Paste your essay in here…Privacy and Surveillance
In this essay I will be focusing on if we live in a surveillance world and how it has improved our everyday lives for example making former dull tasks much easier. while I'll also contrasting this to how it also can be seen as dangerous to our daily lives. How much information do we give for the privileges we enjoy, while also involving key debates along with relevant case studies.
Over the decades, as technology has advanced, surveillance became so much easier. what is surveillance? surveillance by definition is the close monitoring of the activities or behaviours of a specific person or people. Over the years mass surveillance has coursed many to be concerned over the amount of privacy we truly have. As we knowingly or unknowingly give up our personal information for the privileges we enjoy in our daily lives. As written by (Tynan, 2005) "what's the big deal with privacy? well for starters you're computer is leaking information all over the internet." Today, we find ourselves in a world of( Drum,2016)"ambiquous surveillance", where everything is collected, saved, searched, correlated and analyzed. In this digital age we live in its hard to imagine a world in which our lives are not helped or influenced by digital technology in form of hardware and software. "Over the last two decades, our lives have been slowly taken over by technology" (Gebski, 2015) this statement further shows how rapidly digital technology has taken a significant role in our lives in only 20 years. The concept and idea of digital technology, which presented itself in the early 1900’s in the form of radio and telegraphy or even recent progressions such as satellites, electronic chips and internet database. These advancement would have been considered science fiction decades ago but today it has rapidly impacted the very fabric of the society we live in.
overview
Modern technology has given us so much to enjoy. Information from the Census Bureau tells us that "15% of homes had a personal computer in 1989; by 2011 that number climbed to 75%."It has opened up new ways in which we can communicate with each other. It has shown us that we don't have to be the ones always watching television or listening to the radio as it was in the past. Social media has shown us that we can be a source of entertainment to others e.g. The rise of snap chat, Vine and YouTube comedians such as YouTuber 'PewDiePie'. We can also be a source of important information for example with the Eric Garner case. Many people reported hearing about what happened on social networks in form of the video or the hash tag "#Eric Garner" or "#icantbreathe" even before major news outlets started covering the story. This information was first shared with just a few clicks by people present at the location of the incident. “little devices in our pockets are so psychologically powerful that change what we do and who we are” (Sherry Turtle, Reference this properly, found the quote in your lecture 7 PowerPoint). What Sherry Turtle is attempting to prove in her quote is that mechanical gadgets are presently the fundamental source of our activities. It also can show us that at any moment technology and social media in particular can transform us from a normal person to a person of notoriety or fame that everyone wants to look at and hear from. These social media sites have no doubt given us a platform . On the other hand some have argued, At what cost do we enjoy these privileges ?. ”it was conceivable that [Big Brother] watched by everybody all the time” (Orwell, 1987) what he means is every day we are being watched by the government from CCTV, to traffic cameras, to monitor our speed or in any shopping centre/ supermarket. Advancements in technology has caused phones to have the ability to be “tapped” at anytime without knowing, similarly same phone can be used by the user to record and store information or conversations covertly. We can observe a great deal of surveillance all around us. Many people have no idea that their every move is being monitored. This resonates with the Panopticon theory which was conceived and designed by English Philosopher, Jeremy Bentham. Pan meaning 'all' and optic meaning 'seeing'. Panopticon is a system which ensures the automatic enforcement of power by creating a state of conscious and permanent visibility. We feel this as we enter into the supermarket , gym, bank or school. We are faced with the feeling of panoticism and surveillance. The feeling of cameras watching us even though we can't see all of them. The feeling of undercover security and shopping security tags all add to this feeling of an authority watching us. (Foucault, 2012) “principle of his own subjection” sums up how this feeling affect our behaviours as we enter these secure buildings. “invisible but unverifiable” (Foucault, 2012). what he was trying to say in addition is how someone in this panopticon environment will feel as they sense the external power but are not certain of the source. The idea of this architectural design was for exercising power even when not present. According to Michel Foucault, a French philosopher, this is the ideal exercise of power. “because it can reduce the number of those who exercise it, while increasing the number of those on whom it is exercised” (Foucault, 2012). As the new social media era emerges we give more and more of our personal information the aura of surveillance also grows. companies have played into the idea of allowing us to broadcast ourselves in exchange for our thought, information and locations so that they can sell this information on. According to (Griffith, 2015) Snapchat said, "it produced at least some data 92% of the time U.S. law enforcement requested it, and 87% of the time globally. By contrast, Twitter provided data 80% of the time in the U.S. and 52% of the time globally. Google complied 84% of the time in the U.S. and 65% of the time globally. Facebook complied 79% of the time in the U.S. and did not provide an overall global number" this shows how easy it is for our personal information to be retrieved by entities outside of the social network we sign up to initially. According to (Bruce Schneier,CNN) "Corporations always collected information on everyone they could, but in the past they didn't collect very much of it and only held it as long as necessary. When surveillance information was expensive to collect and store, companies made do with as little as possible. Telephone companies collected long-distance calling information because they needed it for billing purposes." This shows the change in attitude towards customer information before third-party cookies. The significance of customers information was predicted (Lyotard, 1984) in (the postmodern condition: A report on knowledge)." it is conceivable that the nations-states will one day fight for control of information, just as they battled in the past for control of access to and exploitation of raw materials and cheap labour"
Critical analysis of Panopticon
surveillance techniques are there to ensure societal rules are followed but Foucault believed they have huge negative implication. He claimed that awareness of being observed stifled individuality and created conformity. People end up acting, thinking and being the same, for fear of being caught out or punished. (Foucault, 2012) calls this "dynamic normalisation". Foucault asserted that "dynamic normalisation" is fundamentally undemocratic because it ends up eradicating free will and independent thinking, creating a society of 'robots'. Foucault thought that over time this would quell our instincts to think for ourselves, behave spontaneously or develop original impulses or ideas. Foucault is considered to be one of the most influential thinkers of our time. Discipline and punish is a compelling study of power and surveillance in the modern world. Foucault's Panopticon idea is very significant to today's society. Foucault has also come under some criticism for example Nick Crossley who suggested a fault in the idea of a Panopticon as the Foucault's main comparison to the concept of power, thinks that it's not clear if the "gaze" coming from the centre tower should have the effect of making a prisoner as (Foucault, 2012) says "principle of his own subjection". According to (Crossley, 1993) the "gaze" effect is able to control a prisoner because they are objectified in the gaze of the other". What he is trying to say is that the lack of communication is what causes this state. A feeling of alienation will then occur as they lose their identity: " his actions and experiences take on a meaning and significance for the other that the inmate cannot understand"(Crossley, 1993) . As a result this "gaze" effect causes the inmate to conform to the norms of the panopticon. This makes the inmate regulate he's "self"(Geoff Danaher Tony Schirato Jen Webb,) . Another author called Neve Gordon doesn't seem to agree with the panoticon being the ideal comparison to modern day surveillance. Gordon thinks that a comparison to a cubicle would be a more accurate. The reason is because a cubicle has no doors, the walls never reach the ceiling and the occupant always has he's back to the door: “worker is never sure who might pass by the open entrance. Similar to the Panopticon, the perpetual visibility of the employees is sufficient to render most workers docile” (Gordon, 2002) . Gordon's critique of the panoticon however isn't very strong because he seems to think Foucault is saying that the tower is the actual source of the power when in fact what Foucault is saying is that the "gaze" is what actually affects the prisoners. Some have gone further as to also argue that this is not a complete representation of total power. Foucault manly talks about "self" and the effect of this type of power structure on the inmate, that it's easy to assume there are no guards around. But Foucault says “A has power over B if A affects the interests or actions of B,” The idea behind this that the guards "agents" are subject to a different type of power in form of hierarchy. This can be said about many different institutions we are involved such as school or working environment.
case study
Hackitvism is a form of activism that involves the hacking of a computer server or computer network. This can be to protest against neglect or oppression. while an individual who carries out this act is called a hackitvist. Hackivism has no doubt been brought into the spotlight as there are much more hackers than ever before. One of the most famous hackers is Edwards Snowden , who is a PC expert and previous CIA representative. He is likewise a celebrated informant who spilled data on worldwide observation programs, numerous which were kept running by American Intelligence. It was accounted for that NSA was gathering over a large number of telephone records of individuals. It was additionally reported that NSA took advantage of the servers of different web organizations, for example, facebook and google, to screen and track online interchanges of a huge number of individuals. This was a genuine rupture of security. A group that is synonymous with this sort of activism is 'Anonymous' a loosely associated ever changing group of Hackivists from people all around the world. They are united by their love of computers and as Anonymous say "fight the system". Anonymous have shown their support of Snowden as well as calling out hate groups, identifying Chinese military cyber attacks along with child pornography. Anonymous do not have one outright leader this is why some of anonymous actions can be seen as contradictory. (Klein, 2016)"Some see a contradiction in this group that champions free speech while effectively silencing that of their enemies." This was said in response to anonymous issuing a threat to Donald Trump's website because of remarks made by Trump. Anonymous have also been involved in realising pornographic images of a minor as well as contact information. This type of behaviour is what has made some people name them "cyber terrorists". This goes to show that the argument of if Anonymous is good or bad is completely subjective because they have people of all walks of life with different ideas on what is good or bad. hacktivism played a massive part in the 'Arab spring' according to (A.shehabat)"The technological battle between authoritarian Arab governments and pro-democracy protesters was long before the Arab spring began." As we learned that social media could reveal issues in Arab regions. Activists that wanted to bring light to the uprising did so by using social media such as Facebook video and skype calls. In response governments of these countries called for a "boost" in online surveillance and eventually shutting the internet down completely. hackitvists such as Anonymous and Telcomic began launching cyber attacks against Bin-Ali, Mubarak and Assad giving the activists freedom of the web. As well as allowing activist groups to join up and channel their attack more effectively such as '#OpTunisa and #OpEygpt . Although this proved to help the people and showed people a new way to protest from their homes which is less dangerous than taking to the streets. Some have also seen these actions as governments showing that they can attempt to take away the freedoms of its people if they do not conform as said by (WeAreLegionDoc, ANON2WORLD, ANONYMOUS, 2012 ) "That just showed me that the same thing can happen at anytime and anywhere with any government" . Others have seen this as negative as it could back fire by creating a new wave of cyber hackers and criminals from the middle east. This concern is what has pushed companies such as Mcafee to install their first cyber defense system for the middle east region(Gert-Jan Schenk, President EMEA, MCAFEE, 2014) " they want to get money and there is money in the region. I think these factors combined make this region very interesting for cyber criminals with different motivations some with pure political motivation and others for greed. we are gathering specific knowledge from the region, so we are looking at bulletin boards, forums and the internet". But in such a diverse region this will prove a big challenge.
An imaginative innovative technology developed two years ago called Eterni.me. This organization is a new business which looks to for all intents and purposes copy the identity of a dead individual by breaking down their "digital footprint". This is to be done through building up an arrangement of algorithms. It achieves the idea of an eternal being as an advanced existence in the wake of death. You will no longer need to grieve your friends and family, they will be only a couple of clicks away. You can get to a virtual being of somebody who has passed away and communicate with them as though they were living people. The status of this advancement is very theoretical right now as the organization has yet to make a real computerized avatar of a dead individual. However it is not just an oddity, as the possibility of re making the persona of somebody after they have passed on is nothing new. In any case, this advancement would have been unfathomable in the pre computerized period. This thought and service would speak to many individuals and would improve their lives, as they would have computerized access to their friends and family recollections and other data, and they would have the capacity to interact with them in more routes ever imaginable prior. According to (Marius Ursache, CEO of Eterni), “technology should make our lives easier, period, If technology can help with leaving a legacy, or solving other problems for dead people’s relatives and friends – such as inheritance, access to information and so on – we should find a way to use it”
While it might appear to individuals that advanced innovations, for example, cell phones and the web improve their lives to an awesome degree, most are ignorant of the implications that can accompany it.. “ When communication technology enhances our freedom and comfort, we forget the risks” (Batra, 2008)
conclusion
In conclusion, the fact that the world that we live in has advanced technologically and rapidly, every day we try to make strides to make our lives a little more easier and enjoyable. It is in our very human nature to do so, we always have and always will. With these advancements and gadgets surveillance these will always be issues that have no definitive black and white answers. During my research i have learnt so much especially about Michel Foucault's work, I feel that Michel Foucault did well to capture the idea of power using the panopticon. it's a very clear and easy to understand as he takes us through the emotions of the inmate. The main issue I found was that Foucault's panopticon doesn't encompass all of the different forms of hierarchical power in society. I also feel that as people we should always have a right to our privacy although apparently I can see the benefits from us giving some information inevitably. It's very important that we always keep in mind that above all these are technology, we are human first and individuals with our own feelings, beliefs and ideas not cattle. As (Edward Snowden, 2015) said "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you care about free speech because you have nothing to say."