Social Networking and Panopticism
The function of social networking sights is somewhat overlooked by a majority of registered users. Environments like Facebook and MySpace put us in a state of constant self regulation, the panoptic gaze and the power relationship, appears to us, in a more peer-driven sense. Foucalts theoretical Panopticon, however, makes clear that this in no way the case, as - although we are subject to surveillance from our peers - it is a mutual surveillance. The user is the subject in communication, Foucalt stresses that "He (the individual in question) is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication". In this sense, the site owners, modulators and developers are the institutional powers.
Facebook and MySpace are perfectly designed disciplinary mechanisms, we voluntarily register ourselves to be under constant scrutiny, to be in an "...enclosed segmented space, observed at every point...all events are recorded." Facebook and MySpace alert all individuals through the activity stream and news feed to any activity, from the acceptance of a friend request, to being tagged by our peers in photos to changes of even the slightest details of our online information. The governing bodies of these sites will have the power to constant access of this information. It is evident in the strategic advertising, targetting each individual through his/her place in society. Data is scrutinised and allows "...the assignment to each individual of his 'true' name, and 'true' place.
The way these sights work as a disciplinary mechanism is the use of the constant gaze, whether real or fictitious, of our peers. MySpace provides the user with the amount of times his/her page has been viewed, Facebook sends relentless emails reminding individual of the slightest form of activity. This is in order to engage docile bodies in online activity, benifitting the institutional powers by giving these environments more value as a place to target and advertise individuals. The surveillance in these environments is "...based on a system of permanent registration." the more we sign in the more useful we are to the governing bodies. The more we update our online data the greater our part as the observed in the panoptic mechanism, the greater our levels of self regulation in these virtual environments. Thus the users' in social networking allow sites to become "...a machine for creating and sustaining a power relation independent of the person who exercises it." The modulators have no need to constantly survey the users, the users function without the need to be subjected to a ceaseless gaze "..he becomes the principle of his own subjection."
As the individual allows himself/herself to be observed at any point, he allows the functionality of power - he places himself in a virtual Panoptical cell to be scrutonised at the leisure of the governing bodies. If within the Panopticon "Visibilty is a trap" then the Facebook/MySpace users are in Alcatraz.
I want to add that having been made aware of the concept of the Synopticon, which is perhaps more relevant when referring to reality TV shows, this would likely apply in the sense of the aforementioned engagement in peer-driven surveillance.
"The Synopticon refers to the creation of another power mechanism, that contrary to Panopticon, is not base (sic) on ceorcion and constriction of movement" (Britez, R)
However, is it not possible that in this case that our peers have no real power despite watching us, as a whole the sites governing bodies hold the controlling gaze. Our private messages and chat cannot be seen by our peers but are viewable by the site regulators, this would allow supervision. I also mentioned the user-specific targeted adverts, this is proof of the governing bodies scrutinising our behaviour. Or maybe I should've just picked something easier.
Britez, R. Globalization & Education,
http://globalizationandeducation.ed.uiuc.edu/Concepts/S.html, Accessed 2/12/09
No comments:
Post a Comment