Surveillance
I remember in a previous reading the idea that surveillance (on campus) is as much about protection of property as it is about discipline or control, which lead me to think about whether all surveillance really boils down to economic concerns. However, this doesn’t necessarily work for online surveillance or self-surveillance, does it? Is there something about knowing what people are up to in and of itself that drives this?
In the Butler article, surveillance footage is used in the court case and grossly misread. This in conjunction with the concept of the panopticon and the abundance of cameras in virtually every space creates an even more frightening scenario, but also makes me question the original purpose of surveillance. If certain bodies are guilty, or violent, or whatever they are interpreted to be without evidence, what is the point of surveillance in the first place?
The question of how information shared online might be used against us come up a lot when thinking about social media, but with the increased awareness of participatory surveillance in the form of online sharing, might we eventually see the opposite effect where not having a readily accessible online footprint could be seen as having something to hide?