Abstract
This article notes ways that power is central to questions of personal information access and use. New surveillance technologies are likely to sustain and even strengthen traditional forms of social stratification. Yet power is rarely a zero-sum game. A number of factors that limit unleashing the full potential of privacy-invading technology, even in contexts of inequality, are considered: legal and moral normative constraints on power holders; the logistical and economic limits on total monitoring; the interpretive, contextual, and indeterminate nature of many human situations; system complexity and interconnectedness; human inventiveness; and the vulnerability of those engaged in surveillance to be compromised or responded to in kind.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brinn, D. (1999). The Transparent Society. New York: Perseus.
Coser, R. (1961). “Insulation from Observability and Types of Social Conformity,” in American Sociological Review 26: 28–39.
Gandy, O. (1993). The Panoptic Sort: A Political Economy of Personal Information. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Lace, S. (2005). The Glass Consumer: Public Surveillance in a Surveillance Society. Bristol: Polity Press.
Lyon, D. (2003). Surveillance as Social Sorting. London: Routledge.
Mann, S., Nolan, J. and Wellman, B. (2003). “Sousveillance: Inventing and Using Wearable Computing Devices for Data Collection in Surveillance Environments,” in Surveillance and Society 1: 331–355.
McCahill, M. (2002). The Surveillance Web. Devon, U.K.: Wilan.
Regan, P. (1995). Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marx, G.T. Privacy and Social Stratification. Know Techn Pol 20, 91–95 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-007-9009-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-007-9009-5