Surveillance After September 11, 2001 David Lyon Lee Jungrye English Language and Literature

‘Big event’ - Transformation device between past and future - Indispensable prism to see social structure and process Also, surveillance is ‘Products of Modernity’ The September ‘terrorist’ attacks

Aftermaths of September ‘terrorist’ attacks - Military retaliation in Afghanistan - Extensive anti-terrorist legislation - Especially enhance surveillance operations iris scanners, closed circuit television(CCVT), political control on everywhere

Is surveillance good or bad? Bad?! Good?! Fare treatment of suspects A question of human right

- The expanding range of already existing range of surveillance processes and practices that circumscribe and help to shape our social existence - The tendency to rely on technological enhancements to surveillance systems Aspects of social structure and process of surveillance after 911

- Passed legislation intended to tighten security to give police and intelligence services greater powers, and to permit faster political responses to ‘terrorist’ attacks But, some questioned How new and necessary are the measures? How long the measures will be in force? Legal changes after 911

- Giving high-tech companies the opportunity to launch their products But, what about the price? - Technologies may be not precise - Social division and exclusion within the countries - Seeking superior technologies appears as a primary goal But, original terrorism involve relatively aged technologies Technical changes Technical changes after 911

Not long ago surveillance is - Centralized power - Big Brother, Class weapon, Unseen observer - Panopticon is a key point - Centrally controlled and coordinated system Social changed after 911

- Panopticon : A type of prison building to allow an observer to observe all prisoners. A power to control public. A surveillance system constructed by information technology. - Big Brother : A fictional character in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty- Four. Everyone is under complete surveillance by the authorities, mainly by telescreens. Authorities or power with monopolized information control a society.

Recent studies about surveillance - As a looser, more malleable and flowing set of processes – “Surveillant Assemblage” - Our daily experiences - Mundane moments - Designed in to the flows of everyday existence Social changed after 911

In the surveillant assemblage Then, question on hierarchies and centralized power Abstract human bodies from their territorial settings Reassemble in different locations as virtual ‘data doubles’ Separate them into flows

- Centralized state informational power - Socio-technical developments - Growth of information and communication technologies in personal and population data processing - More networked modes of social organization with flexibility and departmental openness Social changed after 911

- Potential threat to privacy and individual freedom - Social sorting : Verifying identities and assessing risks based on large personal information databases. Powerful means of creating and reinforcing long-term social differences. Surveillance and privacy Is it intrusion or exclusion?

- Reproducing and rein forcing social, economic, and cultural division in informational societies - We are “Bearers of our own surveillance” - The degree of collaboration with surveillance depends on a range of circumstances and attitudes Contemporary surveillance

- Effective in some very limited circumstances - Only increasing internal surveillance of citizens - Terrors can be by other means (not with high-tech) Limitation of surveillance

Surveillance responses to September 11 - Helps to make visible the already existing vast range of surveillance practices and processes that touch everyday life in informational societies - Surveillance is more dispersed that centralized, more intrusive then exclusionary, that data-subjects are dupes of the system, that it is technically-driven, that it contributes more to prevention than to investigation after the fact. Conclusion

Where are democratic accountability and ethical examination in surveillance systems? Only to start with a willingness to listen to others, care for the other to relieve and prevent suffering Conclusion

Thank you ^^