The advent of social media has changed the world of dating, and no such platform has made bigger changes than Instagram. Created in 2010, the photo sharing app has revolutionized modern connections and created a platform where potential mates can research each other, closely follow each other, and even track how much they are being viewed.

Creating a digital memory book of sorts has made Instagram the first place to go when “looking into” a potential mate: e.g. what they look like, how they dress, what kind of activities they’re interested in. Following someone can also show us when they are active on the app and whose posts they are liking and commenting on. With the introduction of the new “Stories” feature, Instagram users are becoming even more ingrained in each other’s personal lives. Serving as a way to document one’s day, the Stories feature is a constantly updating timeline that lets the person who posted the story see who has viewed it. While this is normal for a feature like this, Instagram has used its “frequented user” algorithm to put the names of those who interact with your account the most at the top of the viewers list. For example, if you post a story and it is viewed by 1,000 people, Instagram will organize the list of viewers by their interaction to your account, with the most engaged users at the top of the list and those who have little interaction with your account at the bottom.

Image courtesy of Mashable 

This kind of “trackability” has changed modern connections, especially in dating. It’s too easy to be given almost too much information about a potential mate, to the point where it can make us either paranoid or uninterested.

Andrejevic uses a quote from Gehl in his writing that I believe  epitomizes this new age of Instagram. “In a typical Web 2.0 site, there is a surface, where users are free to produce content and make effective connections, and there is a hidden depth, where new media capitalists convert user-generated content into exchange-values” (2009, 25).  I think this accurately shows the double layer of Instagram use, where we are both purposefully creating content with our deliberate actions and “accidentally” creating content with our behavior.

Later in his writing, Andrejevic notes this divide in user-generated content. “The advent of the social Web and its mingling of social and professional networks casts at least some forms of user-generated-content in a different light.” This applies to Instagram, as our activity can look one way to us and appear differently to our followers and those who interact with us.

1. Do you think Instagram is beneficial or detrimental to modern dating?
2. How do you feel knowing that others can see how much you interact with their profile?

Over the past week, I have spent more time being aware of my online presence. It is crazy to see how much of my personal information is actually available to the public. Not only is my Facebook linked to many of my other accounts, i.e. Spotify, Airbnb, and Pinterest but I am now ruthlessly followed by everything I have ever looked at in the form of advertisements. According to Mark Andrejevic, “Digital enclosure is the creation of an interactive realm wherein every action and transaction generates information about itself. Although the term implies a physical space, the same characteristics can apply to virtual spaces [Andrejevic, 9].” This speaks directly to websites like Facebook that constantly generate information about you and your preferences, lifestyle, etc.

On market surveillance, I believe there is a line between what is acceptable and what is unacceptable in terms of accessibility to private information. Many companies to track consumer habits and shopping trends use digital surveillance. Mark Andrejevic suggests that there is a blurred line between content and advertising. We are so bombarded by advertisements and product placement that I agree the line is very blurred. The question raised here is: is this attractive or can this be considered a violation of privacy? I am targeted by advertisements from things I’ve looked at on Amazon, Priceline, WebMD, and pretty much everything else I’ve ever searched in my life. “When I buy a book at Amazon.com, I’ve purchased a commodity; if Amazon.com sells information about what books I’ve purchased and viewed to a data-mining company, it is selling what Mosco calls a cybernetic commodity [Andrejevic, p.14].” This gives insight on how our information is passed around online. In an article published on Salon, Google argues, “it has the right to collect your most sensitive data, as long as it flows across an open Wi-Fi network [Rosenfeld, Salon.com].” This may concern many people who aren’t too familiar with how Wi-Fi and many other aspects of the Internet work.

Photo Credit: Imgur

         There have been a few instances when trying to download music or watch a free movie online where they promise free content and then hit you with a sign up page and sometimes even a page to enter your credit card to “sign up.” Many times I did not ask for this. I believe that the perceived existence of an “electronic panopticon” is in fact real. There most definitely is something hidden in the computer layer of my online activity and monitoring my digital movement. The actual concept of this is a little scary but it can be useful. On the contrary, I don’t believe it can be used to stop people from illegally downloading things off the Internet because there are so many people doing it I firmly believe it is virtually unstoppable. There is not real way to fully monitor every single Internet user across the globe.

1. Do you believe our digital surveillance has hit an extreme? Should we begin to worry?
2. How will an increase in digital surveillance affect those who have created lives running illegal downloading and streaming websites? Will they be imprisoned?

As humans and consumers it is very hard to pinpoint exactly when we shifted the way we view content. Very few remember the exact time they stopped buying magazines from the grocery store and relied on online sites to get their daily dose or celebrity gossip. Your parents may mention how they used to go to Blockbuster to rent movies but nowadays we could not imagine being unable to stream movies or music online. This same concept can be applied to advertising and marketing as well. We spent so much time embracing and using every new social media platform that came along that we did not notice the rise of digital surveillance and target marketing that started to be placed every time we visited these websites.

Now it is becoming more obvious to notice the target marketing that is taking place when browsing the internet.According to Andrejevic,   Every message one writes, every video one posts, every item one buys or views, our time-space paths and patterns of social interaction all become data points in algorithms for sorting, predicting, and managing our behavior” (p. 10). These companies are using algorithms to make sure we see the ads they know we’ll be interested in and have a higher potential to click on. In a way you can see this as an effective strategy, they no longer have to waste time and money by advertising to people who are not their target consumer. However, from the consumer standpoint this becomes controversial; they are using our profile which we intended to use for enjoyment purposes to profit and make money.

For example, I am someone who works and goes to school, I do not have much time to go to stores so I usually spend a lot of time shopping online for what I need. Sometimes, I will go to a website a shop around for a little bit but do not complete my order; I may not want anything on that site, want to balance my budget before I checkout or simply get distracted by other websites. However, thanks to digital surveillance it is almost impossible for me to completely forget what I was shopping for. On many other websites, especially Facebook, an ad will pop up on the corner or the side reminding me that I was looking at these items and that it is still possible to complete my order. I know these ads are customized because they show me the exact items I was looking at before. Furthermore, the companies will even go as far as to send an email reminding me about these items as well.

Source: Google Images

Digital surveillance makes it easy for companies because all they have to do to attract new customers is grab their initial interest, and then they have the ability to keep baiting you until you are hooked. Andrejevic states “companies are able to track our movements, transactions, and communications without our permission or, in many cases, knowledge” (p. 4). Companies may believe they are liable to this information, but it would be helpful if the consumer knew what was happening as well. Before this article, I had no idea that every location I went was being tracked and stored by Google. No matter what your location preferences are, they are keeping a detailed catalog of everywhere you have been. I am sure if more people knew about this feature they will be a little more hesitant about the devices they are currently using and questioning why big companies have access to such pertinent information.

Questions

Do you believe you are using digital surveillance to your advantage? Has there ever been a time where you were grateful for target marketing or it led you to better decisionmaking?

What are some ways you can change or alter your digital footprint? Is there a way to outsmart digital surveillance or will there always be a way to track what you do online?

Image Source

You’re famous! Didn’t you know? Just as celebrities get followed around, get their picture taken, and have obsessive fans keeping tabs on them from their birthday, to their favorite color, and underwear preference, you’re no different. But you most likely don’t feel like a celebrity, do you? You don’t see hordes of people following you around, taking your pictures, or anyone lining up to interview you and ask what’s your favorite flavor of ice cream. But I will tell you that your “fans” know just as many details about you, more than you would think.

They have collections, volumes detailing everything about you, from everywhere you go, to everything that you do, they have your photo, they have videos of you, and even your private conversations; they know where you’ve lived, who your roommates are, everything. But where did they get all this information from? You gave it to them silly. Let me give you an example, don’t you remember that private snapchat photo that you sent to that person you like that you thought got deleted after its short life span of 3 seconds? Well right after you sent it to them it went straight to your “fans” who then sold it to the highest bidder, you’re famous alright.

Just like in the example I gave one of the biggest problems with today’s society is that nobody knows that they are “famous”. Nobody knows that they are constantly being watching. After reflecting on my own online activities at first I didn’t think that I could possibly leave much of a digital trace but after thinking some more I realized that I was wrong. I may not post anything on Facebook, and I don’t have an Instagram or twitter or a Pinterest or anything else of that sort but I do have a Snap Chat.

Image Source

With Snap Chat, we are directly outsourcing our personal information in the form of photos, videos, and messages. People have the wrong idea about the app completely. In an article titled Snapchat now owns your photos, even after they disappear, the author explains “The app that pioneered sending secret – and sometimes saucy – snaps that automatically self-destruct can now see, and store, everything you send – even when you no longer can.” It practically like we don’t own ourselves anymore. Right after you use the app the media that you created belongs to the app and they have the right to share, publish, edit or modify that piece of media in anyway that they want. With every update that we download we are giving away more and more of ourselves.

As Mark Andrejevic would explain, this relationship between us and the different media servers that we use create the concept of market surveillance. Andrejevic points out that the problem is that “companies are able to track our movements, transactions, and communications without our permission or, in many cases, knowledge” (iSpy: Surveillance and Power, page 4). The online world is constantly surveiled  and every detail of information that we shared is offered up on the market. For me I don’t think that this is acceptable to any extent. If you want my private information ask for my permission, I’ll still most likely say no but its at least better to be asked and for people to be aware.

Earlier I mentioned that I have a Facebook but I just don’t post on Facebook and there is a reason for it. If I do post it will most likely be photos relating to one of my most recent volunteer trips, or a comment to wish someone happy birthday. Why is that? Well, its because Facebook is a place where not only do I have my friends but I also have my family members; since it apparently considered rude to not accept a friend request from that aunt that you never see. Media is turning into a disciplinary society, “a social formation in which we become both jailor and the jailed” (Digital Media and Society, page 212). Not only are we watched by our “fans” we are also watched by each other. And because of this we change what we would post, and the media that we produce. The digital authorities are here to stay and the sad thing is that most people don’t even know that they’ve showed up.

Lets Think:

Do you think its wrong that we live in a disciplinary society? Do people need surveillance to keep them in check?

Do you think it is possible to change this media trend? What can we do to stop or prevent the way our information is being handled?

Source: lluís vinagre

For example, let’s examine my engagement with digital media last week. I went on Facebook, read some posts, watched some videos, and liked some pictures all on that site. Also, I visited a couple of clothing online websites and beauty products websites just to check if anything was new and if they had sales. I bought something as well. Couple of days later I got email from one of those shopping websites promoting their new products and offering me some kind of discount if I buy it. I also went on YouTube and watched some videos and that changed my suggestion videos on my YouTube account. Netflix is similar to that too, I get suggestions of movies and TV-shows saying “this is because you watched …”

So, basically I sent a lot of information about myself: name, age, email, phone number, address, credit card information and etc. More importantly I gave the companies that run these websites my preferences and interests. Also, using phone, I also gave out information about my movement: where I went, for how long I stayed there and etc. I also made a call to my insurance company, Fidelis Care, which is sponsored by state of New York. They asked me my personal information even the social security number, which I always hesitate to give out, but there I didn’t have a choice. I knew it was government sponsored entity but still deep down I felt that it was risky to giving out my SSN, I got the feeling that I did something to make myself less secure. Probably because we’re not safe, hackers can get that information easily, there might be scams and, etc.

Are we always aware that something somewhere in the hidden computer layer of our online activity is watching our digital movement?_ I guess we are, but I feel like we don’t really give a lot of thought to how much information we’re giving out and what might be the consequences (or if there are any consequences). We assume that we’re not “persons of interest” to any of the entities doing the surveillance. However as Ethique says, “If someone becomes of interest, a large volume of their personal information is already available for retrieval” (Ethique, ch 14, pp 349) So, if we do something that one of the entities with our information sees as a threat then they’ll find us easily because they already have our information. We assume there will be no consequence if we fly under the radar.

Me personally, more I read and learn about it more I get scared. It is frightening just to imagine that they even track the movement of my mouse in the computer. I feel like that I don’t really have my personal privacy. But on the other hand, even though that it scares me, it is always good to get more information about it and know what you’re dealing with and maybe control or monitor your online activities.

Of course, everything has two sides. Digital Surveillance might be bad and good at the same time. For example, on one hand Facebook enable us to interact with many people regardless of where they are but on the other hand it is able to sell information about us that helps marketing companies manipulate us.
Now being aware all of the fact that I live in a world in a constant visible but unverifiable surveillance I don’t think that I’ll change my digital behavior that much simply because we live in a world where we need to have access to networks of connectivity. However this access, “relies upon a thoroughly privatized and commercial infrastructure.. ”. (Andrejevic, pp 280)

This website provides some pros and cons of surveillance cameras in public places.

Questions:
1) What is the next change in digital surveillance?

2) What do government and market entities consider normal/acceptable behaviors, preferences and if they will ever going to change them?

I see that Instagram and Facebook are correlated. I use Instagram to plunge myself in all the pictures of people that I follow which range from pictures of cute puppies, foods (mostly healthy or some brand-new restaurants in NYC), Victoria Secrets, to just pictures of my friends. I found out on a Facebook page, there weren’t only posts made by my friends and pages based on interest, but also videos section that all relate to my “likes” in Instagram.

Facebook was recommending videos or commercials based on my interests. It was giving me tempting messages that said “exclusive offer” or “sign up today and get 10% discount”. It shows that it was tracking all my “likes” and storing data from Instagram and placing related advertisements on Facebook.” The practice of data mining is not conceived of as a historical review of past activity for its own sake, but rather as a mathematically precise technique for predicting the future action of individuals (page 354, Under Scrutiny). To me, it is acceptable that marketers are collecting data and offering promotions. There are over four hundred unread emails composed mainly of advertisements in my inbox but it is useful when it comes to making consumer choices. When I go searching for lunch, I simply go on Facebook or Instagram to receive recommendations by looking at all the pictures of dishes or commercials. I know I am an appropriate target for marketers but it gives me convenience, which saves my time.

To be honest, I was not always aware of such digital surveillance until I learned it in depth in this class. I was just so careful of what I post on Instagram because I did not want someone whom I am not familiar with hitting likes on my pictures and sharing my photo that depicted my daily routine. Thus, I created a new Instagram account and set all the settings to private. I added friends that I identified with in the real world. Other than that, I was not fully aware that all my digital movements were recorded and digital society respond in marketing ways that shaped my consumer behavior. Every message one writes, every video one posts, every item one buys or views, our time-space paths and patterns of social interaction all become data points in algorithms for sorting, predicting, and managing our behavior.(page10 ,Mark).

In regards of “electronic panopticon”, it does hinder me doing from “illegal activities”. Now it is so prevalent that people share individual work through digital media. Sometimes it is so unclear to identify if sharing the photos are illegal or not. However, I try my best to avoid doing piracy because I respect the amount of work and the copyright involved. It is all about the efforts and knowledge, which I do not want to abuse.  Also, committing crimes with disregards to severity is not a preferable lifestyle. No one wants to be arrested for prosecution. Thus, in this respect, it prevents me from doing                 illegal activities.

1. Imagine your country changes regulation for digital society in a very disciplined setting just as China or North Korea does. How would you react? How would you also change your behavior?

2. Do you see the commercials relating to your interests based on data mining with an optimistic view or a negative view? Please explain why you think so.

Image Source

Personal information is very valuable in today’s digital world. During my time on the Web this past week, I purchased a pair of sneaker online and most likely the information I used during checkout is all stored on the companies database. The information submitted includes, Name, address, age from the account created, phone number, and credit card information.

Although we want our information to be kept private, it is not possible in this digital age. Therefore I don’t mind certain information of mine being shared for marketing purposes, such as name and age but credit card information is the type of information that I feel nervous about entering online because it can be hacked and is more valuable than the rest for me personally. And when companies track your movement and use your credit card information without you knowing, then it becomes an issue that is crossing the boundaries of privacy. For Example in this Article, it talks about Uber tracking its drivers movement and using customers credit card information to see if they have any ties with governmental agencies. Also when you don’t know when you are being watched or tracked, it creates a different persona in a person and instills fear of being under constant watch. For example Foucault sharing the example of the British prison model which is how today we are still observed. “At the heart of Bentham’s ‘panopticon’ was the recognition that the best way to controlling the behaviour of prison inmates was to give them the impression that they were under constant observation” (Pg 212).

According to Mark Andrejevic, digital surveillance is used by companies where the information on their customers becomes valuable to other parties. “Information that may eventually be sold to third parties or used by marketers for targeted advertising campaigns” (Andrejevic, 2). Also Andrejevic provides us with example where he suggests, how digital transactions generates more information being shared as to in person transaction which gives you an option to pay for goods and service with cash where no information is being shared. I agree with this concept because it is true but I believe online transaction are more favored today because of its convenience over in person transaction.

When searching online on Google, I am aware of Ad based search results, which are often the first one or two results with a small “AD” symbol. I try to not click those link because then whatever I searched will pop up on other sites which include advertisements. But in terms of illegal download, I use to download music online illegally but now for me music streaming service is much more convenient and gives me access to broader selection of music. And for protection I have an anti virus software where it warns me before entering a potential risky websites.

1. In terms of Digital surveillance, is there any positive outcome for the consumer, when companies share information with other parties? or is it only beneficial for the companies involved in this exchange?
2. We know our information is being shared with other parties but yet still continue to perform transactions online, Why do you think we continue? Do you think we have a choice or is this the consequence we have to face in using the internet?