How Privacy Became the Product

In reading the article “High Tech is Watching You” by John Laider, Soshana Zuboff discusses “surveillance capitalism” which she defines as the collection of individuals personal experiences to that of which is compiled and transcribed into behavioral data which is in turn used to marginalize and profit off whether it be product, service, or for other use. Within the article we have John Laider interview Soshana Zuboff in an Q&A interview styled format which I personally find a great structure to grab the attention of readers and emphasize Zuboff’s central points. For example, Laider is shown asking valuable questions in regard to Zuboff’s arguments that supports her claims such as asking questions along the lines of Zuboff’s claims like “what are some of the ways we might not realize that we are losing our autonomy to Facebook, Google, and others?” As well as later asking Zuboff what it is that should be done regarding this now knowing of this. I find this structure beneficial to strengthening and reinforcing Zuboff’s position and credibility. Zuboff states that large everyday companies such as Google and Facebook knew straightaway that the use of surveillance capitalism was something that should be “undetectable.” In order to do this, they reframed “every product as “smart” and every service described as “personalized.” Professor Zuboff uses ethos within her terminology and references such as “in my 2002 book” which demonstrates her background in studying the “challenges to capitalism” and technology and gives her a sense of credibility for her research done regarding the matter. Zuboff also references “I chronicle 16” to explain how these large corporations were able to essentially slide with implementing surveillance capitalism which extensively demonstrates her further research on how they truly achieved doing so. Zuboff goes onto using pathos as well through the use of terms such as “free will,” “outrage” and “exploit” by explaining how the companies use of our information to their own advantage by ultimately subliminally shifting us towards what is most profitable for them. By doing this Zuboff is able to gain traction towards an angered and motivated audience that would be inspired to take action as she suggests. This also generates a sense of anger, frustration, and confusion as we begin to question how much personal information, we may unknowingly be sharing and how it can, may, or will be used against us or perhaps shaping the way in which we think and act. Personally, I’ve found that often times when after having specific conversations about certain products or individuals in my own home I find myself seeing those exact topics of conversation on social media from TikTok to YouTube ads. Frankly I can state that I find this alarming as invokes a sense of vulnerability as it is scary to see. Zuboff also uses Logos when referring to the events of 9/11 by demonstrating how the government found this as a means to promote security and implementing more surveillance methods in opposition to privacy considering the concerns around the security breach. She also used ProPublic as an example for demonstrating how the company was using consumer information and “secretly” sending it over to health insurers without consent and how it is concerning that personal information is being used and not protected for the benefit of no one but the company itself. Personally, I find this concerning as personal information being shared without permission or in any way knowledge of myself for the use of ulterior motives is highly questionable. In reading this argument I can personally say I’ve also come across various companies who have used personal information as I’ve received emails regarding class action lawsuits against companies like Facebook, Alexa, and Siri to which I have filed as they have been known for listening in on conversations and sharing that information for the purpose of advertising and influencing our decisions. As Zuboff mentions it truly is a threat to our democracy as the use of personal information to sway, guide, or influence our decisions and choices in any manner is unjust. In her interview she reframes the issue as not only a advertising or promotional issue but the principle of it is something that should not be taken lightly as it is a matter of threatening our personal rights. Considering companies are using our information without consent or even our knowledge, it is truly a matter of invasion of privacy which is in no sense democratic and truly makes the reader question it. Zuboff also explains how the use of surveillance capitalism is dominant in almost every industry and has essentially become normalized as companies have found a way to control our perspective on the matter by reframing it as a benefit to us and advancing our lifestyles. In response to this Zuboff states “we say, “no.” We say, this is not OK.” Zuboff also suggests implementing and advocating for laws in regard to this, as well as ensuring the spread of public awareness and understanding of what is truly going on. Zuboff states that once individuals are aware of what it is that is happening is when they are truly able to reject and combat the issue at hand. Overall, I found this article to be informational and helpful in understanding “surveillance capitalism” and how it affects us and our autonomy as well as how it is we as a society should combat it together.

Read the Full Article