New Surveillance: Electronic Technologies and the Maximum Security Society

• NCJ Number: 139189
• Journal: Crime, Law and Social Change Volume: 18 Issue: 1-2 Dated: (September 1992) Pages: 159-175
• Author(s): D Lyon
• Date Published: 1992
• Length: 17 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: An earlier version of this paper was read at the British Sociological Association annual conference at the University of Surrey, April 1990.

Annotation

Based on the concepts discussed in Gary Marx's book, "Undercover: Police Surveillance in America," this article discusses some of the implications of new surveillance technology for privacy and freedom in American society.

Abstract

Marx's examination of the new surveillance technology prompts him to predict a coming "maximum security society" if present trends continue. Such unprecedented observation and control of citizens are due to the combination of centralized and decentralized forms of surveillance. Conventional social control, based in the State's monopoly on the legal means of violence, could be rendered redundant. Marx relates the concept of society becoming more prison- like to the Benthamite architectural plan for a Panopticon, in which inmates were to be controlled by fear of the constant gaze of guards who were out of sight. Under this view, privacy is only an illusion, as behaviors, movements, and decisions become known to those with an interest in ensuring that societal institutions are not threatened by individual behaviors. In assessing Marx's views and trend analysis, the author of this article concludes that surveillance power, augmented by computers, undoubtedly bears panoptic traits. The author argues, however, that the contexts in which surveillance occurs in society are not prison-like and should be distinguished from prisons. He concurs with Marx, however, that the threat of a maximum- security society emerging within the liberal democratic contexts that cherish privacy and liberty is a reality. Such intrusiveness is not just happening through State institutions but also through the private sector. Little headway has as yet been made in introducing legal measures that will restrict the surveillance power of private institutions. Considering the obstacles that have hindered the development and enforcement of data protection and privacy laws, commercial surveillance may well be difficult to regulate. 59 notes