Technological Social Control and Digital Surveillance

Media and Technology SOCI 1306 Technological Social Control and Digital Surveillance The idea of the surveillance society has grown to such an extent that an entire scholarly magazine, Surveillance and Society, has been created to explore it. This concept, which describes a society in which monitoring is ubiquitous, has a long history and has been studied from a variety of angles throughout the years. Philosopher Jeremy Bentham first proposed the concept of panoptic surveillance in the late 18th century, and it serves as a fundamental framework for comprehending modern surveillance techniques. Bentham's concept for the Panopticon, a kind of prison facility, enables a single guard to keep an eye on every prisoner without the convicts knowing they are being observed. The way that this architectural model of surveillance has been modified to fit the workings of contemporary surveillance systems shows how relevant Bentham's theories still are. In his dystopian novel "1984," written in 1949, George Orwell vividly and frighteningly brings Jeremy Bentham's theoretical concept to reality. Orwell pictured a society ruled by an allpervasive, authoritarian state that relies heavily on monitoring to stay in power. Big Brother stands in for the all-seeing, all-knowing government, which keeps an eye on the people to enforce compliance and quell opposition. The novel's depiction of surveillance as an oppressive instrument has come to be seen as a cultural touchstone for debates around invasions of privacy and government power. Resonating with readers of all ages, Orwell's writing serves as a sobering warning of the possible perils of unrestricted monitoring and acts as a sobering example in conversations about civil liberties and government power. The topic of monitoring was developed further by French philosopher Michel Foucault in his 1975 book "Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison." The historical formation of contemporary disciplinary societies, where monitoring is essential to preserving control and order, was examined by Foucault. He expanded on Bentham's Panopticon to develop a more comprehensive social theory, contending that surveillance is a pervasive social phenomenon rather than only a top-down method of control utilised by organisations or governments. According to Foucault, people self-regulate in some way only by knowing they could be observed. He refers to this internalisation of monitoring as the "disciplinary society," in which authority is wielded not just through overt surveillance but also through more covert, widespread tactics. The theoretical frameworks developed by Bentham, Orwell, and Foucault are becoming more and more realised in today's world of constantly tracking technology. This tendency is best shown by the widespread use of digital security cameras in both public and private areas. These cameras, which are frequently a part of enormous networks, record our movements in great detail and offer real-time monitoring capabilities. It is nearly difficult to stroll along a street in many places throughout the world without being repeatedly photographed. There are serious privacy issues and concerns about how to strike a balance between personal liberties and security raised by this ongoing visual surveillance. The emergence of mobile technology has given the surveillance society additional dimensions beyond visual surveillance. Our cell phones, which are becoming a necessity in our everyday life, are powerful instruments for monitoring our whereabouts. With the use of GPS, cell phones are able to locate us rather precisely. Large volumes of location data are gathered and stored by telecommunications firms, and this data may be accessed by law enforcement and other organisations, frequently without the express permission of the user. Smartphones track our internet activity, conversations, and even social contacts, so this type of surveillance goes beyond just our physical movements. Furthermore, advances in facial recognition technology have completely changed how surveillance is conducted. Face recognition software has been used by law enforcement organisations all around the world to identify people in real time or from recorded material. With the use of artificial intelligence, this technology can identify people in a matter of seconds by matching faces to large databases. Face recognition advocates contend that technology improves security and helps prevent crime, while detractors point out that there is a chance of misidentification, prejudice, and privacy erosion. The use of face recognition technology in public areas like stadiums, airports, and city streets has generated a lot of discussion and demands for control and regulation. The way that surveillance technologies are incorporated into daily life has a significant impact on society. On the one hand, these technologies have the potential to improve public safety, discourage criminal conduct, and supply useful data for a range of uses. However, they seriously jeopardise civil rights, autonomy, and privacy. People may behave differently as a result of knowing they are being monitored if they are subjected to continuous surveillance. A thriving, democratic society needs free expression, innovation, and disagreement, all of which may be stifled by this self-censorship. Moreover, the manner that monitoring is ingrained in many societal strata demonstrates the decentralisation of surveillance as envisioned by Foucault. Smaller organisations and people participate in monitoring just as much as governments and big businesses do. While people use their own gadgets to take and share photos and videos, private firms utilise surveillance to keep an eye on their staff and clients. Almost anybody may now be both an observer and the observed, democratising surveillance and resulting in a complex network of monitoring that penetrates social interactions. In conclusion, social scientists and thinkers like as Bentham, Orwell, and Foucault have examined the surveillance society, which has developed into a ubiquitous reality in the contemporary world. Panoptic monitoring has become a reality because to the development of sophisticated surveillance technology including facial recognition software, digital security cameras, and mobile phone tracking. These technologies have advantages in efficiency and security, but they also bring up important moral and legal issues. Today's society has a difficulty in balancing the use of modern technologies for the common benefit with the defence of individual liberties and privacy. As we advance, it will be essential to maintain constant communication and put strong frameworks in place to make sure that monitoring methods do not jeopardise the core principles and rights of a democratic society.