The past and present democracy in the U.S concerning intelligence dissemination continues to elicit debate on transparency. However, the right to know vs. the need to know depends on many factors and perceptions. The right and the need to know specific information follow the significance of the information and its purpose (Carter, 2014). For instance, if the government is undertaking civilian surveillance operations, not every citizen should know such information. Simultaneously, not every citizen should have access to government employees` records and personal information. Such information could prove damaging if everyone had full access to it. Another determination is the sensitivity of the information being shared. In contrast, critical information that could impact others' well-being is better restricted to the few rather than being disseminated to everyone.
Indeed, there are risks in restricting intelligence dissemination. Restricting intelligence dissemination can derail prevention tactics and strategies and the country's inability to stop violent activities, such as terrorism. Terrorists and crime prevention primarily rely on intelligence sharing among the different intelligence agencies and the public. While much time and resources are spent on gathering and analyzing intelligence, restricting its dissemination can prove costly for the intelligence service agencies and the nation. Lewandowski & Carter (2017) further note that intelligence sharing guides law enforcement's decision-making, and restrictive intelligence dissemination has a significant impact on critical decisions. While Lewandowski & Carter (2017) acknowledge the lack of enough research on the risks of restricting intelligence dissemination, they indicate that intelligence sharing has seen significant progress in fighting criminals and disrupting terrorist plans before they could happen.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On the other hand, there are risks in allowing widespread access to intelligence. Full access to intelligence can have a negative impact on national security, compromising the security structure and strategies necessary to safeguard the country. Lewandowski & Carter (2017) note that access to intelligence can lead to public uproar, especially where they access sensitive information. For instance, if people had full access to information that the government was conducting surveillance operations on them, they would revolt and create tension in the country. While widespread access to intelligence information can help build transparency, it can damage the country's security controls and military effectiveness.
References
Carter, J. G. (2014). Inter-organizational relationships and law enforcement information sharing post 11 September 2001. Journal of Crime and Justice , 38 (4), 522-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648x.2014.927786
Lewandowski, C., & Carter, J. G. (2017). End-user perceptions of intelligence dissemination from a state fusion center. Security Journal , 30 (2), 467-486. https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2014.38
