The Name's Meg

dimanche 27 février 2011

RR: "The Electronic Eye: The Rise of the Surveillance Society" (Lyon)

Lyon, David. The Electronic Eye: The Rise of the Surveillance Society. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994, 57-80.

Word Count: 772

Lyon starts off his chapter referencing the famous Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell. By doing so, I can make a direct link with the title and perhaps what he may be getting into- surveillance. He starts off by questioning if we are indeed arriving at this point of complete surveillance that Orwell refers to bluntly in his novel as “Big Brother”. Our current identities online are being more and more watched- not only in a sense of statistics and gather information for disciplines such as advertising or even politics, but also by other users. He states that today “surveillance is both a globalizing phenomenon and one that has a much to do with consumers as with citizens”, which I interpret as the ability to be ‘surveilled’ no longer solely as a being in a given city or bordered atmosphere, but in an online domain where exchange is key. And I keep thinking back to the fact that Lyon wrote this chapter in 1994- just into the beginning of the life of the Internet, and I firmly stand by the fact that this case of surveillance if eve more relevant then he can possibly express in 1994 in today’s online world.

He then jumps into the description of the two relevant models that could possible relate to this online phenomenon of constant watching: Orwell’s Dystopia, and from Bentham’s Panopticon to Foucault. Within these segments, he outlines the basic factors that depict these models.

Orwell’s dysopia underlines the role of the media in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, as the prime tool for “manipulating the masses” was indeed electronic media- regardless of what Orwell really knew about it when the novel was written in 1948. He points out the factors in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four that represent the idea generally of electronic surveillance; including the rise of the power of the nation state, and the growing centrality of information in the nation state, as well as the electronic trail that continues to becoming increasingly unnoticeable- as Lyon emphasizes through the representation of the Panopticon model. I would agree with this statement because in today’s mentality of online users, accounts are not weird- almost in a sense as we know are being watched but do not really take much offense to it anymore. We realize our rights online, and realize that we can even be another identity online, but somehow it has been engraved into our daily thoughts as we communicate via wires and networks ceaselessly.

Perhaps the “privacy” we “have” through our online accounts is private enough for the modern global citizen- as now even banking is done online. One thing that fascinates me and reminds me of the expontential development of the online world is that as more “private” things are put online (banking, bills, paychecks, employment resumés, etc…) more programs are developed to more or less secure the safety (as cards do when you order online, they link you to a page in which you must enter a code that is sent to your mobile phone via SMS, for example). So with this plethora of information of a being that is available online- more safety programs come to play- like they come together as a pair. Our current conception of privacy is a set of numbers and letters with one capital and one symbol that no one else knows- but in the IT world, all of this can be solved through even more extreme coding practices. So why do we think these passwords are enough to ensure our privacy? The first thing I though of while reading the article was the number of e-mail accounts I have for different purposes, with different passwords, with many facets of information in each with different levels of privacy. Are these things actually surveilled or just able to be surveilled if needed?

Continuing off of this idea, in the section Lyon titles as “The Panapticon from Bentham to Foucault” he mentions the question of where the “centered self” is located today if indeed our personal information is floating through various remote databases.
And as Lyon concludes, “No single metaphor or model is adequate to the task of summing up what is central to contemporary surveillance, but important clues are available in Nineteen Eighty-Four and in Bentham's Panopticon”, it is accurate: things are changing at a fast pace, faster than anyone could have expected in models. One thing leads to another, and surveillance is a part of that exponential development.

I feel that Lyon makes valid points, and at times seems to carry on, but in the end his final point is that these are indeed examples, nut no model is descriptive enough to describe the surveillance that has been developed up until today, and even our sense of privacy has changed. Even though it was written in 1994, I feel as though he leaves his argument open for discussion and development- as the future provided that change.

mercredi 9 février 2011

RR: "Cybertyping and the Work of Race in the Age of Digital Reproduction" (Nakamura)

[Nakamura, Lisa. "Cybertyping and the Work of Race in the Age of Digital Reproduction", New Media, Old Media: A History and Theory Reader. Ed. Wendy Hui Kyong Chun and Thomas Keenan. New York: Routledge, 2006, 317-333.]

Word Count: 519

In Nakamura's chapter, "Cybertyping and the Work of Race in the Age of Digital Reproduction", she goes into depth on the way race is portrayed- or lack there of- in the online world that we are now constantly surrounded by. The chapter was written in 2006, which could be considered rather outdated looking back at the exponential rate of production and development of the Internet and the way it has allowed humans to identify and portray themselves.

She starts out the chapter by touching on the idea of the use of words in technology, and how language- or as she says, neologisms- has become apparent through the evolution of media communications (317). Cybertyping, I must admit, I never fully grasped while reading the chapter. With this said, it has changed the way that coming generations communicate- especially regarding their identity on or offline. Going more into her argument, she emphasizes the way that race is represented in online identities, and how people convey or do not convey their race online- in what she refers to as a “assumedly white community”. Throughout her chapter, she touches on the New New Thing & Headhunting, African American Divide, and also Post-Racial Digertai before terminating her argument on the fact that the digital divide is both a result of and a contributor to the practice of racial cybertyping. Cybertying, I assume for Nakamura is in relationship to stereotyping, but online.

In terms of the entire argument about race, I tended to get a bit lost. It was honestly something I had never considered really while searching the web- observing one’s race, or who they portray themselves to be. While she states that it is stereotypically a “white” space online- I’m not sure if I agree. Taking into account that the Internet and use of the Internet has changed significantly in the past 5 years, I understand that this element of concern may still exist. I am a frequent user of online communications, and have honestly never been signaled off by the idea of representation or lack there of in the online world. I feel that now more than ever, yes, online profiles can be fake or untrue, but also, they can be real with people really marketing themselves through online profiles for facilitating contacts in the real world.

The first thing that came to my head when she mentioned the stereotyping of nationalities, was the quote from the film “Up In The Air” that came out in 2009, with the renouned George Clooney (328). He states while in line at the airport:

RYAN BINGHAM: [on getting through airport security] Never get behind old people. Their bodies are littered with hidden metal and they never seem to appreciate how little time they have left. Bingo, Asians. They pack light, travel efficiently, and they have a thing for slip on shoes. Gotta love 'em.

NATALIE KEENER: That's racist.

RYAN BINGHAM: I'm like my mother, I stereotype. It's faster.

With this said, certain nationalities are stereotyped into being more or less efficient in certain disciplines, like Nakamura takes the example with Asians and Indians with the knowledge of technology and technological advancements; and as George Clooney uses the example of an Airport Security Line.

I’m not sure if I agree with the claim that the Internet is considered more or less a “white” space, I feel that the fact that a photo is not always shown only emphasizes the lack of flesh color that exists in the online world.

Side Note:

One place we tend to always put photos, and show off everything about our lives so matter what race we are: Facebook. But I suppose Facebook was just getting started when Nakamura wrote her chapter, and obviously the outreach to facebook users now is tremendous, and photos included: of all races of geek or non-geek.

Is this Cybertyping jazz just an issue of self identity and self promotion online?

Photo from http://www.mediassociaux.fr/

lundi 31 janvier 2011

Response to Jojo Frey : Blog 1

Peer Response to Jojo's Response on:

Castells, Manuel. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. 9-34. Print.

[done in 2nd person in response to Jojo's blog entry here]

In terms of Castells chapter, “Lessons from the History of the Internet”, he touches on a history of the Internet in a minimal number of pages in regards to the drastic innovations that actually took place.

As a dense timeline of events, I feel that you wall captured the overall evolution of the Internet going from the ARPANET and what Internet is now, in the first paragraph presented in your response. The fact that in the response you briefly summarized the overall successes and reasons for the evolution of the Internet made it easier to comprehend the vast number of events.

I found it interesting that you brought up the governmental and academic natures because for my reading it tended to go over my head- and then linking it to the questions of who uses the Internet more nowadays highlighted your overall critique and understanding of Castells chapter. As you mentioned in your final paragraph, the APARNET was initially created for the military, and how the example in 2010 with WikiLeaks.com and the released classified documents from the Pentagon regarding the Iraq war relates to the same usage of technological communications. The fact that you questioned the use of military technology exemplified your critique of the use of Internet in modern times in relation to the distribution of information, as you mentioned the negative aspects of the U.S military.
I found it fascinating that you explored this side of technology, as it was one that I sort of skimmed over through my reading as I thought more about the social aspect as opposed to relating to the initial purpose of APARTNET and what eventually became what we now call Internet.

Your ability to relate the two time periods I found to show a very concise understanding of the text and putting the examples that Castells listed into your own curiosity context.

Word Count: 311

lundi 24 janvier 2011

RR: "Lessons from the History of the Internet" (Castells)

Article Reponded To: “Lessons from the History of the Internet”

[Castells, Manuel. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. 9-34. Print.]

Word Count: 596

The idea of Internet is still confusing and mind blowing. I don’t think that’s going to change any time soon. The cloud in the sky is expanding at an exponential rate and everyone adapts to it quicker and quicker. Well, most of us who are in the generation. Those who missed the transition may have more difficulty as we suggesting class, but after reading “Lessons from the History of the Internet” by Castells it’s pretty easy to say that’s an odd phenomena that expanded so fast without our exact perception of how it was going to transform society, and also that in its most definite explication it is a cultural creation.

In the reading, Castells touches on the main events establishing the level that technology has reached today- all being dependent on the prior events (which I find to be most fascinating). From the ARPANET in the 60’s to the eruption of the world wide web (www) in the 90’s, the Internet is the paradox of simplicity and complexity. While all of these discoveries were appearing worldwide by scholars and engineers, my generation was sitting back and learning slowly how to adapt to every incoming piece of technology or mode of transportation. The references given in the article only emphasize the domino effect and rapidity of evolution, which Castells emphasizes clearly in describing the discovery of Internet and what it has done for society up until today. Initially being a tool for military and governmental communications across borders to maintain efficiency now a tool for creating sometimes a new identity and correctly presenting one’s self in a profile digital form. These "gentlemen of technological innovation" who thrived to "learn and share" their discoveries sought ultimately to keep the openness of the network while really Castells claims they did not achieve this through government institutions or the "chaos of decentralized structure" ... They did this through a different discipline (33).

One part that I found to be clever wording was what Castells stated as “the openness of the Internet’s architecture was the source of its main strength: it’s self-evolving development, as users became producers of the technology, and shapers of the whole network” (27). The fact that users are required for its evolution is modern enough to explain not only the past and the rapidity of the rise of the Internet, but what is continuously developing in current time.

In being alive during the real integration of Internet communications into society, I only feel that I was not completely conscious of the modernity that was developing. The way I communicate now is dependent on prior discoveries that happened following each discovery world wide. The desire to efficiently communicate was always a strong need for global communication and with each step society has developed and redeveloped their systems of communicating with one another. One thing leads to the next- in the most simplest of explications. With the cliché example of Apple, the computer lead to the iPod, which lead to the iPod touch, which lead to the iPhone which now lead to the iPad which is affecting computer companies in general due to the influx of technological knowledge, and the need for people to possess such gadgets to be able to properly communicate amongst each other. I remember the Apple black and white gray brick-like laptop of my dad, and it’s hard to believe I was in Middle School discovering voice recording. Now I create videos on my iPhone and upload them directly onto YouTube. I'm anxious to be alive for even more discoveries and adaptations of gadgets.

then...