Mitchell Gray’s paper “Urban Surveillance and Panopticism: will we recognize the facial recognition society?” analyzes the effects of the use of facial recognition surveillance devices as a reaction to perceptions of “insecurity” in urban environments. Mitchell Gray views facial recognition systems as “part of an attempt to reduce insecurity through knowledge and vision, but, paradoxically, their use may add to insecurity by transforming society in unanticipated directions.” Facial recognition, he insists, will expand the disciplinary power of panoptic surveillance into the present-day urban environment. The potential of facial recognition systems knows no bounds, and will ultimately change society’s perception of privacy while at the same time, affect the overall behavior of individuals and groups in publicly surveillanced areas. Perhaps most importantly, facial recognition has the potential to break down the final barriers of what many consider a taboo in surveillance: the ability to predict future actions of individuals by searching for the tiny “microexpressions” that consistently flash over each individual’s face as they contemplate which decision they will make next. These new abilities in surveillance, while effective, will finally unlock what individuals in the panoptic area are planning to do with themselves, personal privacy will become a thing of the past, and society will take one step closer towards becoming one solid mass of regimented and edited ideas.
While Foucault designed a panopticon reliant on one central all-seeing eye, Mr. Gray counters that in today’s world millions of digital eyes is always better than one. Technology of present day makes such surveillance not only possible, but also quite logical and ea...
... middle of paper ...
...ons and ideas of panopticism. By adding the modern day twist and use of recently developed technology, Mr. Gray opens the door to a new age of modern day panopticons that can be implemented by practically any willing party. The modern day relation of such mechanisms seems to break down even the most complicated aspects of Foucault’s “Panopticism” into the simplest of nonprofessionals’ terms. Gray’s article tackled the effectiveness of Foucault’s ideas in modern society and successfully arrived at the conclusion that as technology advances, the ability to employ a more “perfect” Panopticon becomes simpler and simpler with each advance in surveillance.
Works Cited
Gray, Mitchell. “Urban Surveillance and Panopticism: “Urban Surveillance and Panopticism: will we recognize the facial recognition society?” Surveillance & Society 2003: 314-330. ProQuest. Web. 7 Mar. 2010.
However, there are other critiques that take a different approach on the oppression that exists in the novel. In "Urban Panopticism And Heterotopic Space In Kafka 's Der Process And Orwell 's Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Raj Shah argues that the way in which society in novel is oppressed is not an obvious oppression but one that focuses on constant surveillance. He uses Foucault’s arguments on panopticism to describe this. Shah states, “Foucault neologizes panopticism to describe a form of power relying not on overt repression, but rather upon the continuous surveillance of a population and the consequent strict regulation of the body” (703). He explains it is the constant surveillance that strips individuals of their rights and places them under oppression. He goes on to
...rdens, however, are intangible and cannot be helped. So often the men wished to be released from their burdens. They dreamed of a “flight, a kind of fleeing, a kind of falling, falling higher and higher, spinning off the edge of the earth and beyond the sun through the vast, silent vacuum where there were no burdens and where everything weighed exactly nothing” (O’Brien 349). These burdens are almost unbearable, and yet, they appear to have required the perfect balance and posture. That is, essentially, the goal of the panopticon. The power of observation, placed on them by the social structure of society, is so immense that the soldiers are forced to respond by monitoring themselves. For fear of being ashamed or embarrassed, the soldiers over-monitor to the extent that they have given up complete control. The power of their actions at war no longer belongs to them.
If misused, body-cameras can be a violation of privacy. In order to prevent this, proper legislation needs to be enacted in order to ensure privacy rights are protected. The only policy related document regarding police body cameras is the “Guidance for the use of body-worn cameras by law enforcement authorities” which is issued by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. This document discusses that rules should not be enforced only by local police departments, but for Canada as a whole. As this is the only document related to police body cameras, it is undoubtable that there needs to be serious legislation created. As it is suggested that body cameras pose as a risk for privacy rights, it is evident in order to implement them effectively, there needs to be regulation constructed. Body cameras can be an effective and useful tool, but without legislation, they can cause problems. Bruce Chapman, president of the Police Association of Ontario expresses, “We want to do it right. We don’t want to do it fast” when asked about the implementation of body cameras. While body cameras, are important to have in today's society, it is also dire to have it done properly. By enforcing strict guidelines, and documents addressing body camera legislation, it will ensure the process is done correctly. In order to implement body cameras properly, privacy rights need to be assessed. This process takes time, and proves body cameras need to be implemented at a pace legislation can follow. Thomas K. Bud, discusses the worry that privacy will be violated with body cameras. Factors such as facial recognition, citizen consent of recording, and violations of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms all pose as risks. While legislation has not matched their guidelines with modern technology, it proves how important it is to create new documents, in order for changes to be made. Therefore body
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.
Current advancements in technology has given the government more tools for surveillance and thus leads to growing concerns for privacy. The two main categories of surveillance technologies are the ones that allow the government to gather information where previously unavailable or harder to obtain, and the ones that allow the government to process public information more quickly and efficiently (Simmons, 2007). The first category includes technologies like eavesdropping devices and hidden cameras. These are clear offenders of privacy because they are capable of gathering information while being largely unnoticed. The second category would include technologies that are used in a public space, like cameras in a public park. While these devices
Michel Foucault's "Panopticism" is based on the architectural concept of the panopticon. Foucault extended this concept to create a new sort of authority and disciplinary principle. His idea was that of the anonymous watchers hold in and has the power to influence the ones being watched. This concept is two fold – it is subject to the person being watched not being able to know when they are being watched and to the rules of society places on individuals on how they should act in a given situation. This idea can be applied to every day life, like how we set up testing rooms for students or when reading literary works such as Dracula by Bram Stoker. In Dracula, there are power differentials caused by a character or characters "seeing" what others do not and caused by societal constructions.
Surveillance has been embedded in our society since the beginning of modern civilization; new media has just enabled society to use surveillance for a different purpose. Surveillance is not new to our society. The concept of God, a supernatural being carefully monitoring our every action, shows the incorporation of the idea of surveillance into early society. Surveillance was essential for the production and distribution of goods - to ensure that wo...
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”.
Privacy is a human right that must always be maintained. However, with continuously advancing technology, surveillance is only becoming easier. In current society, many are unaware of the power the government has over accessing information. Many also do not think that this is an important issue in today’s world. The well-known novel, 1984, by George Orwell reflects heavily on this issue. It illustrates a world where there is a complete totalitarian government. Similarly, The Truman Show starring Jim Carrey, is about the character Truman Burbank who unknowingly has a television show revolve around his entire life. These two stories demonstrate the extremes surveillance can lead to if not addressed properly. With the revolutionary increase of technology in today’s society, it is undeniable that government surveillance has a ubiquitous presence. These two stories contain haunting messages where they warn of the outcomes that are associated with the abuse of power. There are a
In Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish, he examines the role of the panopticon in the prison system in the eighteenth century. The panopticon was a method to maintain power and to ensure good conduct amongst prisoners. The panopticon is described as a central tower where one in power can oversee the surrounding area. Surrounding the center tower are cells containing prisoners. The inmates aren’t able to communicate with one another. Also, the prisoners are unable to distinguish whether it is a guard on duty watching their every move. The architectural design of the panopticon gives guards or those in power the upper hand. As a result of the prisoners being unable to determine whether someone ...
...f surveillance might serve to have real impact on people’s life chances owing to such institutionalized prejudice. For example, a recent study found that CCTV operators were disproportionately monitoring the young, the male and ethnic minorities “for no obvious reason” (Norris & Armstrong 1999). That is, in the absence of suspicious behavior they were choosing to focus their attention on these categories of people. The result is that anyone falling into these categories is more likely to be caught if doing something wrong than someone else, thus perpetuating the stereotype. Furthermore, as these groups were being watched more frequently than others, they were more likely to be seen as doing something suspicious. This in turn could lead to disproportionate response rates by security forces on the ground, contributing to a sense of alienation and rejection by society.
According to Kate’s article, National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA), has hosted a meeting with stakeholder about government implement facial recognition technology and privacy violation issue on February 6, 2014. John Verdi, director of privacy initiatives at the Commerce Department, emphasized that these information on government uses would only help federal officers to understand the technology, and they would not actually access technology to misuse the confidential information. (Kate, 2014) However, he did not respond any questions about government uses of facial recognition technology; we could not stop wondering, once it came cross the national security level issue, how long the government could endure a temptation from the demon? Is the government surveillances a necessary of evil?
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.
The inevitable truth about our technological advances has become an ongoing controversial dilemma. It begs to question whether or not our technology is taking us closer to the world of Big Brother. It even subjects us to address all the pros and cons this said technology, as a whole, has to offer. These days when people talk to each other, some no longer share eye contact because they are too busy on social media, texting, checking emails, looking for the next big thing, and so forth. Many people are blinded by the fancy & entertaining applications, availability of gps, and most importantly, being able to surf the web at the palm of their hands, but little do they know that those
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...