Argues that social networking is anchored in surveillance practices - however a positive connotation - empowering, subjectivity building, playful - participatory surveillance
Page 1
3rd para - rejects online/offline dichotomy in favor of social networking as a "mixed world" relating to both online and offline activities
The practice of online social networking: space, place & time
cyrberspace - the spatial metaphor
4th para - "the owner of a space provides details in a profile with personal information" referring to myspace
My comment- so many contradictions there - users do not "own" the space...what about privacy policies?
Page 3
2nd para - danah boyd - online social networking as a mdeiated public is characterized by four properties: persistency (info is stored indefinitely), searchability (convenience of search terms), replicability (configurable to other texts and forms), and invisible audiences (content is available to not your network but everyone - aka who is looking at your stuff?)
Albrechtslund argues this makes relationships eternal - existing beyond the control of the involved person. SM is thought of as "of the moment" but is actually longer lasting
Page 4
6th para - People offer their personal info on SNS (social networking service)
Lyon calls this "leaky containers" (p37-48) - data move freely between different sectors of society with the result that information from different contexts (home, work, shopping) are being mixed
Page 5
1st para - In addition to privacy policy issues & design of SNS, there are shortcomings on the part of the user - ignorance, indifferences, and dependency on others.
2nd para - education, training, and even gov regulations (such as DOPA - deleting online pred. act) try to protext younger users from the dangers of SNS
Author notes that Jenkins & boyd are against DOPA for over restricting access
5th para - Life after social networks - what are the implications of digital footprints when getting a job or what might haunt teenagers when they become an adult? (longitudinal thinking/planning)
9th para - danah boyd - critical of hiring practices that punish SM users
author adds that it could be discrimination or ethical injustice not to hire someone that uses SNS
Page 6
5th para - Particpatory Surveillance
Traditional surveillance - panopticon where the "watched" is in no power and their subjectivity is destroyed (dystopian view)
6th para - "It is difficult to understand the phenomenon of online social networking and related web 2.0 services and applications when we apply this notion of surveillance." (the dystopian view)
Albrechtslund is critical of scholars talking about going beyond the panopticon rather than actually doing it.
he thinks it's useful for theorizing surveillance, but calls for an expansion of the surveillance field.
(I suppose he feels that surveillance studies is stuck on the dystopian view of surveillance (panopticon) and although talks about going beyond it, continually refers to digital media as dystopian surveillance (stuck with panopticon))
Author argues that to truly understand surveillance, we need to challenge the hierarchical conception of it. He acknowledges the dystopian view is important however.
Page 7
surveillance as a mutual, horizontal practice:
surveillance as flat - where even the person under surveillance can have agency
Andrejevic offers "later surveillance" which is peer to peer monitoring and although helpful, he brings in the Pentagon and panopticon strategies for a disciplinary approach. Thus, it does adequately serve Albrechtslund's vision.
6th para - empowerment, subjectivity building, and sharing - under developed areas in surveillance studies. SNS is not about destroying subjectivities, it is about mutuality and building
-uses the example of exhibitionism to "rebel against the shame associated with not being private"
-a "self construction of identity"
(Me: this is way too overly optimistic)
Page 8
2nd para - SNS empowering b/c you can be active - socialize with people and take action since surveillance now allows users to seek information and communicate.
SNS illustrated that surveillance is fundamentally social
(Me: The deep data that SNS collects is NOT the same data that users can search for on Twitter)
Defends his "participatory surveillance" against "participatiory panopticon" because he says participatory panopticon is redundant - the whole idea of the panopticon was to have the inmate internalize the surveillance and pattern self-surveillance, which is already particpatory. Albrechtslund's particpatory surveillance is empowering and constructs subjectivities because the "inmate" has agency.
Doesn't want to mitigate dangers in SNS, but says we should also focus on the social forms of surveillance.
No comments:
Post a Comment