Thesis 1 When creating an online profile through data generating activities, such as; likes, comments, links, shares, and publicly shared private information, on Facebook and other mainstream forms of social media, a user will create a composition of public and private information that is cut and framed to present an idealized version of themselves to appeal the watching public for social, monetary, political, and or personal gain.Thesis 2 Social media corporations have exploited people’s predisposition to embellish their online profile into extravagant stories and content. Through the use of social media platforms, users generate content that holds user retention which generates data, through the circulation of content on the platforms. Social media companies exploit the cycle of production and consumption by commodifying the private data for advertisers through participatory surveillance users opt into for access to content they generate and social capital.
ReferencesAndrejevic, M. (2002). “The Work of Being Watched: Interactive Media and the Exploitation of Self Disclosure” in Critical Studies in Media Communication. 19(2) pp. 230-248This essay critiques corporate surveillance models and the consumers who opt into interactive media with said models as exploitative, consumers are paradoxically exploiting their privacy rights by allowing corporations to monetize the private data generated through use of the media for capital in return.
Andrejevic frames his argument through the application of a consumer labor model to the online economy and market. This article offers an argument the commodification of the data interactive media generates, through consumer discretion is exploitative, and supports thesis two as it tackles the consumer corporate relationship in web 2.0 surveillance.
Fuchs, C. (2011). “New Media, Web 2.
0 and Surveillance”. Sociology Compass. 5(2). 480–487.
In this article Fuchs attempts to approach the controversies surrounding social media giants for web 2.0 surveillance through political economic lens. The article tackles the strategies and methodology that makes web 2.0 surveillance successful and defines the problem of web 2.0 surveillance ranging from the commodification of private data and the unpaid work and creation of users. This article describes how users of web 2.
0 are lured into participatory surveillance models knowingly and the core issues of self exploitation and unpaid work. This article gives a perspective to understand self disclosure and the risk involved.Fuchs, C. (2011) “Web 2.0, Prosumption, and Surveillance.” Surveillance & Society. 8(3). 288-309.
This article aims to describe the economic model social media platforms use and the role surveillance plays. Fuchs links the concept of production, consumption, and surveillance on web 2.0 platforms in a model circulation and accumulation of capital linked to “prosumption”, a term coined by Alvin Toffler.
This article applies a critique of to “Prosumption”, the concept of production by consumers. This describes what is exploited by private corporations, the unpaid value of the content and commodification of data, the work, generated by and for the consumer. Fuchs, C. & Trottier, D. (2015).
“Towards a theoretical model of social media surveillance in contemporary society”. Communications. 40(1). pp. 113-135.This article attempts to define a framework for social media surveillance, through its structure, core characteristic, and societal implication to critique the opportunities of data collection for private companies through the economic and social model’s.
The article first breaks down several concepts that are integral to the core characteristics of the framework, ranging from the information process to the convergence of individual and societal roles. Fuchs and Trottier model society for the framework they will develop to explain the economic opportunities for private companies and the societal implications.This article creates a framework that breaks down how social media surveillance is conducted, and the implications of the model’s private companies use. This can be applied to understand how private companies exploit consumers.Fulton, J. M., & Kibby, M.
D. (2017). “Millennials and the normalization of surveillance on facebook”. Continuum, 31(2), 189-199.
This study aims to understand participatory surveillance, in the study of a focus group and a survey of people who labeled themselves as millennials. it was found the there was a privacy concern, though privacy from the government is a greater than privacy from commercial entities. This article flirts with the concept of the privacy paradox as the participants found that giving up some information is necessary to participate in the online environment.
And were willing to access private information of othersThis article gives an analysis of the normalization of being watched. This analysis and study provides an understanding of the privacy paradox, and claims that participatory surveillance social media have altered young people’s view on privacy and prepares them for a life of exposure.Hallam, C, & Zanella, G. (2017). “Online self-disclosure: The privacy paradox explained as a temporally discounted balance between concerns and rewards”.
Computers in Human Behavior. 68, 217-227.The article aims to explain the paradoxical concerns social media users have as they do not align with the behaviours displayed using Construal Level Theory. This article describes the benefits and rewards that have come with social media surveillance and self disclosure, how these rewards can predict the behaviours of users, and the relationship between privacy concerns and intention.This article describes user behavior and reasoning to tackle the privacy paradox through a political economic lens, looking at the rewards and intentions of the users for the selling of personal data though against their privacy concerns.
This perspective allows for the understanding of the contradictory behaviour in the participatory surveillance models.