Surveillance¶

Basis

The page builds on the source cards. Foucault 2007 and Stahl & Kaempf 2019 have no PDF and are not included.

Definitions in the sources¶

Source	Definition/use	Page	U/T
Foucault 2008	The Panopticon: power that is visible but unverifiable, making the observed discipline themselves	6–7	U
Foucault 2008	Surveillance of the plague town rests on ‘permanent registration’ of every inhabitant	2	U
Bauman et al. 2014	Mass surveillance is, by definition, arbitrary	132	U
Bauman et al. 2014	‘Liquid surveillance’, slippery and hard to grasp; unease about metadata is ‘Kafkaesque’	141	U
Bauman et al. 2014	Competing terms: bulk access and mass surveillance are used to legitimise or delegitimise	140	U
Gros et al. 2017	Mass surveillance as an issue in the European Parliament's hearings; ‘descaling’ narrows the debate	73, 79	U
Solove 2011	Orwellian problems (surveillance, inhibition, social control) are distinguished from Kafkaesque ones (information processing in bureaucracies)	25–26	U
Ruckenstein & Granroth 2020	Dataveillance: surveillance through social media and online services; ‘the intimacy of surveillance’	13–14	U
Hankey et al. 2018	Surveillance capitalism (attributed to Zuboff): platforms engineered to monitor users continuously	7	U
Alegre 2021	Cites Zuboff's surveillance capitalism and the market for ‘human futures’	4	U
Fourcade 2017	Cites Zuboff's ‘surveillance assets’: records that become assets	674–675	U
Steiger 2019	Mass surveillance has a chilling effect and lacks democratic control	83–84	U
Marres 2025	Surveillance as a societal risk of tech trials; CCTV cameras about every 20 metres in Greenwich	2, 12–13	U

Who surveils? The state and intelligence in Bauman et al., Gros et al., Solove and Steiger [U]. Companies in Hankey et al., Fourcade, Alegre and Ruckenstein & Granroth [U]. Bauman et al. show that the boundary between the two is blurred (p. 123) [U].
Visible or invisible? Foucault's power is visible but unverifiable (p. 6) [U]. Bauman et al. describe liquid surveillance that is hard to grasp (p. 141) [U], and Ruckenstein & Granroth a naturalised infrastructure (p. 14) [U].
The Big Brother image: Bauman et al. write that fears about Big Brother are largely irrelevant (p. 125) [U]. Solove writes that the Orwell metaphor captures only some privacy problems (pp. 25–26) [U].

Surveillance and information processing: Solove distinguishes the two (pp. 25–26) [U]. The state's management of registers can be a privacy problem without being surveillance in a narrow sense [T].
Surveillance and control: NOU 2022:11 uses both ‘control society’ (kontrollsamfunnet) and ‘surveillance society’ (overvåkningssamfunnet) (p. 30) [U].
Surveillance and tracking: Ruckenstein & Granroth and Fourcade describe commercial tracking (Ruckenstein & Granroth 2020, p. 13; Fourcade 2017, p. 674) [U].

NOU 2022:11:
- The right to privacy sets limits on the authorities' control and surveillance (p. 30) [U].
- Extensive surveillance can produce a panopticon effect and chilling effects (pp. 32–33) [U].
- The summary describes how many seemingly less intrusive legal provisions in the justice sector can together create ‘surveillance pressure’ (overvåkningstrykk) (p. 14) [U].
FFI report: the word is not used about the researchers' own collection on the primary card [T].

Is the thesis about surveillance, or about the state's use of data more broadly?
Do you use Foucault (visibility and discipline) or Solove (Orwell and Kafka) as your distinction?
Do the documents describe the state's registers as surveillance, or in other words?