Surveillance and the redefinition of individuals and reality

  1. Yauri-Miranda, Jaseff Raziel
Zeitschrift:
Teknokultura: Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales

ISSN: 1549-2230

Datum der Publikation: 2022

Titel der Ausgabe: Miscellany

Ausgabe: 19

Nummer: 1

Seiten: 5-12

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.5209/TEKN.74723 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Andere Publikationen in: Teknokultura: Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales

Zusammenfassung

Este ensaio faz uma visão geral da relação entre vigilância, indivíduos e realidade. Para fazer isso, lanço mão de uma perspectiva multinível que conecta poder (da agência à estrutura) à teoria de sistemas sociais. Esta nova conexão pretende apresentar uma visão holística sobre como os indivíduos são gerenciados além de idéias sobre resistência e tecnologia. No primeiro nível de agência, os indivíduos são limitados pela interação contínua por meio da exploração digital e da manipulação comportamental. No segundo meso nível, os indivíduos se fundem num sistema de informações que renderiza, classifica e distorce fragmentos de dados que emulam a ontologia deles. Por fim, no terceiro nível estrutural, mais do que sujeitos fragmentados, argumento que indivíduos e seus dados constituem um novo ciclo hermenêutico no qual a própria realidade é redefinida em uma leitura autopoiética das coisas que se afasta dos sujeitos e dos saberes.

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • Andrejevic, M. B. (2011). Surveillance and alienation in the online economy. Surveillance and Society, 8(3), 278-287. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v8i3.4164
  • Ansell-Pearson, K., & Pearson, K. A. (2012). Germinal life: The difference and repetition of Deleuze. London: Routledge.
  • Ajana, B. (2005). Surveillance and biopolitics. Electronic Journal of Sociology, 7, 1-15. http://www.sociology.org/content/2007/__btihaj_surveillances.pdf
  • Aradau, C., and Tazzioli, M. (2020). Biopolitics multiple: migration, extraction, subtraction. Millennium, 48(2), 198-220. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0305829819889139
  • Ball, K. (2005). Organization, surveillance and the body: towards a politics of resistance. Organization, 12(1), 89-108. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1350508405048578
  • Ball, K. (2009). Exposure: exploring the subject of surveillance. Information, Communication and Society, 12(5), 639-657. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180802270386
  • Bakir, V. (2015). Veillant panoptic assemblage: mutual watching and resistance to mass surveillance after Snowden. Media and Communication 3(3): 12–25. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v3i3.277
  • Baudrillard, J. ((1981)2019). “Simulacra and simulations”. In Crime and Media, Greer, C. (Ed.). 69-85. London: Routledge
  • Bevir, M. (1999). Foucault and critique: deploying agency against autonomy. Political theory, 27(1), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591799027001004
  • Castelluccia, C. (2020). From dataveillance to datapulation: the dark side of targeted persuasive technologies. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02904926 in 10/17/2020
  • Caluya, G. (2010). The post-panoptic society? Reassessing Foucault in surveillance studies. Social Identities, 16(5), 621-633. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2010.509565
  • Cohen, J. E. (2018). The biopolitical public domain: the legal construction of the surveillance economy. Philosophy and Technology, 31(2), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0258-2
  • Colwell, C. (1996). Discipline and control: Butler and Deleuze on individuality and dividuality. Philosophy Today, 40(1), 211-216. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtoday199640148
  • Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. October, 59, 3-7.
  • Diakopoulos, N. (2015). Accountability in algorithmic decision-making. Queue, 13(9), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/2857274.2886105
  • Fuchs, C. (2011). Web 2.0, prosumption, and surveillance. Surveillance and Society, 8(3), 288-309. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v8i3.4165
  • Gandy Jr, O. H. (2012). Matrix multiplication and the digital divide. In Race after the Internet Nakamura, L. and Chow-White, P. A. (Eds.), 128-145. Routledge.
  • Gill, R. (2019). Surveillance is a feminist issue. Handbook of Contemporary Feminism, Tasha Oren (Ed.). 148-161. Routledge.
  • Gray, C. H. (2000). Cyborg citizen: politics in the posthuman age. London: Routledge.
  • Hall, S. (2001). Encoding/decoding. Media and cultural studies. New York: Blackwell Publishers.
  • Heller, K. J. (1996). Power, subjectification and resistance in Foucault. SubStance, 25(1), 78-110. https://doi.org/10.2307/3685230
  • Jandrić, P., Ryberg, T., Knox, J., Lacković, N., Hayes, S., Suoranta, J., and Ford, D. R. (2019). Postdigital dialogue. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 163-189. https://doi.org/10.2307/3685230
  • Johnson, D., and Regan, P. (2014). Transparency and surveillance as sociotechnical accountability: a house of mirrors. Routledge.
  • Kaplan, M. (2018). Spying for the People: surveillance, democracy and the impasse of cynical reason. JOMEC Journal, 12, 166-190. http://doi.org/10.18573/jomec.165
  • Luhmann, N. (1986). The autopoiesis of social systems. Sociocybernetic paradoxes, 6(2), 172-192.
  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Why systems theory. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 3(2), 3-10.
  • Luhmann, N. (2006). System as difference. Organization, 13(1), 37-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406059638
  • Lyon, D. (1994). The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society. University of Minnesota Press.
  • Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Polity.
  • Mann, S.; Nolan, J.; and Wellman, B. (2003). Sousveillance: Inventing and Using Wearable Computing Devices for Data Collection in Surveillance Environments. Surveillance and Society, vol. 1 (3), 331–55. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v1i3.3344
  • Mann, S., Nolan, J., and Wellman, B. (2020). Wearables and Sur (over)-Veillance, Sous (under)-Veillance, Co (So)-Veillance, and MetaVeillance (Veillance of Veillance) for Health and Well-Being. Surveillance and Society 18 (2), 262-271. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v18i2.13937
  • Márquez, G. G. (2004/2014)). Memories of my melancholy whores. London: Penguin UK.
  • Martínez Cabezudo, F. (2014). Copyright y copylef. Modelos para la ecología de los saberes. Sevilla: Aconcagua Libros.
  • Marx, G. (2003). A tack in the shoe: neutralizing and resisting the new surveillance. Journal of social issues, 59(2), 369-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00069
  • Marx, G. (2004). Some concepts that may be useful in understanding the myriad forms and contexts of surveillance. Intelligence and National Security, 19(2), 226-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268452042000302976
  • McGrath, J. E. (2004). Loving Big Brother: performance, privacy and surveillance space. Psychology Press.
  • Peters, M. A., and Besley, T. (2019). Critical philosophy of the postdigital. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0004-9
  • Striphas, T. (2015). Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 18(4-5), 395-412. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1367549415577392
  • Smyrnaios, N. (2018). Internet oligopoly: the corporate takeover of our digital world. Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance and society, 12(2), 197-208. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v12i2.4776
  • Wilson, D. and Norris, C. (Eds.). (2017). Surveillance, crime and social control. Routledge.
  • Whitson, J. R. (2013). Gaming the quantified self. Surveillance and Society, 11(1/2), 163-176. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v11i1/2.4454
  • Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Public Affairs.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet