Transcript Surveillance Society

Surveillance Society
Introduction
Surveillance is a term that is used very liberally in
today’s society. Most people do not fully understand
the extent in which surveillance by the government
or private corporations affect even the most simple of
tasks in the average person’s life. Gradually, day-byday the American public is being shifted to a life full
of suspect in the attempt to turn the middle class into
a class composed of docile bodies.
Surveillance is a necessary part of life to maintain
some of the rights Americans have fought so hard to
obtain, however it hardly seems fair or necessary to
do it in an extreme way.
Surveillance
Surveillance as a general term generates negative
stereotypes towards people under the surveillance.
The two most common and literal definitions of
surveillance are
 “a watch kept over a person, group, etc.,
especially over a suspect, prisoner, or the like” and
 “Close observation of a person or group,
especially one under suspicion.”
Panopticon
A man named Jeremy Bentham developed a method of
surveillance in the 1700’s.
He developed the idea for prison surveillance called the
panopticon effect.
The basis for a successful panopticon effect is surveillance by
instilling fear into those being watched even though they may
not be.
The panopticon is derived from a method of watching prisoners
in which a watch tower was placed in the middle of the prison
and the inmates never knew whether they were being watched
or not. The guards could see them yet they could not see the
guards. This was a very effective method and is used very much
today. The panopticon effect is a very efficient and economical
method of surveillance.
The level of surveillance that a person needs to endure in their
lives is directly related to their economic standing in society.
Economic Standing
Whether it is by the government or an employer the amount of
surveillance on a person is determined inversely to that of their
economic standing.
The poorest are watched the most as the richest are watched
the least. While the wealthy are still under some form of
surveillance other wealthy people are controlling it.
The idea of the wealthy monitoring the wealthy does not seem
fair, as the poor to middles class are not responsible for
regulating one another. Even though we have a representative
government it is only the wealthy that have the resources to be
able to be in a position to make these changes. The basis of
this problem is that there is less democratization of power.
Leaky Containers
The idea of leaky containers describes the methods of surveillance as the
containers and how the information obtained is not always used only for the
stated purposes.
In “Surveillance Society” by D. Lyons in reference to different entities within the
government or a private company he states:
“What went on in one sector seldom affected another. The surveillance
containers were pretty well sealed. The situation today is changing as
those containers become more leaky. Surveillance practices and flows
of data move much more freely between one sector and another. What
happens in one area has implications on another”
(Lyons 37)
This is the case especially for the lower class workers where information is all
pooled together, yet is only accessible by upper class.
The government is a very good example as well. When a person files their taxes
with the IRS the information is not kept to only the IRS, but other departments
such as homeland security or department of defense can reference all of the
information. Law enforcement such as the FBI or CIA have unlimited capabilities
to view any information that may have been submitted to the government.
Workplace Surveillance
As the average person who goes to work many do not realize that their
every move can be and probably is being monitored. Many people do
not realize that a company has the power to monitor e-mail, phone
calls, and even keystrokes to see not only what a person is typing but
to make sure they are typing a proper number of words per minute.
Microsoft has recently developed software that can scan and observe
the eye movements and pupil dilations of a worker while they are at
the computer to see if they are truly working or if they are doing
something non-work related.
While any person should agree that some sort of monitoring of workers
must take place to ensure a productive workforce it begs the question
of does the economical cost of these technologies plus the loss of
privacy and basic freedoms equal the amount of money lost by
unproductive workers.
Conclusion
In closing, surveillance technologies are becoming
more and more accepted and are widening the net of
social control in the American society.
Through the discussion of surveillance we can
conclude that although surveillance technologies are
aimed at the deviant.
Our society is developing into what Staples calls a
‘risk’ society. Research has shown that workers are
not only being monitored for productivity in the
workplace, but as potential thieves. In this way,
surveillance and discipline have become oddly
democratic; “everyone is watched and no one is
trusted” (Staples, 2000)