I was reading an article on the pervasiveness of modern surveillance technology. While the article itself was mostly about technologies such as CCTV or credit card information, this quote about Michel Foucault’s famous example about the panopticon got me thinking:
What distinguished this structure was an architecture designed to maximize the visibility of inmates who were to be isolated in individual cells such that they were unaware moment-to-moment whether they were being observed by guards in a central tower. More than a simple device for observation, the panopticon worked in conjunction with explicitly articulated behavioural norms as established by the emerging social sciences, in efforts to transform the prisoner’s relation to him or her self. This disciplinary aspect of panoptic observation involves a productive soul training which encourages inmates to reflect upon the minutia of their own behaviour in subtle and ongoing efforts to transform their selves.
The panopticon is the famous prison design by Jeremy Bentham that Michel Foucault used as the ideal metaphor for modern societies need for discipline and normalise through observation. Foucault argued that this type of “control through observation” was not only a feature in prison, but all hierarchical structures such the army, schools, hospitals and factories. Though the panopticon design itself was actually not commonly used, thanks to Foucault it has remained iconic.
What struck me was how I recognized from this idea how people’s awareness of being monitored making them reflect on the minutia of their own behavior. I have more than have a few friends who have become camera shy because they know that any images taken could end up on Facebook with their name on it. Some people even immediately remove all photo tags of themselves as soon as they appear. As Facebook has become more mainstream and people are befriending more broadly (relatives and colleagues instead of just university buddies), it has caused many people to dial back on their candidness when it comes to how they represent themselves online. As evidenced by Facebook’s recent changes, the functionality of the site is intended to leave more and more user information open to the whole world, and in some cases you have to go a rather strenuous process to hide your personal information.
The overall trend in all social media seems to be about openness. Some people seem to embrace it, especially the more extrovert and dare I say egocentric ones. But some are put off by this trend of, as so eloquently put in the article, “groups which were previously exempt from routine surveillance are now increasingly being monitored.” Naturally, it’s a bit of a stretch to compare Facebook to the panopticon prison. So much of this Facebook surveillance is just us learning to “be” on Facebook, but as long as the technology is enabling this surveillance (and increasingly so), we should at least be mindful of it. As we are becoming more digital each passing year, the notion of escaping the digital gaze might become more or less socially impossible. I’ve heard a few predictions that in the future your online presence is what works as your reputation or even resume. “If you’re not online, you don’t exist”, the thinking seems to go. It’s already happening as many companies are already googling any new job applicants and going through their blogs and social media profiles.
Just be mindful of what Facebook (and social media in general) is becoming, or rather that you are being watched more and more on Facebook. At least you don’t want to end up on a site like Failbook before you get it.
Article: Haggerty, Kevin; Ericson, Richard. “The surveillant assemblage” British Journal of Sociology Vol. No. 51 Issue No. 4 (December 2000) pp. 605–622
Recent Comments