Information Management and Privacy

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Information Management and Privacy by Mind Map: Information Management and Privacy

1. Semester

1.1. Spring 2015

2. Student information

2.1. Rylan Mattesich

2.2. Undeclared

2.3. You can share

3. Required branches

3.1. Selected topic

3.1.1. Social Media

3.2. Main research question

3.2.1. How has the use of social media improved the effectiveness of the criminal justice system?

3.3. Focused research questions

3.3.1. What types of social media are utilized by the criminal justice system?

3.3.1.1. How are they utilized?

3.3.2. Who is included in the criminal justice system?

3.3.3. How do you measure the effectiveness of the criminal justice system?

3.4. Search terms

3.4.1. List all appropriate search terms here

3.4.1.1. Criminal justice system

3.4.1.2. Social Media

3.4.1.3. Law Enforcement

3.4.1.4. Facebook

3.4.1.5. Twitter

3.4.1.6. Instagram

3.4.1.7. Police

3.4.1.8. Criminal Investigation

3.4.1.9. Crime Rate

3.4.2. List most successful search queries here

3.4.2.1. Google Scholar: intitle:"social media" intitle:police

3.4.2.1.1. http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy.lib.csus.edu/science/article/pii/S0740624X13000865?np=y

3.4.2.2. Academic Search Premier: social media criminal justice

3.4.2.2.1. http://www.mountainwestlaw.com/File/d72634be-14db-4b9b-b037-fca96bd3ba9a

3.4.2.3. Academic Search Premier: facebook criminal justice book

3.4.2.3.1. http://pqx.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.csus.edu/content/16/4/438

3.5. Final sources of information

3.5.1. Social Media Use in Law Enforcement: Crime prevention and investigative activities continue to drive usage.

3.5.1.1. Secondary

3.5.1.2. Scholarly

3.5.1.3. LexisNexis® Risk Solutions

3.5.1.4. November 2014.

3.5.1.5. A survey was conducted that showed there is increased use and effectiveness of social media as a law enforcement tool

3.5.2. Police Departments’ Use of Facebook Patterns and Policy Issues

3.5.2.1. Secondary

3.5.2.2. Scholarly

3.5.2.3. Joel D. Lieberman, Deborah Koetzle, and Mari Sakiyama

3.5.2.4. July 2013

3.5.2.5. A survey was conducted on a content analysis of messages posted by the 23 largest U.S. PDs using Facebook over a 3-month period

3.5.3. Social media strategies: Understanding the differences between North American police departmments

3.5.3.1. Secondary

3.5.3.2. Scholarly

3.5.3.3. Albert Meijer, Marcel Thaens

3.5.3.4. October 2013

3.5.3.5. Social media strategies of police departments build upon pre-existing strategic choices in communication strategies and situational differences and therefore, in spite of access to similar technologies, conversion in these strategies is limited.

3.5.4. Sexual History Evidence: Late disclosure and relevance

3.5.4.1. Secondary

3.5.4.2. Scholarly

3.5.4.3. Brian Brewis, Adam Jackson, Michael Stockdale

3.5.4.4. February 2013

3.5.4.5. Facebook messages play a role in the court case surrounding minors

3.5.5. Data Mining, Dog Sniffs, and the fourth amdendment

3.5.5.1. Secondary

3.5.5.2. Scholarly

3.5.5.3. Harvard Law Review

3.5.5.4. December 2014

3.5.5.5. A look into the regulations surrounding Facebook data that may be used by the criminal justice system

3.5.6. Grappling with Social Media as a Legal Practitioner

3.5.6.1. Secondary

3.5.6.2. Scholarly

3.5.6.3. Utah Bar Journal

3.5.6.4. February 2013

3.5.6.5. Rules and strategies surrounding digital data as evidence

3.5.7. The intersection of Facebook and the Law: Symposium Article

3.5.7.1. Secondary

3.5.7.2. Scholarly

3.5.7.3. Arkansas Law Review

3.5.7.4. 2012

3.5.7.5. 5th amendment privilege as it pertains to Facebook accounts

3.5.8. Elonis V United States

3.5.8.1. Secondary

3.5.8.2. Scholarly

3.5.8.3. LexisNexis

3.5.8.4. 2013

3.5.8.5. A Facebook user is prosecuted for making digital threats he tried to pass off as music lyrics

3.6. Article analyses

3.6.1. Template for Analyzing the Logic of an Article (Social Media Use in Law Enforcement: Crime prevention and investigative activities continue to drive usage.)

3.6.1.1. Main purpose

3.6.1.1.1. To understand current resources and processes being used by law enforcement when leveraging social media intelligence in investigations

3.6.1.2. Key question/issues that the author is addressing

3.6.1.2.1. How is social media being used by law enforcement efforts?

3.6.1.3. Most important information in the article

3.6.1.3.1. Social media use by law enforcement is on the rise as it has been a useful tool

3.6.1.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.1.4.1. The frequency of social media use by law enforcement, while already high, is projected to rise even further in the coming years.

3.6.1.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.1.5.1. The concept of social media use in criminal investigations

3.6.1.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.1.6.1. The author assumes the definition of social media is agreed upon or static

3.6.1.7. Implications

3.6.1.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.1.7.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.1.8. Main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are)

3.6.1.8.1. A summary of the data collected shows that social media use has been an effective tool for law enforcement and increased access and training will lead to further usage.

3.6.2. Template for Analyzing the Logic of an Article (Police Departments’ Use of Facebook Patterns and Policy Issues)

3.6.2.1. Main purpose

3.6.2.1.1. Determine how PDs are using social networking sites (SNS)

3.6.2.2. Key question/issues that the author is addressing

3.6.2.2.1. With 75% of the largest US PDs having a social social media presence, how are they using this opportunity?

3.6.2.3. Most important information in the article

3.6.2.3.1. The era of PDs communicating with the public through SNS is a new frontier and careful consideration needs to be used when determining the nature of the messages sent by the PDs

3.6.2.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.2.4.1. Facebook is an example of how PDs can cheaply access direct communication channels with their citizenry

3.6.2.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.2.5.1. PDs have yet to establish a "best practices " model, so care must be taken when crafting messages for public consumption

3.6.2.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.2.6.1. This field is so new that many studies need to be conducted to best determine the way PDs should use SNS

3.6.2.7. Implications

3.6.2.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.2.7.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.2.8. Main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are)

3.6.2.8.1. Type here

3.6.3. Template for Analyzing the Logic of an Article

3.6.3.1. Template for Analyzing the Logic of an Article (I regretted the minute I pressed share: A qualitative study of regrets on Facebook )

3.6.3.1.1. Main purpose

3.6.3.1.2. Key question/issues that the author is addressing

3.6.3.1.3. Most important information in the article

3.6.3.1.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.3.1.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.3.1.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.3.1.7. Implications

3.6.3.1.8. Main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are)

3.6.4. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(Social media strategies: Understanding the differences between North American police departmments)

3.6.4.1. Main Purpose

3.6.4.1.1. Research the different nature of SNS strategies employed by law enforcement

3.6.4.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.4.2.1. What different strategies are being used?

3.6.4.2.2. Why are those being used?

3.6.4.2.3. What strategies are successful?

3.6.4.2.4. Are SNS fundamentally changing the nature of community to government connections?

3.6.4.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.4.3.1. SNS success is not limited by a choice of strategy

3.6.4.3.2. Three mainly used strategies

3.6.4.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.4.4.1. Reasons for SNS use

3.6.4.4.2. SNS use at a governmental level requires both support from the top and bottom of an organization to function properly

3.6.4.4.3. SNS strategies tend to fall in line with existing communication strategies

3.6.4.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.4.5.1. SNS

3.6.4.5.2. Relationship between police and community

3.6.4.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.4.6.1. The reasons certain PDs chose their SNS will be determinable

3.6.4.6.2. The study will not result in proving society is headed towards a "user generated" state

3.6.4.7. Implications

3.6.4.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.4.7.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.4.8. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.4.8.1. Social Media advocates over-reach in their projections of just how much and how fast SNS will transform the criminal justice landscape

3.6.5. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(Grappling with Social Media as a Legal Practitioner)

3.6.5.1. Main Purpose

3.6.5.1.1. Educate legal professionals about the strategies and pitfalls surrounding SNS data

3.6.5.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.5.2.1. Is data discovered through SNS admissable in court?

3.6.5.2.2. Will this information face challenges regarding relevance, authentication, and hearsay?

3.6.5.2.3. How should attorneys use SNS?

3.6.5.2.4. How can this data be harvested?

3.6.5.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.5.3.1. Standing rules of evidence already address most challenges to SNS data as evidence

3.6.5.3.2. Content taken from SNS fits an existing standard of electronic data, so it is within purview

3.6.5.3.3. Social Media has great power, with it comes great responsibility to use it properly

3.6.5.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.5.4.1. Something posted online is public information

3.6.5.4.2. Clients should be advised about proper SNS use

3.6.5.4.3. Legal practitioners should learn about the different SNS in order to avail themselves of more information and potential legal strategies

3.6.5.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.5.5.1. SNS data is legal, admissable, and highly valuable

3.6.5.5.2. Using SNS requires ethics

3.6.5.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.5.6.1. People's familiarity with the legal system

3.6.5.6.2. This field of SNS evidence is new and requires more study by legal minds

3.6.5.7. Implications

3.6.5.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.5.7.2. If we fail take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.5.8. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.5.8.1. Privacy is not an expectation on SNS

3.6.5.8.2. SNS are a time-worthy investment for legal purposes

3.6.6. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(Sexual History Evidence: Late disclosure and Relevance)

3.6.6.1. Main Purpose

3.6.6.1.1. Recounting the trial and appeal of a case involving digital data

3.6.6.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.6.2.1. Was the original judge correct to disallow digital evidence?

3.6.6.2.2. Were the Facebook postings in question relevant?

3.6.6.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.6.3.1. Judges are still learning how to handle this newer data discovery process

3.6.6.4. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.6.4.1. Even if produced late, relevant digital evidence should be allowed into cases to test its merit

3.6.6.5. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.6.5.1. The trial judge both erred and succeeded in her decisions regarding the SNS evidence

3.6.6.5.2. All judges decisions are under review and to err in this case is a correctable problem

3.6.6.6. Implications

3.6.6.6.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.6.6.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.6.7. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.6.7.1. The author renders no opinion, but clearly views themselves highly in terms of their legal acumen

3.6.7. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(Data mining, dog sniffing, and the 4th amendment)

3.6.7.1. Main Purpose

3.6.7.1.1. Analyze the effectiveness and legality of data sniffing algorithms used by law enforcement

3.6.7.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.7.2.1. Can data be mined within the confines of the 4th amendment?

3.6.7.2.2. Can an algorithm be developed that is as accurate as a trained canine?

3.6.7.2.3. Is America ready for passive data mining surveillance?

3.6.7.2.4. Should an algorithm that violates the privacy only of criminals be legal?

3.6.7.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.7.3.1. Data is currently collected in a vacuum outside the 4th amendment

3.6.7.3.2. The courts are currently side-stepping the data mining issue

3.6.7.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.7.4.1. Privacy concerns can be mitigated through proper buffering between the data and a human operator

3.6.7.4.2. Any algorithm adopted must pass stringent fail-rate standards

3.6.7.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.7.5.1. Data Mining

3.6.7.5.2. 4th Amendment rights

3.6.7.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.7.6.1. Data mining is happening already, the question now is how legal is it

3.6.7.6.2. Author believes that data mining is the way of the future and we might as well try to get it right cause there is no avoiding it

3.6.7.7. Implications

3.6.7.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.7.7.2. If we fail take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.7.8. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.7.8.1. Data mining is worth the privacy tradeoff

3.6.7.8.2. The collection of public data by the government is in our best interests

3.6.7.8.3. Author surprisingly uses humor in the Harvard Law Review

3.6.8. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(The Intersection of Facebook and the law:symposium article

3.6.8.1. Main Purpose

3.6.8.1.1. Address the current concerns surrounding 5th amendment protections as it pertains to social media use

3.6.8.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.8.2.1. Should a user be compelled to give the proper authorities their password?

3.6.8.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.8.3.1. The fifth amendment rights are currently in flux for Facebook users as the courts grapple with this important issue going forward

3.6.8.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.8.4.1. The main instances in which the incriminating evidence exists only on Facebook are likely to be about crimes enabled by Facebook such as stalking

3.6.8.5. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.8.5.1. Law enforcement is attempting to retrieve information from a resistant source

3.6.8.6. Implications

3.6.8.6.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.8.6.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.8.7. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.8.7.1. Facebook users should not receive any legal benefits just because they encrypted their file system

3.6.9. Template for analyzing the logic of an article(USA vs Elonis)

3.6.9.1. Main Purpose

3.6.9.1.1. Proves that the defendant could be convicted for threats made over Facebook

3.6.9.2. Key question/issues author is addressing

3.6.9.2.1. Is free speech on Facebook a protected right?

3.6.9.2.2. The actual threats were not necessary to convict

3.6.9.3. Most important information in this article

3.6.9.3.1. Things you say on Facebook are public and potentially permanently damaging

3.6.9.4. Main inferences/conclusions in article

3.6.9.4.1. Pressing a mouse button is tantamount to interstate commerce when you are connected to the internet

3.6.9.5. The key concept(s) we need to understand in this article is (are)

3.6.9.5.1. the protections of the 5th amendment as it pertains to true threats

3.6.9.6. Main assumption(s) underlying the author's thinking is (are)

3.6.9.6.1. The reader understands the difference between interstate transmission and interstate commerce

3.6.9.7. Implications

3.6.9.7.1. If we take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.9.7.2. If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously

3.6.9.8. Main point of view presented in the article is (are)

3.6.9.8.1. The author agrees that the threats conveyed were truly threats

3.6.9.8.2. Free Speech protections should not apply so broadly as to allow threats to be communicated over the internet without any repercussions

3.7. Organization mind map for your paper

3.7.1. Free flow mind mapping

3.7.1.1. Social Media benefits

3.7.1.1.1. Improve 2 way communication

3.7.1.1.2. Close investigations

3.7.1.1.3. Anticipate crimes

3.7.1.1.4. Advance laws into the digital age

3.7.1.2. negatives

3.7.1.2.1. large and public mistake potential for users

3.7.1.2.2. Attorneys must keep clients in check regarding SNS usage

3.7.1.3. Quote: "I just loved being in the gym. It was tough at times. Sometimes I wanted to quit, but I'm glad I stuck with it. - Kevin Durant

3.7.1.3.1. This is the quote I found and put on my desktop for self motivation this semester. I wasn't sure if it "fit" for my paper so I will just leave it here because I know it fits for this class

3.7.2. If you followed the Template for Analyzing the Logic of an Article, this part will be easier

3.8. Your final paper

3.8.1. Link to your final paper in Google Docs

3.8.1.1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CnX7emxh0APtfMGJl2pwCn3vyn3J8wanNlaHehMMpb4/edit?usp=sharing