Drawing on the work of Foucault, discuss the claim that ‘we live in a surveillance society’.
The concept of surveillance is a phenomena addressed by a wide range of disciplines- including sociology, psychology, law, criminology and politics (Crampton and Elden, 2007), and has been defined as the systematic investigation or monitoring of the actions or communications of one or more persons (Clarke, 2000). Its purposes vary according to the subject in question, although most ordinary language users argue that its primary purpose is to gather data and information about individual’s actions and daily activities in society (Rose, 1999). While others have argued that there is a second intention which is to deter a whole population from undertaking illegal actions (Clarke, 2000). The process of monitoring includes observations from a distance via technological devices such as CCTV, or interception of electronically transmitted information (reference). On average it is suggested that there are approximately 5.9 million CCTV cameras operating in Britain (Barrett, 2013), which work out at one for every 11 people in the UK. There has been a wide range of debates and publications on Surveillance & Society, the most important of which are the work of Michel Foucault (1977), Jeremy Bentham, Giddens (1985), followed by the work of Gary Marx (1998), and of course more recent work afforded by Deleze, (1990) Lyon (2001, 2007) and many more. For the purpose of this essay, the work of Foucault (1977) is discussed at length in order to examine whether his work is applicable to contemporary society. Therefore, this essay will begin by drawing on Foucault’s work on Discipline and Punish (1977), and outlines the concept of panopticon which he elaborate...
... middle of paper ...
...m’ characterises our society, which also reflects the transition to modernity. ‘Syn’ is a Greek term which stands for ‘together’ and ‘opticon’ connotes the ability to see an object or a person. In many words, what Mathiesen (1997) aimed to illustrate with this concept was that it in today’s society the many see the few, thus we live in a ‘viewer society’. He elaborates on this notion by placing analysis on broadcast television as the mechanism through which the many saw the few (Meyrowitz 1985). Furthermore, the monitoring of the powerful has been eased by the proliferation of relatively inexpensive video cameras. These allow the general public to tape instances of police brutality, and have given rise to inner-city citizen response teams which monitor police radios and arrive at the scene camera-in-hand to record police behaviour (Haggerty and Ericson, 2000)
“With surveillance technology like closed-circuit television cameras and digital cameras now linked to the Internet, we now have the means to implement Bentham's inspection principle on a much vaster scale”(Singer) Bentham's inspection principle is a system that allows the collection, storing and dissemination of data on individuals, corporations, and the government. This collection of data has large implications in regard to privacy and security. “There is always danger that the information collected will be misused - whether by regimes seeking to silence opposition or by corporations seeking to profit from more detailed knowledge of their potential customers.”(Singer) What is done with the information collected is the main issue in terms of privacy. We do not want to be marketed to, or inundated with spam from third-party sources. We also do not want our private social circles and experiences to appear that they are being monetized or subjected to surveillance outside our control. In addition, surveillance has a large effect on the government that can beneficial or detrimental to democracy. Exposure of government secrets may make officials tread carefully when making decisions, ensuring that politicians are nothing but just and fair.“The crucial step in preventing a repressive government from
Ever feel as though someone is watching you? You know that you are the only one in a room, but for some reason you get an eerie feeling that you are not alone? You might not see anyone, but the eyes of a stranger could be gazing down on you. In Foucault's "Panopticism," a new paradigm of discipline is introduced, surveillance. No one dares to break the law, or do anything erroneous for that matter, in fear that they are being watched. This idea of someone watching your every move compels you to obey. This is why the idea of Panopticism is such an efficient form of discipline. The Panopticon is the ideal example of Panopticism, which is a tool for surveillance that we are introduced to in “Panopticism.” Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," has taken the idea of surveillance one step further. The government not only observes everyone, but has complete control over society. The citizens of the United States cannot even think for themselves without being interrupted by the government. They are prisoners in their own minds and bodies. The ideals of “Panopticism” have been implemented to the fullest on society in Vonnegut’s "Harrison Bergeron," through physical and mental handicaps.
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government surveillance is a rising global controversy; and, although minimal coverage could possibly result in safer communities, too much surveillance will result in the violation of citizen’s privacy.
The government has total control: every room has telescreens with hidden cameras, everywhere people look, propaganda posters are hung with the slogan “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU,” (Orwell, 1) and Thought Police snoop through people’s
In 1948, George Orwell wrote about a society in which individual privacy was nonexistent. In this society, which he imagined would become a reality in the 1980s, surveillance was foremost. Everything one did was under surveillance by “Big Brother”, an unseen figure who was always watching you. Surveillance in this society was imposed and malicious. Although this type of society has never fully become a reality in the Western world, changes in technology and media are indirectly bringing this imagined society, one of complete surveillance, to life. With the rise in corporate business and commercialism, surveillance in society increasing; however, new media has brought about a significant shift in its use. In the 20th century, surveillance was primarily used for “protective measures”, as Orwell had imagined. In the 21st century, there has been a rise in its use for commercialism. This essay will critically analyze the developments in new media that have contributed to this shift, as well as explain the reason for the ubiquitous nature of surveillance in today’s western society. To aid with this analysis, surveillance will hereby be defined as a “focused, systematic, and routine attention to personal details for purposes of influence, management, protection or direction” (Lyon 2007:14).
As each person feels alone and alienated under big brother’s watchful eye, they have no choice but to build the only relationship and bond they can, with that of their oppressor. The knowledge that the thought police watches the citizen’s every move influences the masses towards a “norm” of a constant state of fear and discipline resulting in utmost loyalty to Big Brother. Also, because people have no idea when they’re being watched, they learn to behave as if always under scrutiny. This transforms people into their own forms of a panoptic gaze, policing their own thoughts and actions from the fear of possible surveillance. Foucault refers to it as “ becoming the bearers of our own oppression”.
Many people live in fear that they are constantly being watched. Michael Jackson sang it best in the 80 's by saying, "I always feel like, somebody 's watching me," in his hit song with Rockwell. That 's exactly what the NSA and other government organizations are doing today with domestic surveillance. Everywhere Americans go and every corner they turn there is a camera, and every website or email they send is being monitored closely. So what can society do about this? Educate others on the situation and stand up for what is right. Some people believe they must give up some freedoms for protection, but at what cost? What is happening in America is not what the founding fathers fought for. Domestic surveillance should not be allowed because
He then adds that not only does Newman have security cameras but the entirety of England has about 1.5 million police surveillance cameras, which is more than any other country. The essay is packed with statistics that allows the reader to put everything into perspective and make comparisons between our country and another which creates an easy informative
Despite all the controversy and disagreements, most of the populous would agree that on an individual level, privacy is our space to be ourselves as well as to define ourselves through autonomy and protecting our dignity. Our interactions with others can define the level of our relationships with them through the amount of privacy we can afford in the relationship. As we age and immerse ourselves into society, we gain a sense of confidence and security from our privacy. A sense that others know only what we tell them and we know only what they tell us in exchange. What we fear is what others can access and what they might do if they knew of our vulnerabilities. Maintaining and keeping our vulnerable aspects private, we develop a false sense of personal safety from the outside.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place. ”(“5 Myths about Privacy”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
Using surveillance and investigation the government would be able to detect if someone has committed a crime and imprison them based on the evidence. If the person did not commit the crime they would go free and their name cleared. Yet these suspects have not been jailed before hand. In this scenario, why is it ethical for the government to surveill these people? The reason that this is considered ethical is because the government knows how to carry out surveillance and the proper people trained in information gathering are carrying it out and the information is being properly handled. Police officers, detectives or other officers of the law, those who carry out surveillance are trained in it and know how to handle the information gathered. They are the correct people to verify someone’s innocence because they know how to verify innocence or guilt. Surveillance does have a valid purpose of verification and justice, and if the alternatives are worse, nonexistent or need surveillance to supplement the evidence then it would be necessary to use surveillance and the purpose is proportional to the means of surveillance. Their cause is valid, if a crime has been committed to maintain justice and the safety of the people it is
The concept of panopticon in the penal system, which showed immediate success in reform and discipline, eventually leads to it being linked to every component of the modern society. Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon and Foucault concept of Panopticism is seen in many places today in our society. Wherever you look you will certainly find places like, schools, hospital, factories, asylums, and even universities, represent Panopticism because all of this places have some kind of surveillance s...
In the modern day era, we find in society a ubiquitous usage of technology that seems to be never ending and forever growing. Included with this notion, the broad subject of surveillance is of course included. Contemporary surveillance, or more specifically technological surveillance, has been described as ambiguous; meaning that it is often misunderstood or open to different interpretations. The representation of surveillance within popular culture has played an impacting role on how we as a society perceive it and this raises certain questions that may reflect back on to society. The 1998 film Enemy Of The State directed by Tony Scott, Starring Will Smith, Gene Hackman and Jon Voight is considered to be a ‘spy-thriller’ blockbuster. Its central themes explore a range of surveillance techniques and equipment and also provides some insights, no matter how realistic or unrealistic they may be, into the real life security organisation; The National Security Agency (NSA). Using this film as an example and analysing how these themes are represented will hopefully allow us to key these ideas back to modern surveillance theories and practices.