NOTE:

RED – Needs correction

BLU – Suggestions/Addendum
VT – Commentary
CR – For removal
(Are you sure that the Law Enforcement Agencies will disclose?)
(Use one font size and font style)

Social Media as a Surveillance Tool: A Qualitative Study of Law

Enforcement Agencies Strategies and Ethical Considerations

An Undergraduate Thesis Proposal

Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Criminal Justice
Education
Easter College Incorporated

In Partial Fullfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Criminology

by:
Emerson Bayacsan
Ruby Ann Tomog
Jasper Bumidang
Carlo Oya Sta.Ana
Jayson Lopez
Shernan Kange-et
Jun Dave Baybay
Tommy Brian Carling

Carl L. Alonia, RCrim, CSP, CCS

Research Adviser
May 2025
 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Social media has changed the way people communicate and share
information. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have
also provided new tools for law enforcement agencies. Police
officers today can monitor public activities, detect possible
threats, and gather information using social media. However, the
use of social media for surveillance raises questions about
privacy, ethics, fairness, and legality. This study aims to
explore how law enforcement agencies, especially in urban areas,
use social media for surveillance, the ethical concerns involved,
and the role of technology and law in regulating these
activities. The rise of digital communication has transformed how
societies interact and how governments enforce law and order. In
advanced democracies such as the United States, United Kingdom,
and Canada, law enforcement agencies have institutionalized
social media surveillance through specialized cyber units. These
agencies use commercial and proprietary tools—like Geofeedia,
Dataminr, and Media Sonar—to monitor public discourse, track
civil unrest, and identify potential security threats in real
time (Levinson-Waldman & Singhvi, 2019; Williams, Burnap, &
Sloan, 2017). While these methods are often justified for public
safety, civil society organizations have raised concerns about
ethical violations, particularly those involving racial
profiling, mass surveillance, and infringement on privacy and
freedom of speech (Lyon, 2018; Cahill, 2020).

In contrast, developing countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, and

parts of Latin America face resource limitations in implementing
such systems. Studies from Africa indicate that while digital
tools like facial recognition and data analytics are being
introduced, ethical usage is undermined by a lack of oversight,
technical training, and public accountability (Benjamin & Ndkaru,
2024). These limitations make surveillance inconsistent and often
inequitable.

In the Asia-Pacific region, countries like South Korea,

Singapore, and Japan lead in the adoption of algorithm-based
surveillance systems. These governments have integrated social
media tracking with facial recognition and predictive analytics.
However, scholars argue that over-reliance on such tools can lead
to technological determinism, where human judgment is displaced
by flawed algorithms, exacerbating issues of discrimination and
legal opacity (Smith & Marx, 2021; Zuboff, 2019). Within
Southeast Asia, member countries of ASEAN—including Thailand,
Indonesia, and Malaysia—have taken varied approaches. While some
have enacted digital surveillance policies during election cycles
or crises, the lack of harmonized ethical standards remains a
pressing issue (Denef et al., 2020).

In the Philippine setting, the Philippine National Police (PNP)

and its Anti-Cybercrime Group (ACG) utilize social media
platforms to investigate cyberbullying, scams, misinformation,
and drug-related offenses. As of 2024, over 86 million Filipinos
are active social media users (Statista, 2024), making platforms
like Facebook, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter) highly
influential in shaping public discourse and criminal behavior.
Despite this digital proliferation, law enforcement operates
without a unified national protocol governing social media
surveillance. Civil society organizations have raised alarms
about warrantless surveillance, profiling of activists, and
absence of data protection mechanisms (Fallik et al., 2020;
Solove, 2020).

At the local level, such as in La Trinidad, Benguet, municipal

police increasingly rely on social media for monitoring potential
threats, tracking community events, and detecting patterns of
behavior. However, officers often do so without adequate
institutional guidance, formal training, or clear legal
frameworks. This semi-urban locality, characterized by a mix of
traditional rural values and increasing digital connectivity,
offers a unique opportunity to investigate how digital
surveillance is practically interpreted and ethically managed at
the ground level. Despite the growing body of international
literature on the use of social media as a surveillance tool,
there is a notable absence of studies that examine municipal-
level practices in the Philippine context. Most existing research
focuses on national agencies or large metropolitan centers. There
is very limited qualitative research that explores how law
enforcement officers in small yet rapidly urbanizing towns—such
as La Trinidad—perceive and implement social media surveillance.
Furthermore, ethical dilemmas, legal ambiguities, and practical
constraints faced by these officers remain under-documented. This
study seeks to fill that gap by offering grounded, context-
specific insights into law enforcement’s digital practices in a
semi-urban Philippine setting.
 Review of Related Literature

Over the last decade, law enforcement agencies around the world
have increasingly turned to social media platforms to support
criminal investigations and community monitoring. Social media
provides real-time, open-source data that allows police to
monitor public discourse, track suspects, and gather intelligence
with minimal cost and high accessibility (Williams et al., 2017).
This form of surveillance is commonly referred to as Open-Source
Intelligence (OSINT), where information is collected from
publicly available sources, including posts, images, comments,
hashtags, and geotags.

Research by Fortin et al. (2023) found that police officers use

social media as an extension of traditional intelligence work.
Platforms like Twitter and Facebook are scanned for threats,
public events, or online movements that may require a response.
Police sometimes create fake accounts to blend into digital
communities and gather information — a practice that raises
concerns about entrapment and ethical boundaries.

Albalouishi (2019) highlighted how the Abu Dhabi Police

successfully used social media to detect and control criminal
activity. The case showed how digital surveillance could be
proactive and effective, especially when paired with clear
procedures. However, the same study noted that public trust
increases only when these practices are transparent and well-
regulated.

Fallik et al. (2020) emphasized the dual nature of police

presence on social media — it can foster community trust through
public engagement or increase tension if used for secretive
monitoring. Their study recommends further research into how the
public perceives police surveillance, especially among minority
and activist communities.
While many studies support the effectiveness of digital
surveillance, critics like Levinson-Waldman and Singhvi (2019)
argue that these methods lack oversight and can become invasive.
Their research at the Brennan Center highlights how social media
surveillance often occurs without the public’s knowledge or
consent, creating a power imbalance.

The use of social media as a surveillance tool by law enforcement

has raised major ethical concerns, especially about privacy,
consent, fairness, and discrimination. Unlike traditional
surveillance, which usually requires warrants or legal approval,
social media monitoring often takes place in public online spaces
where users may not realize their data is being collected and
analyzed.

Solove (2020) explains that privacy is not just about keeping

secrets but about having control over how personal information is
used. In the context of social media, many users post freely
without understanding that their content could be used by law
enforcement — not just for public safety, but possibly in ways
that profile or target individuals unfairly. Cahill (2020)
emphasizes that ethical boundaries are often blurred when police
use public posts to track people, especially during protests or
politically sensitive events.

Studies have shown that this kind of surveillance can have a

“chilling effect” — meaning that people might stop expressing
their opinions or joining public discussions online out of fear
that they are being watched (Levinson-Waldman & Singhvi, 2019).
This is particularly concerning in democratic societies where
freedom of expression and privacy are protected rights.

Jane & Alex (2022) warn that the use of artificial intelligence
and automated systems for social media surveillance can also lead
to algorithmic bias — where the software unfairly targets certain
groups based on race, location, or language patterns. If not
carefully managed, these tools can reinforce discrimination and
make surveillance even more dangerous for marginalized
communities.

Rousseau (2024) highlights that many law enforcement agencies do

not clearly communicate their social media surveillance practices
to the public, which creates a lack of transparency and
accountability. Without clear rules, police may overstep ethical
lines, even unintentionally.

As a whole, the literature agrees that while social media

surveillance can be useful, ethical guidelines and privacy
protections are essential. Clear policies must be created to
ensure that law enforcement does not abuse its power, and that
individuals' rights are respected online just as they are
offline.

In recent years, the role of advanced technology in law

enforcement surveillance has grown significantly. Social media
platforms have become not only sources of information but also
powerful tools that, when combined with technology, allow police
to monitor large groups of people with speed and precision.
Technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), facial
recognition, natural language processing (NLP), and predictive
analytics are now being used to process vast amounts of online
data and detect patterns of criminal behavior (Asplund, 2021;
Puleri, 2021).

Social media surveillance no longer involves just manually

reading posts or watching videos. Instead, police departments in
more technologically equipped areas now use automated software to
track hashtags, monitor live streams, detect keywords, and even
predict future incidents. These tools allow for real-time
surveillance, which some researchers argue has improved crime
detection and prevention. For example, AI tools can detect
threatening language, map crime-related conversations
geographically, or flag individuals based on behavioral patterns
(Jane & Alex, 2022).

However, these advancements come with significant concerns.

First, many of these tools are built on data sets that may
contain bias, meaning they could unfairly target certain
communities. Jane & Alex (2022) emphasize that algorithmic
systems often reflect existing social inequalities and may lead
to disproportionate monitoring of minority or activist groups.

Additionally, Karlsson (2022) points out that while these tools

offer efficiency, they lack human judgment and understanding of
context. An AI program may flag a joke, sarcasm, or protest chant
as a threat, even when it poses no real danger. This raises
questions about the accuracy and fairness of using automated
tools in sensitive law enforcement work.

A further challenge is that not all law enforcement agencies have

equal access to these advanced technologies. Larger or better-
funded departments may benefit from AI and data analytics, while
smaller or rural agencies may rely on more basic methods like
manual monitoring or public tip-offs. This technological gap, as
mentioned in your source by Benjamin & Ndkaru (2024), can result
in inconsistencies in how surveillance is carried out and may
even widen gaps in policing quality.

In summary, while new technologies have helped police use social

media more effectively, they also raise serious concerns about
fairness, bias, misuse, and unequal access. The literature
suggests that technology should be seen as a tool — not a
replacement for ethical decision-making, legal review, or public
accountability.
As the use of social media for surveillance becomes more common,
questions about its legality and regulation are growing. Many law
enforcement agencies collect and monitor online data, but there
is often a lack of clear legal rules or standardized policies to
guide how this should be done. This creates confusion not only
for police officers but also for the public, who may not be aware
of when and how their online activity is being watched.

Solove (2020) emphasizes that most privacy laws were written

before social media became popular, which means that today’s laws
may not fully protect people from new kinds of digital
surveillance. For example, while public posts may be legally
accessible, it is not always clear how long police can store
them, or whether they can be used in court without a warrant.
This legal gray area can lead to inconsistencies in how police
use social media data and can create opportunities for abuse or
misuse.

Degli Esposti (2021) points out that one of the biggest issues is
the lack of accountability. In many countries, law enforcement
agencies are not required to report how often they use social
media for surveillance or what kind of data they collect. Without
proper oversight, the risk of violating people’s privacy
increases.

Rousseau (2024) also adds that different countries and regions

have very different rules. In some places, strict data protection
laws prevent unauthorized access to online content, while in
others, law enforcement has broad powers to monitor online
spaces. This makes it difficult to create global or even national
standards, and it raises concerns about fairness and equality in
surveillance practices.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice (2024), governments

need to develop updated and transparent policies that clearly
define what law enforcement can and cannot do on social media.
These policies should include rules about how data is collected,
stored, and shared, and they should protect people’s rights to
privacy, expression, and due process.

The literature agrees that laws and policies must catch up with
technology. As social media continues to grow and change, so
should the legal frameworks that control its use in law
enforcement. Without clear and fair policies, both police and the
public are left with uncertainty — and that can damage trust,
lead to legal challenges, or cause real harm to individuals and
communities.

One of the most complex and least understood aspects of social

media surveillance is the collaboration between police and social
media companies. While it is known that law enforcement can
request data or support from platforms like Facebook, Twitter,
and TikTok, there is little public information about how these
partnerships actually work, what data is shared, and what rules
guide these interactions.

Denef et al. (2020) explain that some law enforcement agencies

work with social media companies during emergencies or
investigations. These partnerships can involve data requests,
content takedown support, or help in identifying suspects through
account activity. However, these collaborations are often
informal or inconsistent, with very few published agreements or
public accountability systems in place.

Rousseau (2024) raises concerns about the lack of transparency in

these collaborations. If platforms provide police access to
private messages, deleted posts, or user metadata, it raises
major questions about privacy, consent, and oversight. The public
is usually unaware when these data exchanges happen, and the
legal basis for them is not always clear.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice (2024), there is a
growing need for regulation and public disclosure of how
platforms assist law enforcement. Without proper policies, tech
companies may cooperate too closely with government agencies in
ways that undermine user rights. On the other hand, if companies
refuse to cooperate at all, it could limit police ability to
prevent crime or respond to urgent threats. This creates a
delicate balance between public safety and civil liberties.

A study by Francis et al. (2023) adds that even when officers are
aware of these partnerships, they may lack formal training on how
to use platform tools correctly or ethically. Some police
departments rely on third-party software to access or interpret
social media data, which can add even more layers of complexity
and reduce transparency.

One important point raised in several studies is that smaller or

less-funded police agencies often lack access to these
collaborations. They may not have the relationships, tools, or
legal support needed to work with social media platforms
effectively, creating inequality in digital policing practices
across regions (Benjamin & Ndkaru, 2024).

Overall, the literature suggests that collaboration between law

enforcement and social media companies is an important but under-
researched area. There is a strong need for clearer rules,
ethical standards, and public awareness about how these
partnerships work — and how they affect privacy, fairness, and
accountability in surveillance

THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents the theoretical foundations and the

conceptual structure guiding this research. It draws from three
main theories — Surveillance Theory, Privacy Theory,
and Technological Determinism — and culminates in a visual
conceptual framework that links the major constructs of the
study: strategies, ethics, technological tools, collaboration,
and legal frameworks. Together, these components form the
scaffolding for understanding how and why social media
surveillance is used, and what its consequences are in modern law
enforcement.

Theoretical Framework

 Surveillance Theory: This theory explores the systemic and

institutional collection of data as a means of social
control. It is essential in understanding how surveillance
practices become embedded in societal functions, often
beyond public awareness or consent. (David Lyon, 2018).
 Privacy Theory: This theory examines privacy not as an
individual right alone, but as a social good that is
threatened by unchecked data collection. It addresses the
asymmetry between institutions with surveillance power and
individuals navigating digital life. (Daniel Solove, 2020).
 Technological Determinism: This framework posits that
technology drives social and cultural change — often before
societies can fully understand or regulate its implications.
In the context of law enforcement, it helps explain the rush
to adopt tools like facial recognition or predictive
analytics without fully considering ethical ramifications.
(Smith & Marx, 2021).
 4. Routine Activity Theory– Suggests that crimes occur when
a motivated offender and a suitable target converge in the
absence of capable guardianship, here mediated digitally.
(Cohen & Felson, 1979).
 5. Social Contract Theory– Highlights the tension between
individual liberty and collective security. (Rousseau, 1762;
interpreted by Rawls, 1971).
 6. Critical Surveillance Studies– Introduces the idea of
‘surveillance capitalism’ and warns against commodifying
 digital behavior under the guise of security. (Zuboff,
2019).

These theories help the researchers understand not only the

methods used by law enforcement but also the ethical, social, and
legal implications of using technology for surveillance.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework serves as the architectural blueprint of

the study — visually and descriptively laying out how the core
components of your research interact. Based on the integration of
Surveillance Theory, Privacy Theory, and Technological
Determinism, this study proposes a framework involving five
primary domains:

1. Surveillance Strategies – Operational methods employed by law

enforcement to monitor social media (e.g., hashtag tracking,
OSINT tools, undercover profiles, (David Lyon, 2018; Williams et
al., 2021).

2. Ethical Considerations – Issues of privacy, consent, fairness,

and data justice, (Daniel Solove, 2020; Cahill, 2020; Jane &
Alex, 2022).

3. Technological Infrastructure – Availability and sophistication

of surveillance tools (AI, analytics, facial recognition, NLP),
(Puleri, 2021; Asplund, 2021; Smith & Marx, 2021).

4. Collaboration & Partnerships – Inter-agency and public-private

cooperation, especially with social media platforms. (Denef et
al., 2020; Rousseau, 2024)

5. Legal and Policy Frameworks – Governing rules, gaps, and

inconsistencies that regulate or fail to regulate these practices

(Solove, 2020; Brennan Center for Justice, 2024)

These five dimensions directly influence the practice and
perception of law enforcement surveillance. They also feed into
two dependent outcomes:

· Effectiveness: How well surveillance supports crime prevention

or public safety

· Legitimacy: Public trust, ethical integrity, and legal

compliance

This framework does not assume a one-size-fits-all model;

instead, it accommodates variability by highlighting how context,
capacity, and cultureshape the way these variables interact. It
also supports qualitative inquiry by guiding interview protocols
and coding themes around these five domains.

7. Integration with Research Questions

Each research question is rooted in a specific aspect of the

conceptual framework. Below is the alignment:

Research Question Framework Domain

What are the primary Surveillance Strategies

strategies employed by law
enforcement to utilize social
media platforms for
surveillance purposes?

How do ethical considerations Ethical Considerations

impact the use of social media
as a surveillance tool by law
enforcement agencies?

What technological Technological Infrastructure

advancements have most
significantly enhanced the
capability of law enforcement
agencies to conduct
 surveillance through social
media?

How does inter-agency Collaboration & Partnerships

collaboration and partnership
with social media companies
affect the effectiveness of
social media surveillance?

What legal frameworks and Legal/Policy Frameworks

policies are currently in
place to regulate the use of
social media as a surveillance
tool, and how do they
influence law enforcement
practices?

By clearly mapping each question to a part of the framework, this

study ensures coherence between theoretical grounding, data
collection, and analysis. It also supports analytical
triangulation, allowing findings to be interpreted through
multiple theoretical lenses.

Significance of the Study

This study is important because it helps us understand how police

use social media to watch for crimes and gather information — and
whether that’s being done fairly and responsibly. In school
research, it adds something new by combining different big ideas
(like surveillance, privacy, and technology) into one complete
framework. That way, other students or researchers can learn from
it and build on it in the future.

For people working in law enforcement, this study can be useful

in improving the way they use social media tools, while also
pointing out problems like lack of training, unclear rules, or
unfair treatment of certain communities. It gives practical
suggestions to help officers do their jobs better while
respecting people’s rights.

The study also shines a light on serious ethical questions — like

whether people’s online activity is being watched without their
permission, or if the technology used could be unfair to some
groups. It shows that new rules and better systems are needed to
make sure surveillance is done in a way that’s honest, legal, and
respectful of personal privacy.

Finally, this research helps everyday people understand what’s

happening when police use social media to monitor activity. It
encourages the public to ask good questions, stay informed, and
take part in conversations about privacy, safety, and the right
way to use digital technology.

Objective of the Study

The general objective of this study is to explore how law

enforcement agencies use social media as a surveillance tool.

The specific objectives are:

1. To identify the common strategies used by law enforcement in

social media monitoring.
2. To analyze the ethical concerns connected to social media
surveillance.
3. To determine the role of technology in supporting
surveillance activities.
4. To examine the laws and policies that guide social media
surveillance in the Philippines.
Statement of the Problem

As digital surveillance becomes increasingly integrated into

modern policing, understanding how local law enforcement
personnel navigate the balance between public safety and ethical
responsibility is essential. In the Philippines, where legal
policies on social media surveillance are fragmented and the use
of advanced surveillance tools is uneven, there is limited
knowledge on how officers apply these strategies in real-world
settings. The lack of context-specific insights particularly
affects towns like La Trinidad, Benguet, where urban-rural
dynamics influence both digital activity and policing strategies.

This study seeks to investigate how the La Trinidad Municipal

Police Station uses social media platforms for surveillance, what
ethical and legal challenges arise from these practices, and how
technological and policy gaps impact implementation. The central
problem is the absence of a clear, context-driven understanding
of how digital surveillance is operationalized and experienced by
municipal-level police officers in the Philippine setting.

Specifically, this study will answer the following questions:

1. What surveillance strategies are employed by law enforcement

officers in the La Trinidad Municipal Police Station through
social media platforms?
2. What ethical issues and dilemmas do officers face when
conducting social media-based surveillance?
3. How does the availability or limitation of digital tools
affect the implementation and efficiency of social media
surveillance?
4. What challenges do officers encounter in complying with
legal standards and institutional policies when using social
media for surveillance?
 CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter discusses the research design and methods used in
conducting the study. It explains the type of research employed,
the participants involved, the location of the study, and the
techniques used in collecting and analyzing data. It also
presents the scope and limitations of the research, as well as
the ethical considerations observed throughout the process. This
chapter aims to show how the study was carefully planned and
carried out to ensure the credibility, validity, and reliability
of the findings.
Research Design

This study will utilize a qualitative-descriptive research

design, which is appropriate for exploring the lived experiences,
ethical perceptions, and operational strategies of local law
enforcement officers involved in social media surveillance. A
qualitative approach will allow the researchers to capture the
depth, nuance, and complexity of participants’ perspectives —
especially as these relate to ethical tensions, technological
constraints, and legal compliance.

Data will be collected primarily through semi-structured

interviews with officers from the La Trinidad Municipal Police
Station, complemented by document analysis of public policies and
training materials (where available). The interview guide will
follow five thematic domains aligned with the conceptual
framework.

Since this is a proposal, no data has been collected yet. The

study will proceed only upon approval from the appropriate
institutional review board and with full compliance to ethical
standards of voluntary participation and confidentiality

Population and locale of the study

The study will be conducted at the La Trinidad Municipal Police

Station, located in the Municipality of La Trinidad, Province of
Benguet, Philippines. La Trinidad is a fast-urbanizing
municipality in the Cordillera Administrative Region, known for
its active social media use among residents and engagement with
technology-driven governance. The locale provides an ideal
context to examine how social media surveillance is implemented
by municipal law enforcement in semi-urban Philippine settings.

The research participants will be selected personnel from the La

Trinidad Municipal Police Station who are knowledgeable about or
actively engaged in digital surveillance tasks, particularly
those who work in intelligence, operations, or community affairs.
The selection will be made using purposive sampling to ensure
that insights come from officers with direct experience or
familiarity with social media monitoring practices. No data has
yet been collected as this proposal is still under review for
approval.

La Trinidad, located in the Province of Benguet within the

Cordillera Administrative Region, is a semi-urban municipality
known as the "Strawberry Capital of the Philippines." Aside from
its agricultural identity, it is also emerging as a digitally
engaged community, where residents actively use social media
platforms for civic engagement and communication. The La Trinidad
Municipal Police Station plays a key role in public safety and
increasingly interacts with digital content shared online by
citizens. This makes it a strategic location for investigating
how local law enforcement uses social media for surveillance,
especially in a setting that blends rural values with urban
technology exposure.
Data Gathering instrument
As this research is still in its proposal phase, the primary
data-gathering instrument will be a semi-structured interview
guide. The guide will consist of open-ended questions tailored to
extract insights from law enforcement personnel regarding their
experiences and perceptions of social media surveillance.
Questions will cover five major areas based on the conceptual
framework: (1) strategies used, (2) ethical issues encountered,
(3) technological limitations or strengths, (4) collaboration
with other agencies or platforms, and (5) awareness of existing
legal policies.

The interview instrument will be reviewed and validated by

subject matter experts in criminology and information ethics to
ensure relevance, clarity, and neutrality. Revisions will be made
based on feedback prior to any data collection. Field notes and
policy documents will serve as secondary instruments to
triangulate data.

All instruments will be pilot-tested, and adjustments will be

made based on initial feedback to improve clarity and
appropriateness.

Data Gathering Procedure

Since this study is currently in the proposal phase, no data has

been collected yet. Upon receiving ethical clearance and
institutional approval, the researchers will proceed with a
qualitative data collection process designed to capture the
perceptions and insights of law enforcement officers regarding
social media surveillance.

The primary data collection method will be semi-structured

interviews. These will be conducted with purposively selected
officers from the La Trinidad Municipal Police Station,
specifically those involved in intelligence, operations, or
public safety roles. The researchers will develop an interview
guide aligned with the study’s five conceptual domains:
surveillance strategies, ethical considerations, technological
constraints, collaboration, and legal awareness.

Each interview will be scheduled in advance, with written

informed consent obtained from the participants. Participants
will be assured that they may refuse to answer any question or
withdraw at any point without consequence. To protect privacy and
ensure candid responses, interviews will be audio-recorded only
with permission, and personal identifiers (names, ranks,
assignments) will not be documented.

Interviews will be conducted face-to-face within police premises

or via secure online platforms, depending on the participants'
preferences and institutional guidelines. Secondary data such as
publicly available PNP policies, training manuals, and
institutional reports will be used to triangulate the findings.
All collected data will be securely stored and used strictly for
academic purposes.

Scope and Limitation Of the Study

Scope of the study

This research focuses on the practices, perceptions, and ethical

implications of social media surveillance as implemented by the
La Trinidad Municipal Police Station in Benguet, Philippines. It
aims to explore how law enforcement officers perceive,
understand, and apply surveillance strategies using publicly
accessible social media content. The study centers on five main
dimensions: (1) surveillance strategies, (2) ethical concerns,
(3) technological capacities, (4) legal awareness, and (5)
collaboration practices.

The scope is intentionally narrowed to avoid collecting

classified or operational data. The research will not inquire
into specific cases, surveillance software, or internal reports.
Instead, it will gather general insights using semi-structured
interviews and supplementary analysis of public policies and
literature. By doing so, the study ensures compliance with
ethical boundaries and institutional confidentiality protocols
while still offering meaningful academic insight into municipal-
level digital policing in a Philippine context.

Limitations of the Study

While this study aims to gather in-depth insights on social media

surveillance practices, several limitations must be acknowledged:

One significant limitation is the potential unwillingness of

police officers to fully disclose sensitive or classified
information. Officers at the La Trinidad Municipal Police Station
may be restricted by institutional confidentiality policies,
especially when it comes to specific surveillance tools or
operations. To address this, the study will not require
participants to reveal any classified or operationally sensitive
data. Instead, the research will focus on gathering their general
perceptions, ethical awareness, and experiences regarding social
media surveillance in a non-threatening, scenario-based, and
hypothetical format.

Additionally, this research is limited to one municipality and

will utilize purposive sampling, meaning the results may not be
generalizable to all law enforcement agencies in the Philippines.
Time constraints and academic scope further restrict the study
from evaluating real-time surveillance systems or tools. Despite
these limitations, the study provides valuable exploratory
insight into the ethical and operational dimensions of digital
policing at the local level.

Data Analysis
For this proposed study, thematic analysis will be used as the
primary method of data interpretation. After data collection,
transcriptions will be coded and categorized according to
emerging themes, particularly across the domains of surveillance
strategy, ethics, technology, law, and collaboration. As of now,
no data has been analyzed since the research is in the
preparatory phase.
 Ethical Consideration

The researchers are committed to upholding ethical standards in

accordance with the guidelines of Easter College and the
Philippine National Police. Since no data collection has begun,
all ethical procedures are currently preparatory and will be
activated upon approval.

Participation in the study will be entirely voluntary. Informed

consent will be obtained in writing, ensuring that participants
are aware of their right to withdraw at any time without penalty.
No identifying information—such as names, ranks, or specific
duties—will be collected. All data will be anonymized, securely
stored, and used solely for academic purposes.

The researchers will refrain from asking about classified,

confidential, or operational matters. Instead, interviews will
focus on professional experiences, perceptions, and ethical
reflections regarding social media monitoring. The research will
be conducted in a manner that respects institutional rules and
prioritizes participant safety and autonomy.

Ethical clearance will be sought from the college’s review board

prior to any fieldwork.

Reference for Background of the Study

 Benjamin, K., & Ndkaru, D. (2024). Surveillance Ethics and

Infrastructure in Sub-Saharan Africa. African Journal of
Criminology, 18(2), 122–137.
 Cahill, L. (2020). Consent and Control in Digital
Surveillance. Journal of Cyber Ethics, 7(1), 33–48.
 Denef, S., Bayerl, P. S., Kaptein, N., & Ramirez, L. (2020).
Social Media and the Police: Key Trends and Ethical Issues.
Policing and Society, 30(3), 310–326.
 Fallik, S. W., Novak, K. J., & Chamlin, M. B. (2020).
Public Perceptions of Police Social Media Surveillance.
Criminal Justice Review, 45(4), 427–443.
 Levinson-Waldman, R., & Singhvi, A. (2019). Government
Monitoring of Social Media. Brennan Center for Justice.
Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/
 Lyon, D. (2018). The Culture of Surveillance: Watching as a
Way of Life. Polity Press.
 Smith, M. R., & Marx, L. (2021). Does Technology Drive
History? The Dilemma of Technological Determinism. MIT
Press.
 Solove, D. J. (2020). Understanding Privacy. Harvard
University Press.
  Statista. (2024). Number of social media users in the
Philippines 2016–2024. Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com
 Williams, M. L., Burnap, P., & Sloan, L. (2017). Social
Media, Riot Participation and Social Control: A Simulation-
Based Study. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6),
850–871.
 Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The
Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power.
PublicAffairs.

Where are your references from the BoS?

Use APA 7 format for reference

Ex. For Books

Alonia, C. (2025). Fundamentals of Intelligence and

Investigation. Elm Street Publication. Seattle, Washington. ISBN:
999-999-999

Ex. For Internet Sources

(Look for the author of the article, do not just copy and paste
the link or hyper text transfer protocol (https)

Findley, J. (2024). Ready Positions: 7 Types for Pistol Self-

Defense. Accessed November 2, 2024. From
https://www.usacarry.com/ready-positions-7-types-for-pistol-self-
defense/