Technology has brought us incredible ways to reach out information by just a click. Unfortunately this information can also be about what we like, what we don’t like, where are we and where we will be. And this doesn’t necessarily make our lives too “private”.
The last example I can think of about market surveillance was 2 days when planning my trip for spring break. I have an app on my phone called “Skyscanner” (it is also a website) where you can find really good deals for round trip flights in the US and internationally. The good thing about it is that all the info that I put when I was doing my search will be saved,(such as dates, places that I will like to visit, prices that I’m willing to pay, etc). And by that, they will inform me if the prices go down, go up, alternative deals, etc. As you can see my inbox below.
Image Source: Myself (screenshot of my inbox)
To me it is an excellent way to find the best deals since I’m not on my phone 24 hours checking for flights and all these endless destinations. And this doesn’t happen just to me, this pattern happens to many other users of this app with their respective search data. So basically Skyscanner is doing exactly what Mark Andrejevic explained, “ There is a pattern: the use of new media devices lends itself to the generation or cybernetic information, feedback about the transactions themselves”.(Page 3). Andrejevic argues that this feedback “becomes the property of private companies that can store, aggregate,sort and sell information in the form of database”. (Page 3). And that is exactly what happened with the info I put in for my trip. Although some people might think this is a negative effect because it violates privacy, I see it as a helpful tool that helps me narrow my search data and provide me with the best deals.
Then we have state surveillance which also plays an important role in our lives. I agree that somewhere, somehow there is a technique of disciplinary power that won’t allow us to commit crimes. But the most recent example I can give is a website where you were able to watch recent movies for free. The website was 123movies.is , but unfortunately they took it down. Probably a sort of investigation was held and they found out that this website was violating copyright laws. Even though I don’t know the specific method or the agency who discover this website, I can put it as an example for this section. I know I was wrong for entering this website , but it was good to be able to watch a movie on my free time and without paying theater prices. This will probably affirms Michel Foucault belief that “ The major effect of the panopticon is to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power”.(Page 212). I was watching this website because nobody was there to tell me that it was wrong; but If I knew for sure somebody will accuse me, probably my actions would have been different. I found this article about a similar website that was ban from the internet for publishing movies. This is another example that somehow we are been monitored in the internet to make sure we follow laws and rules.
- Would you create an illegal site knowing that you will make great profit out of it?
- What do you consider as “invaded privacy”?
I definitely agree that if things were more vocal when we’re being wrong (maybe if 123movies or piratebay had ILLEGAL written all over the sites), it would make us feel a little more guilty or cautious, but if I had the chance to create something to do something for others at no cost – I would. Like, if I could make a site for Baruch students to have access to the PDF versions of all of their textbooks, I would want to help my classmates that way. People might say that it would hurt the school because of less funds, but people also say that about healthcare and I still think everyone should have access to that.