Accumulation of capital, exploitation on social media, Internet, social media, media consumer
New technologies have changed the way people communicate and see each other: we all became the objects of surveillance voluntarily and non-voluntarily. Social networks, closed-circuit television (CCTV) in supermarkets and in railway stations, marketing agencies all these are slowly turning our lives into constant reality shows. The new media and social networks transformed electronic technologies and social platforms from the sources of providing communication and bonding people together to the source that collects information about its user's and make profit from it. Thus, each advantage, as the possibility to achieve all the information with incredible speed, is always balanced with some disadvantage, such as general surveillance, especially if it concerns technology.
[...] Surveillance in the internet and other areas ensures that the people in government and in control can limit others and ensure that they have constructively reduced them considerably. The political state like the economic state relies heavily on the information that it collects from the media platforms and different areas in order to come up with ways to control people and their opinions. They ensure that the information that they get is used in structuring and formulating systems that are used in the control process by the people in power. [...]
[...] First, it is lateral or horizontal surveillance, where one person can observe activities and actions of other users (Farinosi 2011; Humphreys, 2011). When we are looking at our friends' profiles and browsing through their wallpapers we are performing a lateral surveillance. The second type is voluntary or “participatory” surveillance; where people are voluntary participate in the process of watching their behaviours because they think it is for their benefit (Humphreys p. 577). Users voluntarily post pictures and ‘check-in' in the places because they think it is for their own benefit. [...]
[...] Promoting consumption might not be seen as a big concern. However, Fuchs (2011) and Albrechtslud (2012) argue that surveillance can be harmful to individuals because aggregated data can create false assumptions about people based on their looks, religious views and ethnic background. Such assumption can charge users with terrorism and wrongly assuming innocent citizens of being criminals (Fuchs p. 293). The third downside of surveillance caused by lateral surveillance or when one user of social networks can observe activities and actions of other user. [...]
[...] 258-275). Toronto: Nelson Education. [...]
[...] 684). For example, a person who searched in Google for a particular product notices the ad of that product in all his/her social networks. We all notice that the advertisement in our browsers fit our recent requests: if we were looking for a new pair of sneakers soon enough we notice banners with sneakers ads. Such methods of marketing are intrusive, violating, and irritating. Moreover, when the information from users' personal profiles can be directly sent or sold to companies. [...]
using our reader.