Here is the written text:

As you know, surveillance is everywhere. And as what has been discussed in the blog post, it polices a set of ideals that are encouraged and promoted to the object of surveillance. In other words, surveillance is capable of bringing the necessary information to be used by the authorities in regards to the effectiveness, workability and acceptability of that set of ideals. There are a number of examples that can be brought to the table in order to explain this argument.

For example: at school, the installation of CCTV within the school premise has become an ongoing debate in the study of surveillance. Apart from being a security measurement, the instalment of those CCTVs are primarily to ensure and enforce school regulations that are subjected to the students. It lets the teachers see and observe regarding the behaviour of their students; whether they are following the set rules and norms or not. From there, the teachers could decide upon the “appropriate” actions to deal with the problem.

Another example can also be seen in more extreme cases such as that of the proposal by the US presidential candidate, Donald Trump, who wants a thorough check and systemised surveillance on every mosque in the US in the purpose of country’s security measurement. Though it is not a live example of surveillance, his proposal implies an ideal that is set to protect and at the same time set against certain groups of people in which surveillance becomes the body that polices them.

What is then the difference between surveillance and normal observation? From the above example, I argue that the difference between surveillance and normal observation is that when we surveil something, we consciously or subconsciously wanting and hoping for our object of surveillance to either go with or oppose an idea that we have in mind. When we keep looking at a person’s Facebook profile in order to find out if that person is up to something that we do not wish for or we do wish for, that is an example of surveillance. Else, that person is just being observed.

From there, we can conclude the role of surveillance and propaganda: propaganda tells you where to look, or what to look at; surveillance is on the other hand making sure that you are looking at where you should be looking at.

In the case for Snowden movie, do you think it is too early to say that it is a piece of US propaganda? If that’s the case, how would you think they will make sure that you are looking at their version of the story?


RD AMP