Research Paper on Surveillance Studies: Examining Power and Social Control Through Technology

Introduction

Surveillance can be defined as the close but sustained monitoring of an individual through video or audio recording (Thomsen, 2019). Surveillance studies explore how people in authority, prevalently governments, surveil their citizens to gain power and influence over the masses. Michael Foucault is the pioneer of surveillance studies through his work, Discipline, and Punish (1977), that thoroughly espouses technological advancement as the apparatus for social control (Fernback, 2013). The understanding of surveillance means there is an existence of power dynamics where the watcher oppresses the surveilled. The literary works of Huxley, Kafka, and George Orwell explores the use of technology and computers and their profound implications on society and social behavior. However, in this digital age, there has been a paradigm shift in the practice of surveillance, in which case the surveilled have become the observers an act called sousveillance.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Coined by several scholars, the term sousveillance is the direct opposite of surveillance used to describe bottom to the top approach of watching (Mann et al., 2003). These practices of counter-surveillance and inverse surveillance have increased in this digital age as a sign of resistance and defiance to the state's absolute power and a method of exposing social violence and injustices. Mann et all. (2003), argued that, by pointing the camera at the surveilling authority, citizens managed to preserve their security and privacy while at the same time creating a balance in the surveillance environment. This study will analyze the implications of sousveillance on African Americans, and African Americans can apply it to counter the complexities and dynamics of state violence and discrimination.

Research Questions

This research is guided by questions such as: How is the term sousveillance defined in literature? Of what value is surveillance as a tool of resistance, and in what ways does it improve the quality of activism among African Americans? What risks does sousveillance pose to citizens who chose to participate? What are its limitations? How does the practice of sousveillance shift the political and cultural landscape from Panopticon to a new social order?

Literature Review

From a literal point of understanding, surveillance is derived from a French term surveillir, which means "watching from above." The Oxford dictionary (2013) defines surveillance as the close monitoring and observation of an individual suspected of espionage of crime. Numerous scholars have merged previous definitions into the interest in having absolute control and influence in handling personal information (Balanger & Crossler, 2011). The new methods of surveillance have been defined as the use of technological means to acquire and create personal information that can be retrieved from individuals or context. Contemporary monitoring mainly focuses on retrieving data from individuals' settings and patterns of relationships (Marx, 2002).

Nonetheless, the diverse definitions still do not capture the technological capabilities, influence, and control that can be applied to individuals and society with the use of surveillance. On the same note, as the French word suveillir denotes watching from above, sousveillance implies to view from below (Mann et al., 2003). Sousveillance can be used to express two forms of monitoring namely; hierarchical sousveillance where the surveilled direct the surveillance equipment to the ones in authority. Personal sousveillance on the other hand, is the human-centered observation and recording of experiences (Mann, 2003). Due to the unclear meaning of the term sousveillance, it can only be implied that the sousverillers are socially below those who watch them (Thomsen 2019). Thomsen critiques the ambiguity of this term, arguing that a comprehensive definition of sousveillance needs to take into consideration several factors. In categorizing various facets of surveillance, several aspects have been proposed by different scholars such as Mann, Nolland, and Ferrenbock. These dimensions are based on the technology used, the data collection process, and the nature of the data collected (Mann, 2004).

Surveillance in modern society highlights the technological developments that have surpassed traditional surveillance. Technological advancements, in the same measure, have affected the definition and understanding of the term sousveillance (Mann, 2003). The popularity and use of sousveillance are increasingly enabled through advancements in technology. However, regardless of the technological similarities, research and extensive literature show that these two terms differ greatly and can be interpreted as direct opposites. Mann's (2003) extensive research elucidates that surveillance indicates observation from above; by people who have higher social, economic, and political standing over the surveilled.

However, sousveillance, differs from normal surveillance in that, it is observation and recording of the observer. For example, the police may have a camera on their uniforms to record incidents as they happen; that's surveillance, however, while attempting an arrest, the culprit might record the whole incidence on their phone (Fernback, 2013). The action of the culprit can be termed as sousveillance. Sousveillance offers the oppressed the power to equalize society through the use of surveillance equipment. Mann et al. (2003) consider sousveillance to be a form of reflection in which the surveillance equipment is re-appropriated by the surveilled to film themselves or the ones doing the surveilling. Although the practice of sousveillance may not necessarily be designed to counteract surveillance, it creates the opportunity for a secondary gaze, which in turn balances the power dynamics of a situation. (Mann & Ferrenbock 2013). Through sousveillance, the oppressed get the power to turn the camera to their watchers while driving social and political change. (Mann & Ferrenbock 2013). Walsh O'Connor, in agreement, explains that the distribution of sousveillance material on social media fosters public engagement and debate (Bock 2016). Additionally, it helps citizens have complete access to social realities, injustices, and violence that would have otherwise remained unknown to them (Bock 2016). The most valuable insight on how sousveillance has greatly been of the essence in facilitating democracy is through its ability to shift power dynamics and consequently promoting civic engagement. This paradigm shift has greatly improved the social arrangement that has resulted in total transparency of the society where everybody has the power to watch everybody and with the use of social media; exchange and share sousveillance material freely.

Sousveillance has managed to bring fundamental symmetry and equality in the society with no exemption of the people in power. The practice of sousveillance has been used as an equalizer in the power relations between the surveillance societies. If the methods of surveillance and sousveillance are in a state of balance, equality is achieved hence the balance of power between the observer and the and ones who are being watched. (Mann, et al. 2006). This simplistic definition of the term has given rise to controversy and debate because of its insufficient description of the scope and magnitude of modern-day surveillance. Surveillance in modern society highlights the technological advancements made over traditional surveillance, which has turned western nations into "glasshouses" (Marx, 2002). The equivalence theory by David Bollier argues that sousveillance practices may reduce the need for surveillance practices (Marx, 2002). This theory illustrates there is a possibility of replacing the panoptic all-seeing eye from above with a more community based personal experience recording. Social injustices like Police brutality can, therefore, be solved through collaborating with the citizens rather than monitoring them. The approach from an all-powerful observer to an equal partnership with the community through the use of phone videography has the potential to change society to be more self-reliant.

Analytical Framework

In response to the current extreme surveillance practices in American society, nearly all citizens have adopted the use of sousveillance to stimulate inquiry into the actions by authority figures surveilling them. In some contexts, this can be looked at in terms of reflection where the people who are under constant observation decide to point the observation tools back at the law enforcers, hence creating a mirror effect. Digital technology has the potential to build on personal computing skills and make an individual feel empowered at home, workplaces, in school, and as a member of the community. Technologies such as mobiles phones, personal recording devices like camcorders, and computing devices have enabled Black Americans to move with the technological revolution (Mann et al. 2003). Currently, both surveillance and sousveillance have experienced a boost owing to fast technological improvements such as tiny cameras on the cloths, better cameras on the phones and even use of drones in areas where what is being observed is in motion.

Sousveillance accurately captures the state of modern societies where anybody with a smartphone has the power to capture video footage or images of any event as it happens in real-time and distribute the information freely across the social media. In an example, the narrative of occurrences of police officer ultimately shifts from the story to one narrative; a perspective and not the final word (Bock 2016). An early example of sousveillance is the 1991 case of LA police brutality recorded from a home video camera exposing how the police brutally beat up Rodney King (Adams, 2016).

With the great strides taken in technology, nearly everyone has access to a smartphone, the concept of "eye on the street" has now been implemented. Jacobs coined the term "eye on the street" in his book The Death and Life of Great A American cities (Jacobs, 1961). Sousveillance characteristically involves public-based recording and monitoring without necessarily having a political agenda of social control. However, individuals who participate in sousveillance aim to shift the power from the watcher to the watched while at the same time exposing information that would have otherwise remained unknown to the general society

The rate of racial oppression accorded to the black community socially, economically, and most importantly, the justice system has called for thorough implementation of sousveillance by African Americans. Sousveillance is witnessed when regular people equipped with just their camera phones are moved to be vigilant against the abuse of power that results in social injustices and oppression. Some examples of sousveillance include the murder of Eric Garner and the shooting of Walter Scott by the police, both of which were recorded on a civilian's phone (Miller, 2016). This thesis aims to explore the concept of sousveillance and how Black Americans have used it to counter and resist the surveillance practices of the state.

Discussion on Benefits, Limitations, and Risks of Sousveillance

The literature reveals the on-going debate about the influences that new technologies, applied in sousveillance activities, have on society and particularly from the point of justice and equality. The following paragraphs will discuss the different points of view and include an evaluation of the importance, risks, and challenges of sousveillance on the people that chose to engage in community bases monitoring an...