G2: Life through a lens

Stuart Jeffries argues that these days, having a mobile phone without a camera is absurd. Technology is so advanced and so accessible that now everyone has a mobile phone with 3G capabilities.

Cellphones are better, as Jeffries states, because they are more portable than digital cameras and can be snuck into places that do not allow cameras. Not only that, but cellphones have Wi-Fi and wireless capabilities that allow them to connect to the Internet from just about anywhere.

“They’re more portable than most digital cameras and, more importantly, offer faster connection with the Internet, which is a key consideration in this age of virtual presenteeism.”

A point that Jeffries makes is that we are viewing the world more through the lens of a camera than with our own eyes. If we are to go to the beach for example, we’ll take hundreds of photos of our experience there and maybe spend a minute or two looking at the scenery. We are so wired and have the need to post our lives online, that we do not take the time and relish life as it is.

Yet, the photos and videos from cellphone cameras have huge advantage. This advantage comes for indie music artists who are performing in small gigs around clubs, cafes etc. Usually, people who like the music pull out their cellphone and snap photos – and although the video quality is horrible when recording, the fans do it for the music.

These photos and videos are then posted on Facebook and other social networking websites that garner further attention and get free publicity for artists.

Cellphone cameras are also allowing citizens to become reporters. In the G20 protests in London of 2009, Ian Tomlinson was beaten to death by police officers. Other protestors captured this moment and shared it online. During the G20 Toronto Summit, the same thing happened as protestors captured photo and video of police brutality on peaceful demonstrators.

Camera-phones have challenged society quite  a bit over the last seven to eight years. They are revolutionary, and a great surveilling and sousveilling technology; just about everyone has a camera-phone.

Surveillance and Sousveillance: Citizen journalism meets the Panopticon Pt.1

The Panopticon is an idea of constant surveillance invented by philosopher Jeremy Bentham. Now, assuming that you already know what the Panopticon is, I just want to say that it is ingenious. The Panopticon reminds me of the world as it is and as it is transforming with constant surveillance.

The theory of a Panopticon if you visualize it is a 360 degree prison with a watchtower smack in the center of it. In this watch tower, the authorities are constantly watching the prisoners in their cells – making the prisoners think that they are always being watched with every move they make.

The prisoners are made extremely visible; so much so that there is a light at the back of their prison cell to make them more visible to the authority in the watchtower. The idea is that if the prisoners are visible, they cannot hide and will always feel as if they are being watched at all times. This will eventually alter a prisoners behaviour towards following the rules.

However, the prisoners cannot be made aware that they are being watched, but rather know that they can be watched at any time, which in turn will alter their behaviours and attitudes. In the world today, there are cameras and motion detectors just about anywhere. They are always watching us and always altering our behaviour.

For example, if we ever thought to do a little shoplifting we would do it (if we were immoral that is) unless, there was someone watching us. Most convenience stores have security cameras that record everything that happens, and if someone was to shoplift their face would be caught in the recording and they would be reprimanded for their crime.

It really makes me think and say, “Wow, because of enhanced technology we are less inclined to do what we want in the face of consequences.”