To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Capitalisme de surveillance.
Journal articles on the topic 'Capitalisme de surveillance'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Capitalisme de surveillance.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Zuboff, Shoshana, and Sean Rose. "Un capitalisme de surveillance." Études Févrir, no. 2 (2021): 57. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/etu.4279.0057.
Full text
2
Zuboff, Shoshana, and Jonathan Chalier. "Le capitalisme de la surveillance." Esprit Mai, no. 5 (2019): 63. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/espri.1905.0063.
Full text
3
Bocquet, Nicolas, and Corentin Debailleul. "Quelle place pour l’État à l’âge du capitalisme de surveillance ?" Revue française de science politique Vol. 73, no. 1 (2024): 119–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rfsp.731.0119.
Full text
4
Raus, Rachele. "La traduction des discours européens sur l’intelligence artificielle entre effets de sens et « capitalisme de surveillance »." Mots, no. 128 (April 14, 2022): 65–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/mots.29325.
Full text
5
Kivotidis, Dimitrios. "Break or Continuity? Friedrich Engels and the Critique of Digital Surveillance." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 19, no. 1 (2020): 97–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v19i1.1213.
Full textAbstract:
This paper is a contribution to the argument that Engels’s work remains topical and may provide us with the analytical tools necessary to approach contemporary manifestations of capitalist contradictions. Based on Engels’s work on political economy (with emphasis on his contribution to the labour theory of value and the articulation of the law on the tendency of the rate of profit to fall) it will critically review the concept of “surveillance capitalism” as developed by Shoshana Zuboff, in order to explain central aspects of the process of digital surveillance. In particular, it will criticise the view expressed by Zuboff that surveillance capitalism constitutes a break with capitalism’s past and can be tamed through an enhancement of democratic accountability and regulation. Marxist contributions to the critique of digital surveillance have already approached this phenomenon in a many-sided manner. This paper builds upon these contributions and suggests that the exponential growth of digital platforms can be explained as a direct result of the development of capitalist contradictions, especially the contradiction between productive forces and relations of production as expressed in the law of the falling rate of profit.
6
Venkatesh, Nikhil. "Surveillance Capitalism: a Marx-inspired account." Philosophy 96, no. 3 (2021): 359–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0031819121000164.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractSome of the world's most powerful corporations practise what Shoshana Zuboff (2015; 2019) calls ‘surveillance capitalism’. The core of their business is harvesting, analysing and selling data about the people who use their products. In Zuboff's view, the first corporation to engage in surveillance capitalism was Google, followed by Facebook; recently, firms such as Microsoft and Amazon have pivoted towards such a model. In this paper, I suggest that Karl Marx's analysis of the relations between industrial capitalists and workers is closely analogous to the relations between surveillance capitalists and users. Furthermore, three problematic aspects of industrial capitalism that Marx describes – alienation, exploitation and accumulation – are also aspects, in new forms, of surveillance capitalism. I draw heavily on Zuboff's work to make these parallels. However, my Marx-inspired account of surveillance capitalism differs from hers over the nature of the exchange between users and surveillance capitalists. For Zuboff, this is akin either to robbery or the gathering of raw materials; on the Marx-inspired account it is a voluntary sale. This difference has important implications for the question of how to resist surveillance capitalism.
7
Nocetti, Julien. "Affaires privées. Aux sources du capitalisme de surveillance . Christophe Masutti. Caen, C&F Éditions, 2020, 480 pages." Politique étrangère Printemps, no. 1 (2021): XIX. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/pe.211.0203s.
Full text
8
Petrulis, Jason. "Making a global beauty business: the rise and fall of Hong Kong wigs in the 1960s." Entreprises et histoire 111, no. 2 (2023): 92–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/eh.111.0092.
Full textAbstract:
Cet article analyse le processus par lequel une industrie de la beauté des années 1960 devient globalisée. Il le fait au travers du prisme de l’industrie hongkongaise de la perruque, – alors n° 1 mondial des industries globales de la beauté aux États-Unis, valant 1 milliard de dollars. Suivre cette industrie de son ascension jusqu’à son déclin permet d’appréhender l’histoire de la mondialisation différemment : non pas comme l’avènement du laissez-faire et d’un capitalisme global dématérialisé, mais comme un ensemble de relations complexes historiquement constituées (connexions à l’Inde et à la Chine), ayant un caractère accidentel découlant de la politique de Guerre froide (embargo surprise contre les cheveux « communistes » asiatiques), ou encore résultant de la surveillance intrusive du commerce hongkongais par le gouvernement britannique, qui, en garantissant la qualité et l’origine, surmonta la méfiance envers la distance inhérente au commerce global.
9
Borradaile, Glencora, and Joshua Reeves. "Sousveillance Capitalism." Surveillance & Society 18, no. 2 (2020): 272–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.24908/ss.v18i2.13920.
Full textAbstract:
The striking commercial success of Shoshana Zuboff’s 2019 book, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, provides us with an excellent opportunity to reflect on how the present convergence of surveillance/capitalism coincides with popular critical and theoretical themes in surveillance studies, particularly that of sousveillance. Accordingly, this piece will first analyze how surveillance capitalism has molded the political behaviors and imaginations of activists. After acknowledging the theoretically and politically fraught implications of fighting surveillance with even more surveillance—especially given the complexities of digital capitalism’s endless desire to produce data—we conclude by exploring some of the political possibilities that lie at the margins of sousveillance capitalism (in particular, the extra-epistemological political value of sousveillance).
10
De Brito, Lucas. "ZUBOFF, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019, 691p. ISBN 9781610395694." Mural Internacional 12 (March 19, 2021): e55150. http://dx.doi.org/10.12957/rmi.2021.55150.
Full textAbstract:
Shoshana Zuboff, em seu livro The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, perpassa pelas diversas funções e características do capitalismo de vigilância, conceito instrumentalizado pela autora e que diz respeito a uma nova ordem econômica baseada na extração de dados para a predição de comportamento capitaneada pelas grandes empresas de tecnologia. Através de vários exemplos e de uma narrativa bem fundamentada a autora mostra as consequências, na vida cotidiana, do aparato sofisticado utilizado para a modificação de comportamento.Palavras-chave: Capitalismo de vigilância; Big tech; Poder comportamental.ABSTRACTShoshana Zuboff, in her book The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, goes through the diverse functions and characteristics of surveillance capitalism, a concept instrumentalized by the author and which concerns a new economic order based on in data extraction to predict behavior led by large technology companies. Through several examples and a well-tied narrative, the author shows the consequences in everyday life of the sophisticated apparatus used for behavior modification.Key words: Surveillance capitalism; Big tech; Behavioral power. Recebido em: 09 out. 2020 | Aceito em: 23 jan. 2021.
11
Curran, Dean. "Surveillance capitalism and systemic digital risk: The imperative to collect and connect and the risks of interconnectedness." Big Data & Society 10, no. 1 (2023): 205395172311776. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20539517231177621.
Full textAbstract:
Zuboff's The Age of Surveillance Capitalism provides a powerful analysis of the emergence of surveillance capitalism as a particular type of informational capitalism. Many of the important impacts of this project of creating larger and more integrated systems of ‘behavioural surplus’ are captured powerfully by Zuboff; yet as different risk and organisational scholars such as Beck, Perrow, and Vaughan have argued, integrated systems often do not function as intended. While the imperfection of these systems may raise the possibility that surveillance capitalism may not be as bad as Zuboff suggests, there is also a way in which these systems not functioning as intended can make surveillance capitalism an even more dystopian possibility. In this vein, this paper asks: what are the consequences when the tools of a surveillance capitalist society break down? This paper argues that it is by thinking through Zuboff's framework that we can identify the systemic fragility of a surveillance capitalist society. This systemic fragility emerges through how surveillance capitalism generates imperatives towards the maximal collection of data for exploitation, which in turn generates a corresponding imperative to connect all aspects of life. Both of these imperatives, of collect and connect, in turn create an immensely fragile digital system, which has vast ramifications throughout social life, such that small imperfections and gaps in the system can magnify risk throughout society.
12
Zuboff, Shoshana. "Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization." Organization Theory 3, no. 3 (2022): 263178772211292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26317877221129290.
Full textAbstract:
Surveillance capitalism is what happened when US democracy stood down. Two decades later, it fails any reasonable test of responsible global stewardship of digital information and communications. The abdication of the world’s information spaces to surveillance capitalism has become the meta-crisis of every republic because it obstructs solutions to all other crises. The surveillance capitalist giants–Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and their ecosystems–now constitute a sweeping political-economic institutional order that exerts oligopolistic control over most digital information and communication spaces, systems, and processes. The commodification of human behavior operationalized in the secret massive-scale extraction of human-generated data is the foundation of surveillance capitalism’s two-decade arc of institutional development. However, when revenue derives from commodification of the human, the classic economic equation is scrambled. Imperative economic operations entail accretions of governance functions and impose substantial social harms. Concentration of economic power produces collateral concentrations of governance and social powers. Oligopoly in the economic realm shades into oligarchy in the societal realm. Society’s ability to respond to these developments is thwarted by category errors. Governance incursions and social harms such as control over AI or rampant disinformation are too frequently seen as distinct crises and siloed, each with its own specialists and prescriptions, rather than understood as organic effects of causal economic operations. In contrast, this paper explores surveillance capitalism as a unified field of institutional development. Its four already visible stages of development are examined through a two-decade lens on expanding economic operations and their societal effects, including extraction and the wholesale destruction of privacy, the consequences of blindness-by-design in human-to-human communications, the rise of AI dominance and epistemic inequality, novel achievements in remote behavioral actuation such as the Trump 2016 campaign, and Apple-Google’s leverage of digital infrastructure control to subjugate democratic governments desperate to fight a pandemic. Structurally, each stage creates the conditions and constructs the scaffolding for the next, and each builds on what went before. Substantively, each stage is characterized by three vectors of accomplishment: novel economic operations, governance carve-outs, and fresh social harms. These three dimensions weave together across time in a unified architecture of institutional development. Later-stage harms are revealed as effects of the foundational-stage economic operations required for commodification of the human. Surveillance capitalism’s development is understood in the context of a larger contest with the democratic order—the only competing institutional order that poses an existential threat. The democratic order retains the legitimate authority to contradict, interrupt, and abolish surveillance capitalism’s foundational operations. Its unique advantages include the ability to inspire action and the necessary power to make, impose, and enforce the rule of law. While the liberal democracies have begun to engage with the challenges of regulating today’s privately owned information spaces, I argue that regulation of institutionalized processes that are innately catastrophic for democratic societies cannot produce desired outcomes. The unified field perspective suggests that effective democratic contradiction aimed at eliminating later-stage harms, such as “disinformation,” depends upon the abolition and reinvention of the early-stage economic operations that operationalize the commodification of the human, the source from which such harms originate. The clash of institutional orders is a death match over the politics of knowledge in the digital century. Surveillance capitalism’s antidemocratic economic imperatives produce a zero-sum dynamic in which the deepening order of surveillance capitalism propagates democratic disorder and deinstitutionalization. Without new public institutions, charters of rights, and legal frameworks purpose-built for a democratic digital century, citizens march naked, easy prey for all who steal and hunt with human data. Only one of these contesting orders will emerge with the authority and power to rule, while the other will drift into deinstitutionalization, its functions absorbed by the victor. Will these contradictions ultimately defeat surveillance capitalism, or will democracy suffer the greater injury? It is possible to have surveillance capitalism, and it is possible to have a democracy. It is not possible to have both.
13
Smith, Kyle Lauriston. "Thomas Aquinas, Ronald Dworkin, and the Fourth Revolution: The Foundations of Law in the Age of Surveillance Capitalism." Laws 12, no. 3 (2023): 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/laws12030040.
Full textAbstract:
Since the publication of Shoshana Zuboff’s The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, the strategies of Surveillance Capitalists and appropriate responses to them have become common points of discussion across several fields. However, there is relatively little literature addressing challenges that Surveillance Capitalism raises for the foundations of law. This article outlines Surveillance Capitalism and then compares the views of Thomas Aquinas and Ronald Dworkin in four areas: truth and reality, reality and law, interpretation and social custom, and virtue and law; finally, it closes by asking whether the law alone can provide a sufficient response to Surveillance Capitalism. The overarching argument of the article is that, while Aquinas’s view of the foundations of law accounts for and responds to the challenges of Surveillance Capitalism more effectively than Dworkin’s, law alone cannot provide a sufficient response to this emerging phenomenon.
14
Bencze, Larry. "Post-pandemic Science & Technology Education." Journal for Activist Science and Technology Education 11, no. 2 (2020): 33–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.33137/jaste.v11i2.34534.
Full textAbstract:
Much of the world is experiencing a crisis in which many ‘instructional packets’ (SARS-CoV-2 viruses) have commandeered ‘machinery’ of living beings to propagate themselves — regardless of surrounding harms their self-interested purposes may cause. Although they have, indeed, caused massive global disruption, crises linked to hegemonic actors are not uncommon. Capitalists, like viruses, conscript various living and nonliving entities to serve them and, in their persistent — and, generally, highly-successful — pursuit of profit, are said to be responsible for numerous social injustices and much environmental devastation, such as climate disruption and nuclear war (Ripple et al., 2020). Accordingly, like viral pandemics, many suggest that capitalism is a ‘pandemic’ and also must be eliminated — and, some would suggest, replaced with eco-socialist worlds. Capitalism seems, however, to be extremely resilient, often able to survive different crises and, sometimes, capable of emerging even stronger. In this vein, Naomi Klein (2007) suggests that capitalists and others have routinely exploited natural and anthropogenic disasters — using societal destabilization to further implement pro-capitalist policies, often at expense of well-being of many people (e.g., gig workers), societies (e.g., under surveillance) and environments (e.g., climate change). The CoViD-19 pandemic, however, may be a special kind of crisis — perhaps opening doors to more non-capitalist futures. Although enabling, for instance, more for-profit surveillance, it also may have disaggregated capitalist networks to the point of severe weakening and, in doing so, enlightened many people about pre-crisis neoliberal and populist infrastructures that may have contributed to this and other crises. Such conscientization may, in turn, have emboldened many to work for better futures. Given roles of science and technology (S&T) in capitalist empowerment, a natural place for such transformation may be science and technology education. In this paper, a framework for S&T education showing promise in this regard is described and defended. Nevertheless, those wishing societal transformation towards more eco-socialist futures need to engage multiple and diverse living, non-living and symbolic entities in ways that may generate networks supportive of such transformations.
15
Charitsis, Vassilis, Detlev Zwick, and Alan Bradshaw. "Creating Worlds that Create Audiences: Theorising Personal Data Markets in the Age of Communicative Capitalism." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 16, no. 2 (2018): 820–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i2.1041.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, we draw on theories of biopolitical marketing to explore claims that personal data markets are contextualised by what Shoshana Zuboff calls “surveillance capitalism” and Jodi Dean calls “communicative capitalism”. Surveillance and communicative capitalism are characterised by a logic of accumulation based on networked captures of life that enable complex and incomprehensive processes of extraction, commodification, and control. Echoing recent theorisations of data (as) derivatives, Zuboff’s key claim about surveillance capitalism is that data representations open up opportunities for the enhanced market control of life through the algorithmic monitoring, prediction and modification of human behaviour. A Marxist critique, focusing largely on the exploitative nature of corporate data capitalism, has already been articulated. In this article, we focus on the increasingly popular market-libertarian critique that proposes individual control, ownership, and ability to commodify one’s personal data as an answer to corporate data extraction, derivation and exploitation schemes. We critique the claims that personal data markets counterbalance corporate digital capitalism on two grounds. First, these markets do not work economically and therefore are unable to address the exploitative aspect of surveillance capitalism. Second, the notion of personal data markets functions ideologically because it reduces the critique of surveillance capitalism to the exploitation of consumers and conceals the real objective of data capitalists such as Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple to not (just) exploit audiences but to create worlds that create audiences.
16
Gama, Jader Ribeiro, and Fábio Carlos da Silva. "CAPITALISMO DE VIGILÂNCIA E SEUS NEXOS COM A DEPENDÊNCIA TECNOLÓGICA NA AMAZÔNIA." InterEspaço: Revista de Geografia e Interdisciplinaridade 5, no. 19 (2020): 202036. http://dx.doi.org/10.18764/2446-6549.e202036.
Full textAbstract:
SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM AND ITS CONNECTIONS WITH THE TECHNOLOGICAL DEPENDENCE IN THE AMAZONEL CAPITALISMO DE VIGILANCIA Y SUS CONEXIONES CON LA DEPENDENCIA TECNOLÓGICA EN LA AMAZONIARESUMOEste artigo tenta estabelecer uma conexão entre o Capitalismo de Vigilância e a Teoria da Dependência, com vistas em mostrar como o processo massivo de captura de dados pessoais por meio das corporações tecnológicas denominadas de BigTechs através de suas plataformas computacionais tem aprofundado tanto a dependência tecnológica quanto a desigualdade econômica entre países ricos e países pobres. Situação que deve se agravar ainda mais a partir da intensificação do processo de rapina de dados biológicos da biodiversidade com foco nos espécimes da Floresta Amazônica. Trata-se de um chamamento para que mais cientistas e pesquisadores lancem um olhar mais acurado para essa dinâmica que vem se consolidando através da chamada Economia do Conhecimento, que tem relegado aos fazedores de ciência dos chamados países subdesenvolvidos ou em desenvolvimento o papel de meros usuários de tecnologias oriundas dos grandes centros econômicos capitalistas, além de coletores de dados para alimentar a indústria científica e tecnológica dos países do chamado primeiro mundo.Palavras-chave: Capitalismo de Vigilância; Teoria da Dependência; Amazônia.ABSTRACTThis article attempts to establish a connection between Surveillance Capitalism and Dependency Theory, with a view to showing how the massive process of capturing personal data through technological corporations called BigTechs through their computing platforms has deepened both technological dependence and economic inequality between rich and poor countries. This situation is expected to worsen even further due to the intensification of the prey process of biological data on biodiversity with a focus on specimens from the Amazon Forest. It is a call for more scientists and researchers to take a more accurate look at this dynamic that has been consolidated through the so-called Knowledge Economy, which has relegated the role of mere users to science makers in so-called underdeveloped or developing countries, technologies coming from the big capitalist economic centers as well as data collectors to feed the scientific and technological industry of the so-called first world countries.Keywords: Surveillance Capitalism; Dependency Theory; Amazon.RESUMENEste artículo intenta establecer una conexión entre el capitalismo de vigilancia y la teoría de la dependencia, con miras a mostrar cómo el proceso masivo de captura de datos personales a través de corporaciones tecnológicas llamadas BigTechs a través de sus plataformas informáticas ha profundizado tanto la dependencia tecnológica como la desigualdad económica entre países ricos y pobres. Se espera que esta situación empeore aún más debido a la intensificación del proceso de presa de datos biológicos sobre la biodiversidad con un enfoque en especímenes de la selva amazónica. Es un llamado para que más científicos e investigadores profundicen en esta dinámica que se ha consolidado a través de la llamada Economía del Conocimiento, que ha relegado el papel de meros usuarios a los creadores de ciencia en los llamados países subdesarrollados o en vías de desarrollo, tecnologías provenientes de los grandes centros económicos capitalistas así como recolectores de datos para alimentar la industria científica y tecnológica de los llamados países del primer mundo.Palabras clave: Capitalismo de Vigilancia; Teoría de la Dependencia; Amazonia.
17
Drinkall, Jacquelene. "Capitalist Telepathics, Psychic Debt and the Search for Collective Intelligence." TOPIA: Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies 45 (October 1, 2022): 133–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/topia-45-002.
Full textAbstract:
The current state of capitalist digital telepathics, or what I will call telepathy 3.0, presents a serious threat to the prospects of human freedom (Žižek 2020) . Notably, the capitalist race to develop telepathics by Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook/Meta, Elon Musk’s Neuralink and others represents an intensification of surveillance capitalism (Zuboff 2019 : 206). Through an examination of tech-sector marketing literature and industry critics this article examines contemporary development of Brain Computer Interfaces (BCIs), Neural Interfaces (NIs) and intensified social networks, revealing the expansion of surveillance capitalism and its shift into neurocapitalist telepathics. Is there an alternative to the corporate dystopia promised by telepathy 3.0? This article argues for a more soulful and speculative form of telepathics in fields including art, philosophy, design, architecture, engineering, cybernetics and even psychology. This tradition of prophetic art and human compassion must be nurtured in the face of massive corporate-led investments in predictive technologies.
18
Cooke, Philip. "Three Disruptive Models of New Spatial Planning: “Attention”, “Surveillance” or “Sustainable” Capitalisms?" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 1 (2021): 46. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010046.
Full textAbstract:
This paper compares and contrasts three disruptive models of potential and actual new kinds of spatial planning. These include “seasteading”, “smart neighbourhoods” and “renewable spatial systems”. Each is labelled with distinctive discursive titles, respectively: “Attention Capitalism”; “Surveillance Capitalism” and “Sustainable Capitalism” denoting the different lineaments of each, although they all have their origins in the Silicon Valley techno-entrepreneurial milieu. In each case, while the path dependences of trajectories have diverged the progenitors were often erstwhile business partners at the outset. The paper is interested in qualitative methodology and proposes “pattern recognition” as a means to disclose the deep psychological, sociological, political and economic levels that inform the surface appearances and functions of the diverse spatial planning modes and designs that have been advanced or inferred from empirically observable initiator practice. “Dark Triad” analysis is entailed in actualising psychological deep structures. Each of the three models is discussed and the lineaments of their initiators’ ideas are disclosed. Each “school” has a designated mentor(s), respectively: academic B. J. Fogg and venture capitalist Peter Thiel for “Attention Capitalism”, “smart city” planner Dan Doctoroff for “Surveillance Capitalism” and “renewable energineer” and Elon Musk for “Sustainable Capitalism”, the eventual winner of this existential “dark versus light triad” urban planning contest.
19
Kortesoja, Matti. "Surveillance Capitalism." Tutkimus & kritiikki 4, no. 1 (2024): 119. http://dx.doi.org/10.55294/tk.144881.
Full text
20
Dolber, Brian. "Organizing at the Digital Water Cooler: Social Media, Platform Organizing, and the Fight against Surveillance Capitalism." South Atlantic Quarterly 122, no. 4 (2023): 779–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00382876-10779424.
Full textAbstract:
This article explores how Rideshare Drivers United (RDU), a fledgling union of app-based drivers in California, works in dialectical relationship to processes of surveillance capitalism. First, the article gives a brief history of RDU's organizing strategy in the lead-up to two strikes in the spring of 2019. RDU capitalized on social media's advertising platforms, as well as on a purpose-built app called Solidarity, to bring together a disparate workforce. Next, drawing on Vincent Mosco's framework for the political economy of communication, the article describes how this strategy emerged in response to, and intervened in, the processes of commodification, spatialization, and structuration that constitute surveillance capitalism. Interviews with Los Angeles– and San Diego–area driver-organizers suggest that this use of digital tools has become a mundane feature of the contemporary labor and social life. The refusal to fetishize platforms opens space for app-based workers to challenge surveillance capitalism's logics through platform organizing.
21
Breckenridge, Keith. "Capitalism without Surveillance?" Development and Change 51, no. 3 (2020): 921–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dech.12588.
Full text
22
Linder, Thomas. "Surveillance Capitalism and Platform Policing: The Surveillant Assemblage-as-a-Service." Surveillance & Society 17, no. 1/2 (2019): 76–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.24908/ss.v17i1/2.12903.
Full textAbstract:
Based on empirical research on training webinars, interviews, and promotional material from Vigilant Solutions, this paper investigates the surveillance regime enabled by platform policing: the implementation of cloud-based platforms, designed and run by private corporations, that provide mass surveillance-driven simulations for a range of police operations, including predictive policing, targeted surveillance, and tactical and strategic governance. Building on Amoore’s (2016) work on “cloud geographies,” this paper argues that the platform model embodied by Vigilant Solutions involves multivalent processes of de- and reterritorialization in which new technological and datalogical spaces are formed and these erode older societal boundaries of private, public, and state. Specifically, Vigilant Solutions leverages its multi-sided platform business model through the deterritorializing, cloud-based concatenations of surveillant technologies. It then argues that the resultant reterritorialized cloud space, which is accessible through its Vigilant Investigative Centre (VIC) platform, fuses mass surveillance data from diverse private, public, and state sources in a simulated geography. Further, the VIC furnishes to law enforcement an array of data analytics that exploits this cloud geography to enable a boundary-crossing surveillance regime of association analysis and proximal suspicion.
23
Lipartito, Kenneth. "Information, Surveillance, and Capitalism." Capitalism: A Journal of History and Economics 4, no. 1 (2023): 153–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/cap.2023.a899274.
Full text
24
Gray, Chris H. "The threat of surveillance capitalism." Teknokultura. Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales 16, no. 2 (2019): 265–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/tekn.64984.
Full textAbstract:
Using Shoshana Zuboff’s 2019 book, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, the essay explores this latest form of capitalism and Zuboff’s claims about its organization. Her arguments are compared and contrasted with David Eggers novel, and the movie that came out of it, called The Circle, as well as other perspectives on capitalism (Marx, Barry Unsworth’s Sacred Hunger) and the current dominance of social media companies (especially Alphabet/Google, Facebook, and Amazon) from Evgeny Morozov, Natasa Dow Schüll, Zeynep Tufekci, Steve Mann and Tim Wu. Zuboff’s description and critique of Surveillance Capitalism is a convincing and important addition to our understanding of the political economy of the early 21st Century and the role of giant monopolistic social media companies in shaping it.
25
Doyuran, Elif Buse. "How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism." Journal of Cultural Economy 14, no. 5 (2021): 612–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2021.1927150.
Full text
26
Cinnamon, Jonathan. "Social Injustice in Surveillance Capitalism." Surveillance & Society 15, no. 5 (2017): 609–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.24908/ss.v15i5.6433.
Full textAbstract:
A rapidly accelerating phase of capitalism based on asymmetrical personal data accumulation poses significant concerns for democratic societies, yet the concepts used to understand and challenge practices of dataveillance are insufficient or poorly elaborated. Against a backdrop of growing corporate power enabled by legal lethargy and the secrecy of the personal data industry, this paper makes explicit how the practices inherent to what Shoshana Zuboff calls ‘surveillance capitalism’ are threats to social justice, based on the normative principle that they prevent parity of participation in social life. This paper draws on Nancy Fraser’s theory of ‘abnormal justice’ to characterize the separation of people from their personal data and its accumulation by corporations as an economic injustice of maldistribution. This initial injustice is also the key mechanism by which further opaque but significant forms of injustice are enabled in surveillance capitalism—sociocultural misrecognition which occurs when personal data are algorithmically processed and subject to categorization, and political misrepresentation which renders people democratically voiceless, unable to challenge misuses of their data. In situating corporate dataveillance practices as a threat to social justice, this paper calls for more explicit conceptual development of the social harms of asymmetrical personal data accumulation and analytics, and more hopefully, attention to the requirements needed to recast personal data as an agent of equality rather than oppression.
27
Lejo, Bergita P. Pricelia. "Kerentanan Perempuan dalam Surveillance Capitalism." Jurnal Wanita dan Keluarga 2, no. 2 (2021): 65–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.22146/jwk.3616.
Full textAbstract:
Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menganalisa kerentanan perempuan terhadap Kekerasan Gender Berbasis Online (KGBO) di dalam ruang digital. Studi ini menggunakan konsep kapitalisme pengawasan/surveillance capitalism dan symbolic violence sebagai dasar untuk memahami logika ekonomi dan juga kekerasan yang berlangsung dalam ruang digital. Ruang digital sebagai alat ekonomi tidak hanya menghasilkan “behavioral surplus” sebagai material baru tetapi juga menjadi ruang bagi terbentuknya “dominant habitus” tentang siapa itu perempuan dan bagaimana seharusnya perempuan merepresentasikan dirinya. Dominant habitus yang senantiasa direproduksi mampu menciptakan kebutuhan ekonomi bagi perempuan melalui komodifikasi dan bahkan eksploitasi terhadap tubuh perempuan yang terepresentasi dalam teks gambar, dan video di dalam platform digital. Melalui proses-proses ini, perempuan mengalami kekerasan simbolik yang terus-menerus direproduksi dalam dominant habitus. Dengan demikian, bekerjanya surveillance capitalism dan menguatnya dominant habitus di dalamnya menjadi kondisi yang membuka ruang bagi berlangsungya KGBO terhadap perempuan. Dengan menggunakan perspektif kritis dalam memandang KGBO tulisan ini hendak mendalami proses-proses yang mengkondisikan kerentanan perempuan di dalam ranah digital. Pemahaman akan hal-hal tersebut menjadi basis penting untuk memikirkan secara tepat posisi perempuan di dalam ruang digital yang saat ini secara luas diterima sebagai condition sine qua non yang di dalamnya berbagai bentuk relasi berlangsung. Dengan demikian, tulisan ini memberikan pijakan dasar untuk mendorong dan merumuskan beberapa agenda perubahan.
 ===
 This paper aims to analyze women's vulnerability to Online-Based Gender Violence (KGBO) in the digital platform. This study uses the concept of surveillance capitalism and symbolic violence as a basis for understanding the economic logic and violence that takes place in today's digital platform. Digital platform as an economic tool not only produces a "behavioral surplus" as a new material, but also becomes a space for the formation of a "dominant habitus"; who is women are and how women should represent themselves. Dominant habitus which is always reproduced is able to create economic needs for women through commodification and even exploitation of women's bodies which are represented in text, images and videos on digital platforms. Throughout these processes, mostly women suffer from symbolic violence which persistently reproduced by the dominant habitus. It obviously reflects the vulnerability of woman as the victim of KGBO. By using a critical perspective in looking at KGBO, this paper intends to explore the process that put women’s vulnerability in the digital arena. Understanding of these matters becomes an important basis for thinking about the exact position of women in the digital space which is currently widely accepted as a condition sine qua non in which various forms of relations take place. Thus, this paper provides a basic basis for encouraging and formulating several agendas for change.
28
Sparkes, Matthew. "An end to 'surveillance capitalism'?" New Scientist 250, no. 3342 (2021): 18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0262-4079(21)01179-9.
Full text
29
Sirotkin, V. B. "Decentralized money. Resisting surveillance capitalism." Economic Revival of Russia, no. 1 (71) (2022): 129–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.37930/1990-9780-2022-1-71-129-136.
Full textAbstract:
Modern changes in centralized money are under consideration. It is shown that private electronic money (cryptocurrency) acts as a means of resistance to the increase of government control over people.
30
Álvarez-Rufs, Manuel. "Los Algoritmos del Capitalismo de la Vigilancia como Medios de Comunicación de Masas: Un Modelo de Comunicación Algorítmica Interactiva y Persuasiva." Tradición y progreso en la investigación en comunicación. Transformación y creación de teorías y metodologías ante los nuevos retos de la convergencia digital, Especial (July 31, 2023): 108–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.24137/raeic.10.e.7.
Full textAbstract:
En este ensayo de investigación se analiza el modelo de comunicación subyacente tras la construcción de la realidad que llevan a cabo los sistemas de inteligencia artificial basados en algoritmos que actúan al servicio del capitalismo de la vigilancia como medios de comunicación de masas. Los algoritmos construyen diferentes realidades dentro del entramado cibernético actual, pero ¿cuál es la realidad de la construcción de la realidad de los algoritmos de los que se sirve el capitalismo de la vigilancia? Desde una mirada etnográfica a los algoritmos de Facebook y Twitter, se propone un nuevo modelo de comunicación algorítmica interactiva y persuasiva en el que los algoritmos generan diferentes niveles de realidad, con una finalidad oculta de manipulación y modificación conductual, como es el caso de los experimentos sociales llevados a cabo por Facebook, el escándalo de Cambridge Analytica o los sistemas de crédito social instaurados en algunos países.
31
Vianna, Fernando Ressetti Pinheiro Marques, and Francis Kanashiro Meneghetti. "IS IT CROWDSOURCING OR CROWDSENSING? AN ANALYSIS OF HUMAN PARTICIPATION IN DIGITAL PLATFORMS IN THE AGE OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM." REAd. Revista Eletrônica de Administração (Porto Alegre) 26, no. 1 (2020): 176–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.280.96476.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT This paper contributes to studies on the dark side of digitization by relying on the concept of surveillance capitalism to analyze the role of individuals in digital organizations in performing activities known as crowdsourcing. Even though there is a discourse of empowerment and mutual interest exchanges between organizations and individuals through crowdsourcing, the transformation of computer systems into the so-called 4.0 era or 4.0 industry seems to have altered their role in digital organizations as well. These individuals began to be analyzed from the data they produce, and no longer from their desires, thus approaching the sensors of these organizations. Using the case study method, we analyze the contents of the Netflix, Facebook and Google platform home pages, as well as their terms of service and privacy policies. The way users participate in these platforms is analyzed, as well as the way their data are exploited, and the reason why this continuous exploitation of data occurs. We argue that this exploration alienates the empowering and participatory concept of crowdsourcing and brings the passive concept of individuals closer together as sensors, or crowdsensing. This approach, instead of treating individuals as singular, quantifies and categorizes their uniqueness to meet the controlling longings of hegemonic organizational structures, limited by capitalist discourse, or surveillance capitalism.
32
Murakami Wood, David, and Torin Monahan. "Editorial: Platform Surveillance." Surveillance & Society 17, no. 1/2 (2019): 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.24908/ss.v17i1/2.13237.
Full textAbstract:
This editorial introduces this special responsive issue on “platform surveillance.” We develop the term platform surveillance to account for the manifold and often insidious ways that digital platforms fundamentally transform social practices and relations, recasting them as surveillant exchanges whose coordination must be technologically mediated and therefore made exploitable as data. In the process, digital platforms become dominant social structures in their own right, subordinating other institutions, conjuring or sedimenting social divisions and inequalities, and setting the terms upon which individuals, organizations, and governments interact. Emergent forms of platform capitalism portend new governmentalities, as they gradually draw existing institutions into alignment or harmonization with the logics of platform surveillance while also engendering subjectivities (e.g., the gig-economy worker) that support those logics. Because surveillance is essential to the operations of digital platforms, because it structures the forms of governance and capital that emerge, the field of surveillance studies is uniquely positioned to investigate and theorize these phenomena.
33
Dyer-Witheford, Nick. "Left Populism and Platform Capitalism." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 18, no. 1 (2020): 116–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v18i1.1130.
Full textAbstract:
This paper contextualizes and analyses the policy proposals of new “left populisms” (Mouffe 2018) for the regulation and reform of the “platform capitalism” (Srnicek 2017) that increasingly organizes digital communication. The era of the 2008 crash and subsequent recession saw the emergence in North America and Europe of new left-wing electoral initiatives, either as new parties or fractions within older parties. These include, in the USA, Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Democrats; in the UK, Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party; in Spain, Podemos; in Germany, Die Linke; in France, La France Insoumise. While many of these groupings might be described as socialist, or democratic socialist, they often also distinguish themselves from older socialist or social democratic formations; so, for lack of a better term, we call them left populisms. Left populisms are connected in contradictory ways to the appearance of platform capitalism, a corporate model exemplified by Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Uber, deploying proprietorial software as a launch-point for user activities accessing commodified or advertising-driven goods and services. The rise of left populism correlates with the ascent of platform capitalists. Left populist parties emerged from the anti-austerity movements (Occupy in the USA, the Indignados in Spain, student campus occupations in the UK) organized with the help of social media platforms. However, it is also the failures and scandals of platform capitalism have been important to left populism. Edward Snowden’s revelations of ubiquitous surveillance and the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica-Russian hacker imbroglio around the 2016 US election have fuelled a “techlash” against giant digital corporations that is now an important component of left populist sentiment. Drawing on policy documents, manifestos, speeches, position paper, this paper analyses the policy platforms in which left populist parties confront platform capitalism around issues of content regulation; concentration of ownership; the rights of digital workers; alternative ownership models; and proposals for a high-tech driven transition to “postcapitalism” (Mason 2016). It considers the similarities and difference between and within left populist parties on these issues; the extent of their departure from neoliberal policies; and their differences, and occasional erratic similarities, with right-wing populisms, such as that of Trump. It then reviews critiques of left populism made from Marxist and ecological anti-capitalist positions, with particular reference to technological issues. The paper concludes with a summary of the opportunities and problems for a left wing “data populism” (Morozov 2016) in the current political conjuncture.
34
Ptaszek, Grzegorz. "Surveillance capitalism and privacy. Knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland." Mediatization Studies 2 (June 26, 2019): 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/ms.2018.2.49-68.
Full textAbstract:
<p>The purpose of the study was to determine the level of knowledge and attitudes towards surveillance capitalism and online institutional privacy protection practices among adolescents in Poland (aged 18–19), as well as to determine the relationships between these variables. Surveillance capitalism has emerged as a result of internet users’ activities and involves the collection of all data about these users by different entities for specific benefits without letting them know about it. The dominant role in surveillance capitalism is played by hi-tech corporations. The aim of the study was to verify whether knowledge, and what kind of knowledge, on surveillance capitalism translates into practices related to the protection of online institutional privacy. The study was conducted on a sample of 177 adolescents in Poland. The main part of the questionnaire consisted of two scales: the scale of knowledge and attitudes on surveillance capitalism, and the scale of online institutional privacy protection practices. The results of the study, calculated by statistical methods, showed that although the majority of respondents had average knowledge and attitudes about surveillance capitalism, which may result from insufficient knowledge of the subject matter, this participation in specialized activities/workshops influences the level of intensification of online institutional privacy protection practices.</p>
35
Kendell, David. "Age of Surveillance Capitalism – The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power." Brock Education Journal 29, no. 2 (2020): 52. http://dx.doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v29i2.849.
Full textAbstract:
As an educator have you recently heard the term or perhaps even been told to be data driven? Inherent in this simple two-word statement is a quagmire of ethical and privacy concerns that educators must confront to reach the goal and realize the expected results. Central to the concept of data-centered collection, interpretation, and prediction is surveillance capitalism from which many of the tools, methods, and ideology used originate. This review of Shoshana Zuboff's work narrows the focus to the implications for education both in the classroom and in research. As an educator, Zuboff describes three central areas of concern for education's adoption of surveillance capitalist methodologies: changes to the division of learning, private money in research, and the impacts on student development. The work presents many quesitons that can be raised at all levels of educaiton to quesiton technological adoption in and for the classroom.
36
Hegedűs, Dániel. "Felügyeleti kapitalizmus: disztópia vagy valóság?" Információs Társadalom 19, no. 1 (2019): 130. http://dx.doi.org/10.22503/inftars.xix.2019.1.7.
Full textAbstract:
Recenzió Shoshana Zuboff The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight For a Human Future At the New Frontier of Power (Public Affairs, New York, 2019, 704 oldal, ISBN 9781610395700) című könyvéről.
 
 ---
 
 Surveillance Capitalism: Dystopia or Reality?
 
 Book review on Shoshana Zuboff: The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight For a Human Future At the New Frontier of Power (Public Affairs, New York, 2019, 704 pages, ISBN 9781610395700)
37
Kannankulam, John. "Konjunkturen der inneren Sicherheit." PROKLA. Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialwissenschaft 38, no. 152 (2008): 413–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.32387/prokla.v38i152.462.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores the relationship between the changes within the capitalist mode of production since the political and economic crisis of the 1970s and its possible effects for the recent tightening of surveillance and control in the pri vate sector as well as in the states' homeland security policies. It is argued that beside these economic changes within the societal relationship of forces, neo-conservative and neo-Iiberal strategies have to be considered, which, when we take them all together, even regarded from a viewpoint of capitalism itself, often seem to be dysfunctional. Therefore left-wing counter-strategies should not fall into the trap to take the proclaimed Orwellian Big-Brother ideologies for granted.
38
Vianna, Fernando Ressetti Pinheiro Marques, Francis Kanashiro Meneghetti, and Jurandir Peinado. "Capitalismo de vigilância, poder da digitalização e as crianças: uma análise do discurso de pais e tutores." Cadernos EBAPE.BR 20, no. 5 (2022): 624–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1679-395120210159.
Full textAbstract:
Resumo O presente trabalho tem como objetivo analisar as percepções de pais e tutores sobre o uso de dados das crianças pelas organizações que compõem o chamado capitalismo de vigilância. Para tanto, desenvolveu-se uma pesquisa quali-quanti, que contou com a participação de 565 respondentes na parte quantitativa, sendo que 107 deles preencheram uma pergunta aberta optativa, correspondente à etapa qualitativa, comentando sobre suas percepções ou preocupações acerca da utilização de dados por empresas com foco no público infantil. Os resultados quantitativos apontaram que, mesmo percebendo um aumento no volume de uso de mídias e dispositivos digitais pelas crianças, pais e tutores raramente (ou nunca) leem os termos de consentimento. Além disso, a análise de discurso das respostas à pergunta aberta, na parte qualitativa do estudo, mostrou que os respondentes se silenciam a respeito da responsabilidade das organizações que compõem o capitalismo de vigilância. Dessa forma, atribuem a si mesmos, a terceiros ou a situações contextuais as eventuais distorções no uso de dispositivos e mídias digitais pelas crianças, bem como na expropriação e na exploração dos dados pelas organizações. Para o campo da administração, os achados representam um avanço nas discussões sobre o lado obscuro (darkside) da digitalização, especialmente no Brasil, onde o tema permanece inédito.
39
Corrêa, Murilo Duarte Costa, and Giuseppe Cocco. "Capitalismo de vigilância e lutas algorítmicas." MATRIZes 18, no. 1 (2024): 105–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v18i1p105-125.
Full textAbstract:
The recent literature on digital techniques has exploded in a spiral of denunciations against algorithms. They would be nothing but neoliberal techniques by which a new stage of capitalism would globally subsume societies, enclosing them in an infinite repetition guaranteed by data extraction and continuous surveillance. This essay problematizes surveillance capitalism – one of the main focal points of this debate. Furthermore, it repositions the split between surveillance and security in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of algorithmic struggles. As a result, we argue that surveillance capitalism hides the perspective of work and struggles, throwing us into political impasse and immobility.
40
Stanković-Pejnović, Vesna. "Control over biopower in cognitive and surveillance capitalism." Srpska politička misao 80, no. 2 (2023): 201–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/spm80-43934.
Full textAbstract:
Biopower is a form of power that regulates social life from its interior, following it, interpreting it, absorbing it, and rearticulating it. Power can achieve an effective command over the entire life of the population only when it becomes an integral, vital function that every individual embraces and reactivates of his or her own accord. Biopower points out the moment when human life explicitly became part of the political calculations. Beyond the regime of sovereignty, oriented by a logic of repression, emerges a new regime, oriented by a logic of production and control, that is, a power "to make live" or "to let die". For Negri and Hardt biopower constitutes social relations, inserting individuals and populations in a circuit of value, obedience, and utility. In cognitive capitalism capital presents itself as biopower. The point is that capitalism is not only an economic mode of production, but also a mode of life production, a mode of subjectivation. Therefore, it is not only about the reproduction of capital, but also about the reproduction of subjects, the effective producers of economic value. We are facing with the tendency of capital's invasion of bios, the becomingof-capital-biopower, to introduce the concept of biocapitalism. However, it is in this context that biopower and biopolitics must be seen as working together with other technologies of power - repressive and disciplinary power - which operate more directly on the body and on subjectivity. To the new forms of conflict are linked with new forms of power: from cognitive warfare to sharp power. Through cognitive conflict and sharp power strategies, we are witnessing an epochal change, an IT revolution that brings political conflict into a digital dimension, which acts on the ground of public opinion, politics and economics, control and conditioning of knowledge, of our world view and of facts. Zuboff introduces the concept of surveillance-based capitalism implemented via sophisticated algorithms of BigTech companies (Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta, and others). Digital networks do not only collect data on users, but they "cluster" these users with the help of algorithms and encourage specific desired behaviors. Then, the patterns of these behaviors are stored (as raw material of a kind) in Big Data and sold further as commodity (behavioral surplus) on the market. A persons "digital behavior" thus becomes a market subject in various ways. It is ubiquitous, sensate, computational, and global and it is designed so that all human activity, from the most banal to the boldest, can be monitored, measured, and modified for the purposes of surveillance capitalism This capacity to "shape human behavior", gives rise to what Zuboff calls "instrumentarian power" This is not dissimilar to forms of governmentality described by Foucault, because its goal is not just the "conduct of conduct" rather it is to turn people themselves into highly predictable instruments of political or material consumption. As a new form of subtle and sophisticated despotism, data are used by agencies as predictive products about our future behaviors, information that allows to control a market, but also the space for political decision-making and legitimacy, and, therefore become a huge power. Predictive behavioral surplus sources are increased and enhanced to guide, advise and lead people to behaviors, which they believe free, which actually aim for the greater profit of surveillance capitalists.
41
Peša, Anita. "Private and Public in Surveillance Capitalism." Acta economica et turistica 8, no. 1 (2022): 93–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.46672/aet.8.1.5.
Full textAbstract:
The paper deals with the protection of the private and public spheres in surveillance capitalism. Predictions on consumer behaviour or the so-called behavioural surpluses are extracted from the set of collected (big) data of users/consumers from the so-called digital footprints, which become intelligence data, commodities on the data market. In addition to predicting user behaviour, various behavioural techniques push, or nudge users in a particular desired consumer or political direction or action, or dark nudge techniques when it comes to unauthorized data collection on users in the digital sphere. Surveiling and nudging users is done in the range from caring for their health, well-being and benefits, as well as general and public well-being, to encouraging expenditure, desired behaviour or voting in the desired direction of subjects who create such incentives (corporations, political parties, governments, etc.). The subject of the paper is based on behavioural economics which has introduced behavioural techniques in the field of public policy. The author proposes conceptual model of protective and active approach in the era of surveillance capitalism in the private and public spheres. An overview of the current digital regulation in the EU is given, and the need for further development of the legislative framework that will regulate the issues of supervision and protection of privacy and user data is pointed out.
42
Huberman, Jenny. "What to Do with Surveillance Capitalism?" Anthropology Now 12, no. 2 (2020): 94–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19428200.2020.1824760.
Full text
43
Shammas, Victor L. "Superfluity and insecurity: Disciplining surplus populations in the Global North." Capital & Class 42, no. 3 (2017): 411–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816817738319.
Full textAbstract:
Capitalism in northern societies is entering an age of advanced precarity. On the one hand, postindustrial societies are confronted by growing surplus populations for whom there exist few positive functions in the market. These new ‘dangerous classes’ are increasingly subject to surveillance, discipline, and exclusion as the policing and penal instruments of the state are called upon to detect and contain risk. On the other hand, capitalism’s ‘insiders’ are increasingly consigned to a precarious life of hyperflexible labor and generalized insecurity. Confronted with a growing mass of ‘social detritus’, augmented by advances in automation and catalyzed by accelerating flows of capital, states in the Global North will increasingly be forced to mobilize the disciplinary instruments of policing and punishment to contain the swelling ranks of problem populations.
44
Bignoli, Callan, Sam Buechler, Deborah Caldwell, and Kelly McElroy. "Resisting Crisis Surveillance Capitalism in Academic Libraries." Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship 7 (December 15, 2021): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.33137/cjalrcbu.v7.36450.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper, we consider what we identify as crisis surveillance capitalism in higher education, drawing on the work of Naomi Klein and Shoshana Zuboff. We define crisis surveillance capitalism as the intersection of unregulated and ubiquitous data collection with the continued marginalization of vulnerable racial and social groups. Through this lens, we examine the twinned crisis narratives of student success and academic integrity and consider how the COVID-19 pandemic further enabled so-called solutions that collect massive amounts of student data with impunity. We suggest a framework of refusal to crisis surveillance capitalism coming from the work of Keller Easterling and Baharak Yousefi, identifying ways to resist and build power in a context where the cause of harm is all around and intentionally hidden.
45
Gavrilenko, Olga V. "The Era of “Surveillance Capitalism”: New Forms of Digital Platform Power and User Manipulation." Теория и практика общественного развития, no. 3 (March 27, 2024): 74–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.24158/tipor.2024.3.7.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers new tools and forms of digital control, as well as mechanisms of manipulation of behavior of users of digital platforms in the era of “surveillance capitalism”. The business model of operation of techno-logical giants is analyzed, based on the retention of the user on the platform by filtering the information provid-ed to him (“filter bubbles”), increasing the time of the user’s presence in the network, increasing the number of digital footprints left by him, which make the user “transparent” for the platform and allow to transform the col-lected data into forecast products for increase of incomes of “surveillance capitalists”. The article raises the problem of lack of ethical standards of data extraction and use, problems of control over “fate” of provided per-sonal data and violation of privacy, and analyzes psychological hooks, used by technology platforms to keep users online, and possible strategies to resist the power of technology giants by fighting for a “new Internet” and spreading restrictive practices regarding digital media.
46
The Editors. "Notes from the Editors, May 2016." Monthly Review 68, no. 1 (2016): 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.14452/mr-068-01-2016-05_0.
Full textAbstract:
buy this issueA little less than two years ago, in July-August 2014, Monthly Review published a special summer issue under the title Surveillance Capitalism, edited by John Mage.… The lead article by Foster and McChesney was itself entitled "Surveillance Capitalism: Monopoly-Finance Capital, the Military-Industrial Complex, and the Digital Age." In Foster and McChesney's analysis, the problem of surplus absorption under monopoly capital was seen as having led to the development over the last seven decades of a massive surveillance network, extending across the sales effort, finance, and the military, and integral to the entire information economy.… We were therefore pleased to discover that the concept of "surveillance capitalism" has now entered the mainstream and is drawing considerable attention, through the work of Shoshana Zuboff, emeritus professor at the Harvard Business School.… " She failed, however, to mention the prior treatment of "surveillance capitalism" in Monthly Review, despite the fact that her analysis was written in November 2014—judging by her accessing of numerous articles on the Internet on that date—four months after the MR issue was published and posted online.…Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
47
Fuchs, Christian. "Google Capitalism." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 10, no. 1 (2012): 42–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v10i1.304.
Full textAbstract:
This paper analyzes Google’s political economy. In section 2, Google’s cycle of capital accumulation is explained and the role of surveillance in Google’s form of capital accumulation is explained. In section 3, the discussion if Google is “evil” is taken up. Based on Dallas Smythe’s concept of the audience commodity, the role of the notion of Internet prosumer commodification is stressed.
48
Fuchs, Christian. "Google Capitalism." tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 10, no. 1 (2012): 42–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/vol10iss1pp42-48.
Full textAbstract:
This paper analyzes Google’s political economy. In section 2, Google’s cycle of capital accumulation is explained and the role of surveillance in Google’s form of capital accumulation is explained. In section 3, the discussion if Google is “evil” is taken up. Based on Dallas Smythe’s concept of the audience commodity, the role of the notion of Internet prosumer commodification is stressed.
49
West, Sarah Myers. "Data Capitalism: Redefining the Logics of Surveillance and Privacy." Business & Society 58, no. 1 (2017): 20–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650317718185.
Full textAbstract:
This article provides a history of private sector tracking technologies, examining how the advent of commercial surveillance centered around a logic of data capitalism. Data capitalism is a system in which the commoditization of our data enables an asymmetric redistribution of power that is weighted toward the actors who have access and the capability to make sense of information. It is enacted through capitalism and justified by the association of networked technologies with the political and social benefits of online community, drawing upon narratives that foreground the social and political benefits of networked technologies. I examine its origins in the wake of the dotcom bubble, when technology makers sought to develop a new business model to support online commerce. By leveraging user data for advertising purposes, they contributed to an information environment in which every action leaves behind traces collected by companies for commercial purposes. Through analysis of primary source materials produced by technology makers, journalists, and business analysts, I examine the emergence of data capitalism between the mid-1990s and mid-2000s and its central role in the contemporary information economy.
50
Espinosa Yáñez, Alejandro. "Social construction of surveillance capitalism: the serpent's egg revisited." Gestión y Estrategia 60 (July 1, 2021): 41–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.24275/uam/azc/dcsh/gye/2021n60/espinosa.
Full text