For next week, read/view the following:
- Brignall III, Tom. (2002) The New Panopticon: The Internet Viewed as a Structure of Social Control. Theory & Science, Vol. 3, Issue 1.
Consider the following questions – choose ONE SET to respond to:
- What example of the panopticon (either a model or structure) can you identify within your own neighborhood? How does it control social behavior and interactions? Discuss, specifically, how your panopticon example utilizes structure, setting, technology, and/or people (employees, guards, and/or other authoritative figures) to survey a large group of people? In what ways does your example fit into the characteristics of the panopticon, according to the article and video? Be sure to reference the reading when discussing your example.
- Why is the Internet potentially the most dangerous and/or powerful panopticon model? What examples can you specifically locate (other than those the reading makes reference to) that exemplify characteristics or
elements of the panopticon? Some possible examples (there are many) include YouTube, MySpace, blog software, email providers, etc. How might the Internet, in general, and your example specifically, have an effect on your daily life? How does your example altar or affect your online behavior? Explain and describe, being sure to make reference to the reading. - Utilizing an example not already used in the readings, explain and describe how the panopticon connects with power. Within your model of a panopticon structure and/or model, who is in power? How do individuals within the panopticon become agents of their own oppression? How do corporations, businesses, institutions, and/or governmental entities justify their use of panopticon structures, models, and/or techniques? Make reference to your example and the reading.
November 7, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Question 1. One example of the pantopticon model in the neighborhood I work in is the camera placed on the corner by the CCPD. I believe it was placed there to monitor gang activity. It does make people interact differently (on that corner) because they can never know if they are being watched. I know I always make an extra effort to make a complete stop at the stop sign, just in case!
The camera is set pretty high up on the light pole, so that it can probably get a good view beyond just that 4-way stop. As discussed in the reading, the purpose of the camera is to “weed out” the unwanted. Just as the pantopticon model for the internet would get rid of the unwanted sites (pornography,illegal downloading) the camera on the corner is meant to deter gang/drug activity.
November 8, 2007 at 12:12 am
The reason the internet is so dangerous and dosnt follow the panopticon is because as good as technology is and as good as its getting, its extremley hard to catch people doing things they shouldnt be doing, or looking at things they shouldnt be looking at or exposed too. For my case study im doing it on internet safety and more specifically petafilia and child abuse. A huge problem we are having today is stalkers on the internet praying on young children who are the majority of the people that use the internet. Its extremley hard to track down and watch a few people let alone everyone and watching everything they do on the internet. There is a great show on NBC that im going to use in class tomorrow that shows some criminals in the act of abusing the internet to have sex with kids, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY8BkoyH8m4g In the reading it was giving an example of a prison thats shaped like an octagon where lights are on the inmates so that the guard can look at them but the inmates know they are being watched but dont know exactly when. This is a great example because when people think they are being watched our might be being watched there is less of a chance for violence or any kind of criminal behavior but at the same time you have to ask yourself the question, is it worth it. Is it worth it being scared and nervous about the fact that someone might be watching you at any given time, and when is it possible at all if you have any moment where you can actually be alone. This text and reading made me realize that as much as we want to control the situations that are at hand, at what price are you willing to sacrifice everyones privacy to get crime to decrease. I personally think crime is always going to be present and you can try all you want to get ride of it but it will never really disappear, humans are naturally violent and seek out ways to do what they want and in the end its going to happen and its never really going to disappear 100%. I think they are all ideas and as good as they sound on paper, in real life if they were practiced i would imagine more than not people would be extremley upset about this and not want or let it happen. The same with the internet, you can try all you want to watch what people do but its so hard that its just an externality that comes with the freedom of the internet and the most in my opinion you can do is try to catch the criminals, but you cant just inforce watching everything people do all the time. Technology is a werid thing and its always advancing and sooner or later theres going to be new technology that even if you find away to track everyone, theres going to be a way around it.
November 8, 2007 at 1:26 pm
a site once met for college students where they can get to know one another look up people from different scholls and mingle via internet. that site isn’t just for college students anymore high schoolers, and middle school kids are on this site. facebook.com has become the new “myspace” only better. facebook is more sophistcated or mature version of myspace, no color backgrounds and people actually read what people put on their facebook. i’m in a group at school and where having a speaker come next monday C.L. lewis to speak about how facebook can either make or break a person from getting a job. employers are starting to look at other people’s facebook to see what kind of person they are, whether worth hiring or not from the picture to the comments and what kind of friends we have. other people are looking from the outside in and finding out the things that we do what we are like. social barrier that the internet plays is when on facebook and we meet this person we have a good conversation online without knowinf what each other is like but when we meet in person we don’t know how to act when we’re face to face. the internet brings up a wall on communication we talk great online but all that goes out the window when people are together. when poeple go on the internet the one place that we go is facebook spending hours on it doing what, i don’t know. i hear people telling their freinds that they should go to “FA” facebook annoynomous.
November 8, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Question 3. Although I am not much of a television-watcher, as I was reading this week’s article, all I could think about was reality TV. Television is in a league of its own when it comes to power: it obviously has America in a chokehold because more people than ever before are glued to their sets, paying for more and more expensive cable, and TiVo-ing and all that. Before it was soap operas, cartoons, movies, regular shows; but in the past—what? 10 years or so? Maybe less—reality TV has taken center stage. There are dozens and dozens of these types of shows, with subjects stretching from romance to “eat or be eaten,” to the everyday lives of little people. The structure of reality television is distinctly panopticon: there is always the possibility that the individuals on set are being watched, whether by the guy holding the camera or by the little surveillance thingy in the corner of their bedroom. But reality television is panoptic in a new way as well: the people on the show don’t know if the boss or whoever is going to even use the footage taken of them; everything is chopped, spliced, and edited. So while the individual thinks that she/he is in “power” (because they are, after all, the star of a television show) they are actually no different than the inmates of the very first panopticon prison.
The individuals within the panopticon of reality TV “become agents of their own oppression” because not only do the willingly submit to the conditions of non-privacy innate in reality TV, they also modify their behavior because of that fact. The old saying “dance like no one’s watching” is nonexistent in this culture of voyeurism/exhibitionism: rather, it becomes “dance like EVERYONE’S watching.” Because they are.
The corporations behind reality television are obviously profiting (far more than their “stars,” I would bet) and justifying their realm of entire lack of privacy with money, money, money. The ratings show that Americans don’t mind having fellow citizens’ privacy invaded; actually, they want to participate in invading their privacy by staying glued to their television all night and all day.
While I realize that this example of a panopticon is different than that described in the reading, I think it is relevant because both the state of the internet and reality television say something about the state of affairs in the United States. The “normalization” mentioned in the reading is exactly what’s going on in television: we have been made to think that it is indeed NORMAL to be followed around by cameras all day.
By the way, the second thing I thought about when I started reading this article was George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” How excited was I when the farther I read the more I saw about the Orwellian and “Big Brother”? If you haven’t read it, you should read it.
November 8, 2007 at 3:38 pm
I think that the internet as a panopticon model is right on, it just goes to show that nothing is truly secret, as was mentioned in the reading there are such programs as spyware, and initiatives of the internet companies to monitor our internet usage and e-mail either for security or for the use of advertising or something else. The internet give us as users to monitor each other also, for instance I think we have all been on facebook lately and what is the first thing we see each and every time we long on…news feed we see the last 25 activities of our various friends and groups and what has been written on our friends walls. After we look at what’s new and interesting on news feed we often click into our friends profiles and see what they have been writing, who they are friends with etc. anther example is sprint the cell phone service monitors all text messages and saves them in a data base for two weeks. I am not really someone who has anything to hide and I don’t really care what the internet and phone companies do to monitor me and my recent activities, but like it said in the reading if all we begin to think about is how we are being watched all the time is our freedom of speech going to slowly die away, and the candid exchange of opinion and information that is the internet going to change into something much more stiff and impersonal? One of the keys the article made about the panopticon is that we will be watched but not all the time, I think in a lot of ways it could make people think about the consequences of what they write because they will eventually have a judgment it may not be today or tomorrow but we will all be watched sometimes, but how much is too much, and when does it cross the line from a thing we do to keep the peace to a flat out invasion of privacy.
November 8, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Question 1: The town that I grew up in just like the place Carinna placed cameras in various locations across town. They are on light poles and stop lights. The city put them in place so they could catch speeders and also to catch people dealing drugs. The city put those cameras in for all the right reasons but it really has caused a lot of problems. Here in the city of Chicago they have very high tech camera systems. But out in the suburbs since the funds aren’t there the cameras are a lot lower quality and the clarity are not as good.
Because of the low quality people have been issued unnecessary tickets and unlawful arrests.
November 8, 2007 at 3:56 pm
2) While the Internet gives us unlimited access to an infinite number of information, it also has become a dangerous outlet. The number of technological advances in our century has been heightened by the creation of the Internet. As technology progresses, certain things become more available and easier to do. mp3 sharing, which is probably illegal (But I do it anyway), has been a great tool in breaking the boundaries of the conventional music industry, instead it spreads by word of mouth. This is just one example. As we progress, responsiblity also rises, which in turn rises surveillance. Now with all the current events that have happened and the Patriot Act, we are constantly monitored over the web. Of course, this is useful in tracking criminals and terrorists, which is great, but some of it isn’t needed. Even with Myspace, it has become a form of censorship. Just recently, posts and bulletins from Ron Paul’s page have been deleted, and accounts of his supporters have been canceled. I’m not saying there is a whole conspiracy going on..but maybe there is..
I am on the Internet almost everyday for schoolwork and such. To think that some govt. official is reading my emails is strange. It does have a Big Brother quality to it. Increasing govt control in this form is a scary thought. It’s ironic to think that the Internet is thought of a form of total connection or freedom. And now it caould been seen as some sort of prison.
November 8, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Question 1:
One example that I have is the school bus system. After there were certain violent acts committed on st. paul school buses each bus was given a “video recorder”. It was a small off white box that had a glass panel in the front of it. There was a small red light that blinked about every 5 seconds. After the recorder was placed in the front of the bus things started to change. The behaviour of the students became passive. It was if someone finally was able to tell these kids that a bus is a form of transportation, not a place for kids to fight or play around. Kids were silent because before although the bus driver was an authority figure he was to busy watching the road and he wasn’t able to keep track of what was going on behind him.
The factor that makes this interesting is that it finally leaked that the “video recorders” were just boxes. They were there to simulate a camera and inflict a fear on the kids to behave. The bus system didn’t have a enough money to actually have working video cameras along with moniters that would watch the video streams. After it was found out that the cameras were just boxes the kids starting acting out again because they didn’t feel like someone or something was keeping tabs on them. The fact that the behaviour changed with the camera and then without it shows that it is a necessary factor. In the prison and on the bus, the individuals weren’t intimidated when they could see the person who was in authority (say a prison guard or the bus driver.
When the unknown aspect was introduced they both changed. They became weary of who was watching them behind or beyond the box and watch tower. The unknown element is what keeps the panopticon theory going which in turn keeps the hegemony agent strong.
November 8, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I live on campus at the Hostel on Congress. I see myself being monitored constantly. Walking into the building, I see cameras monitoring outsiders or those about to enter. As I come inside, a student or employee monitors a screen with a bunch of different views from the cameras outside as well as the ones inside. Passing the person watching the screen, I go to the elevator to get to the fifth floor. On the way there, I curiously look at the little structure in the back right corner, another camera. As I get off the elevator to go to my room, another camera watches my actions as I walk past.
It seems being watched is completely unavoidable, and I feel like I am being watched all the time.
I suppose the people who put the cameras in place would also say they are for safety, like the people from the reading who say the Internet must be monitored for safety reasons. I’m not sure that so many cameras are necessary for my safety. The way that I am constantly feeling watched though, resembles the panopticon structure. I am never sure exactly when I am being watched so sometimes I feel on guard, like I have to hide. I feel especially awkward when I am alone on the elevator and I think about the little camera behind me and the person downstairs watching what I am doing. I get a little bit antsy. I have no reason to hide. I have done nothing wrong or offensive, yet the presence of the cameras invades my privacy.
So what exactly am I, along with the other residents and visitors at the Hostel, being kept safe from? Do the cameras cause other people, people who potentially want to do harm, to rethink their plans? Do they see the cameras and decide that doing something unlawful or harmful would be too much of a risk?
The reading focuses more on corporations having access to personal information used to exploit consumers. However, the introduction discusses the government using our fear to violate our privacy and read our e-mails as if doing so is in our best interest or for our safety. Are the many cameras installed both inside and outside the Hostel and other areas of our lives, like the workplace and streetlights in our best interest? Are they impacting our safety because people behave differently with a camera watching them?
In the case of the Hostel, it is probable that the college would be hoping to deter students from behaving badly by drinking, smoking, or other inappropriate things.
November 8, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Hope’s comment brings up a good point. I too, remember the cameras on the buses. I was very quiet, so it didn’t change my behavior. Most of the children were still very loud and rambunctious on my bus even with the camera, though. It did perhaps, prevent violence. There were still bullies who didn’t need extreme violence to bother the kids on the bus. Maybe kids today are so used to being monitored that they take it for granted somewhat and their behavior does not drastically change.
November 8, 2007 at 5:26 pm
2. The reason the internet is the most dangerous panopticon model is basically because the amount of people who use the internet. Like stated in the readings, the internet has almost become a “cultural necessity.” People use the internet to get their news, shop, communicate, etc… and because of this there is a huge number of the population that can be monitored not only by the government, but corporations, etc… I think a really interesting fact I got from the readings is how American Online has their own customers observe other customers in exchange for service. I think that is sort of deceiving of them to do, but I guess a good strategy to follow what people do online. I think its sort of ridiculous to monitor people online… I feel its our freedom to be able to look at what we want when we want, because of how the internet is such a great information tool. Granted there is plenty of bad stuff online that people shouldn’t look at..(but I’m sure still do) One thing I feel is really dangerous online is something called the anarchists cookbook. This is basically homemade recipes for people to build bombs and other harmful things.. and it gives you step by step instructions. I feel its important to monitor sites like these for obvious reasons but people should be able to browse other things without worry of who’s watching. I feel examples that exemplify a panopticon already are peer to peer sites. For example, myspace, facebook, blogs, etc… These give the other users the chance to monitor you and possibly people you don’t want to the chance as well. These sites even give you the chance to put you current “status” which is basically what your doing at that moment. I feel they can be dangerous for people you don’t know browsing your site, but at the same time a great way to stay connected to a large group of people. It can affect our daily lives because many of us in my generation are using these sites daily. This gives the possibility for stalkers and other weirdo’s the chance to watch you… even if you are unaware. Thats basically all I gathered…. thanks for reading
November 8, 2007 at 5:36 pm
1) Reading about the panoptican theory was really intresting. I dind’t take me much to make my mind up for this question. I believe that religion has been doing the same thing as this panoptican theory. This god society speaks about has such a great athourity that force fear upon us. Fear to withdraw from what the creators of this panoptican way of living believed as wrong. Society has became scared of god who watches over us and knows everything we do, but at the same time we aren’t allow to know what IT is? In the reading it states that knowing your being watched modifies you behavior. This is obsolutly true in my example of religion. This institute shacles you mentally to their “correct” way of living to keep you controlled. Not only does this change you as a natural human but also some might change at religion events. I know i defenetly did when i used to be into god. What gets to me the most is that the authority figures of this institute end up contradicting themself with their actions. For example the scandals of the priest have sexual relationship with children. That is crazy. I can’t really find away to incorporate this into technology. Wait i have something but it is history. When the printing press was invented it gave the opportunity for this institutes to spread and become more powerful. So yeah that’s it.
November 8, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Question 3
The internet is quite possibly the most dangerous pronopticon model around in that there is no way to monitor everything that happens in/on it. The reading mentioned the Carnivor and how it searches for key words sent through ISPs. This would allow the government to track down dangerous transmitions and the people making them. Unfortunately, depending on what these key words are, this would also include a great number of people that have nothing to do with such activities, forcing the government to sift through millions of pieces of electronic data in order to find the real threats. With that said, we would need to change the way we speak or communicate in order to avoid being mistakenly labeled as a terrorist. Of course, that means we would essencially have a limit or restriction put on freedom of speach, bringing up the question of “What should we do?” Personally, I’ll take my chances. I don’t really send too many e-mails or do much on-line chatting. So I think my chanves of having some thing negative happen to me as a result are very slim.
November 8, 2007 at 5:51 pm
The Internet is potentially the most dangerous and/or powerful panopticon model because everything we do on the internet is monitored. Every website you go to, everything you download, every e-mail you write… people can see. People have their identities stolen every day. i cant even imagine whats worse than someone pretending to be you and stealing and basically ruining your life. everything you do or get usually depends on your credit. i remember they had to run a credit report on me
before i got my job. if someone stole your identity and ruined your credit- there goes your future. Some people just hand their informations out like on myspace- you can just go to anyones myspace and find out their full name, where they live, where they were born, what they look like, what kind of body they have, how much they make, where they work– its like damn. who needs to even do any work to steal an identity anymore? i used to have a livejournal and i remember my best friend and i found this website where this person had taken all these pictures we had on our livejournals and used them as their own. I couldnt believe it. it was so weird. this person just made us random stuff- the person said our names were something else and we were from like sweden or something and we loved to sleep with everyone and eachother. we complained and it got taken down but it was scary and i never put out numerous pictures of myself for the public to see ever again. people are crazy and do extremely crazy things.
November 8, 2007 at 5:52 pm
After reading Agency, I couldn’t really understand the true defintion of the word, but I could really relate to what the passage was saying. Agency seems like it means that someone has some type of power over you, like something u can control or may you can but just dont want to. The word “power” is powerful it self, I think that we take for granted how powerful it is. For instants we all would want to have our streets free from crim but yet we hate the cops and bash them. I feel that cops do have athority over us and we like the thought that they are there to help us but we hate the thought they have power over us.
The meaning of Agency is different depending on the person. If I have the power to change the fact that cars don’t need gas to fuction, I would consider that a great thing but I’m sure that all the gas station would hate it. they wouldn’t consider that power they would consider that as a curse. Some times I think as people we dont respect the good power or athority someone has over us but we accept the bad power that someone has over us like the government.
I can think of this one time when I was younger about 6 years old. My mother stressed that I sould look both ways before crossing the street and should never cross by myself. I was a hardheaded child and hated the thought of anyone telling me what to do. I knew that crossing the street was dangerous and that my mother probly had me in her best interest but keep in mind that I hated the fact that anyone was controlling my life. I crossed the street and got hit by a truck and broke my femor and was in the hospital for a month. The moral of the story is we (I) like the idea of agency but can we really handle it.
November 8, 2007 at 5:57 pm
I’ve thought about this a lot, because it really creeps me out…
The city of Chicago and the Chicago Transit Authority know where I am at all times. When I swipe my U-Pass to go to school or come home, they have a record of my name, the school I go to, and the time of day that I travel to and from both locations. From this, they can assume several things: I live in Lakeview, by Wrigley Field/boystown; I am 17-24 years old; I go to Columbia College Chicago, and therefore I must be into the arts/have an “alternative” lifestyle; I travel to school, on average, at around 2pm each day; I travel to go home, on average, at around 8pm each day. The CTA has this information about all students living in the city of Chicago attending college full-time. Of course, they can’t necessarily know my specifics (or can they?), but with this information, they can find out how/when to market things to me (me, meaning myself and my peers). It creeps me out!
Another way we are being monitored is with EZ-Passes. Every time I drive through a toll, my name and credit card information is sent in to the EZ-Pass company. They know where I’m going to and coming from.
Of course, I know when I get my U-Pass or EZ-Pass, that I am giving the CTA and EZ-Pass company access to my information, but, just as I do when I sit on my computer and access probably a few taboo websites, I don’t (and I’m sure no one else does, either) think that they’re going to access my information to use as some sort of statistic, to try and monitor and figure out people of my demographic. These are just two ways of making my life easier- I don’t have to throw down 2 dollars every time I want to ride the train, and I don’t have to wait behind cars at a tollbooth to pass through (makes my life easier, and helps me get where I’m going faster). But the truth is that they have the ability to use this information as a way of monitoring all those using these amenities.
The truth is that I just simply don’t know what they’re going to do with my information. It’s just too easy for the government, or these private companies, not to capitalize off of the statistics that they can get from U-Pass and EZ-Pass companies.
November 8, 2007 at 6:38 pm
i grew up in a smallm town in germany. it had a lot of closed minded people and kids who loved tagging and creating groups of ‘bad-ass’ guys. we had several streets that had nothing but fields surrounding them so drivers knew they could speed. however, after time there were three crashes in which five people died. by the thrid crash they final decided to putt up speeding cameras. my father was a driver who loved to speed and he was caught speeding on one of the street and had to pay a fine. a camera like this reminds people to pay attention to the speed limit and encourages them to drive at the specific speed limit. this is someting that we should not have to be reminded of becasue it is something that we should already do. its sad to think that three crashes and a fine is what it takes for people to follow laws. nevertheless, people are still speeding on these roads.
also there is a camera located outside of our local grocery store becasue these so call ‘gangs’ are bothering customers and stealing the fruit that sits outside of the store. now that they put a camera there the ‘gangs’ do not hang out there anymore. however, it is disturbing to know that you are being watched. it is interesting to watch the customers reactions before they get close to the camera. almost everyone puts a smile on when coming close to the camera.
these are only something we are aware of. think of all the possible things we can do with technology now a days. in london there are cameras everywhere. i was walking down the street and instead of putting my cigarette out in the ashtray i threw it ont he ground and a camera told me they were watching me and asked me to pick my bud up and throw it in the trash. where is the privacy? how do we know when and where we are being watched. they say it is for our own safty but to be honest i do not feel safe i feel watched and violated.
‘If the panopticon model is nothing more than a marketing tool used by corporations in hopes of knowing their customers better, this is still an invasion of privacy. Having the potential to observe everything a customer does is highly detrimental to democratic values and issues of personal privacy and freedom. Do consumers desire to be catalogued so that all corporate product decisions might be preordained based on statistical demographic studies? Do mass-market surveys based on Internet usage and traffic accurately reflect what consumers truly desire? If these events should occur with more frequency than they already do, is this not a form of social control?’
November 8, 2007 at 6:41 pm
I really enjoyed this reading. I grew up in a small town in Germany. It had a lot of closed minded people and kids who loved tagging and creating groups of ‘bad-ass’ guys. We had several streets that had nothing but fields surrounding them so drivers knew they could speed. However, after time there were three crashes in which five people died. By the third crash they final decided to putt up speeding cameras. My father was a driver who loved to speed and he was caught speeding on one of the street and had to pay a fine. A camera like this reminds people to pay attention to the speed limit and encourages them to drive at the specific speed limit. This is something that we should not have to be reminded of because it is something that we should already do. It’s sad to think that three crashes and a fine is what it takes for people to follow laws. Nevertheless, people are still speeding on these roads.
Also there is a camera located outside of our local grocery store because these so call ‘gangs’ are bothering customers and stealing the fruit that sits outside of the store. Now that they put a camera there the ‘gangs’ do not hang out there anymore. However, it is disturbing to know that you are being watched. It is interesting to watch the customer’s reactions before they get close to the camera. Almost everyone puts a smile on when coming close to the camera.
These are only something we are aware of. Think of all the possible things we can do with technology now a days. In London there are cameras everywhere. I was walking down the street and instead of putting my cigarette out in the ashtray I threw it on the ground and a camera told me they were watching me and asked me to pick my bud up and throw it in the trash. Where is the privacy? How do we know when and where we are being watched? They say it is for our own safety but to be honest I do not feel safe I feel watched and violated.
‘If the panopticon model is nothing more than a marketing tool used by corporations in hopes of knowing their customers better, this is still an invasion of privacy. Having the potential to observe everything a customer does is highly detrimental to democratic values and issues of personal privacy and freedom. Do consumers desire to be catalogued so that all corporate product decisions might be preordained based on statistical demographic studies? Do mass-market surveys based on Internet usage and traffic accurately reflect what consumers truly desire? If these events should occur with more frequency than they already do, is this not a form of social control?’
November 8, 2007 at 7:12 pm
The internet isn’t potentially the worlds greatest panopticon, it just is the greatest one. It has given any individual access all of the information in the world they wish to seek out and even more access to the people controlling it. Because of the internet, someone like myself can sign on facebook and instantly know who my friends are talking to, what about, interests, email addresses, phone numbers, all sorts of stuff. Likewise, someone who is a bit more computer-savvy ccould quite easily find out even more info: passwords, home addresses, ss numbers. And even more alarming than that is to imagine that a government official or internet service provider employee could know everything about my life online: who I’m emailing, who’s emailing me, credit card information, web sites I’ve visited, chat rooms I join, basically anything. And this is when things become a bit big brotherish and creepy to think about. And the worst part of it all is that our society, in a very short time, has become built on a need for the internet. Shit, I hate computers and my life would come to a screeching hault were I to lose my technological connections. I pay all of my bills, access my bank accounts, conduct most of my school work and keep connected with friends and family all online. This is what the reading desrcibes as “those individuals that exist in a panopticon model become their own agents of oppression. The panopticon model can become a form of hegemony while also allowing those who control the model to make a profit. Ultimately, individuals in a panopticon model eventually will not be weary of “Big Brother”, but weary of “Little Brother” (or other inmates) who may be willing to keep track of group members for a profit. The power of the panopticon becomes “a faceless gaze that transformed the whole social body into a field of perception: thousands of eyes posed everywhere, mobile attentions ever on the alert” (Foucault, 1972: 214)”. Most would laugh at this when compared to the internet because everyone loves the internet but that doesn’t make it any less true. We live in a world where people let their imaginations run wild and we’re suffering the consequences because now they can put all of that built-up paranoia to use by monitoring every move we make, atleast in the digital world. Some of it is legit concern but most of it is probably “talks about the misunderstanding and over-inflated fear of the existence of evil Internet hackers and crackers as promoted by companies that stand to gain a profit from the purchase of their software or services”. The internet is hegemony personified, we love it and it is invariably fused with our everyday lives for better or worse from now on.
November 15, 2007 at 2:28 am
The internet is one of the most dangerous panopticons, because of the mystery. There are sites where you can view who is viewing you, but this isn’t always the case. You have to be careful what sites you visit because you can be tracked. Every computer has a code with a history to look up, so if you are doing something possibly reckless, you never know what powers can track you; the site’s creator, the government, etc.
I think one’s neighborhood serves as a panopticon. Some neighborhoods have community watches, where a set number of blocks use vigalant survalance to protect each other. Like the cameras on the street posts in Chicago, this too can be uncomfortable because you may feel as though your every move is being monitored by SOME one.
December 5, 2007 at 5:43 pm
the internet is a model of the worse panopticons. ofcourse we have no privacy because of the net,this technology takes away our freedom of speech and privacy through spam,and the marketing of various net and services we( i)don`t need( cell phones,dating,
finance etc..) .so i`m asking my self if these companies got my info with out my permission,who can say the criminals can`t do the same? every day we moniter each other,i pass, grocerystore,malls
concerts ,and of course phonelines, the irony is when it`s time to use these methods of surveillace to find criminals ,it`s not used more frequently.most of us are put in the panopticon situations by no choice ,your job, your educational institutions even our cablesevice (tv).it`s the undercover brother and we have tojust deal with it.