Week #3 blog post
What are the ways that surveillance affects privileged and marginalized groups differently?
Not all forms of surveillance are created equal. Technology may offer privileged groups protection, convenience, or customization. Surveillance is often linked with exclusion, punishment, and control for underprivileged populations. In the words of Eubanks, technological assistance programs unfairly flag low-income applicants for failure or fraud, resulting in the creation of a "digital poorhouse." As noted by Daniels, online communities often mute or silence women of color while boosting the opinions of white users.
What are the actual consequences on Eubanks' opinion of being "red-flagged" by automated systems?
Not only can being flagged by a welfare system cause paperwork to be delayed, but it can also result in the loss of access to housing, food, and medical treatment. As stated by Eubanks, patients who were hospitalized and missed appointments were refused compensation, but their appeals were heard after they passed away. These damages are frequently fatal and tangible rather than hypothetical. As a result, surveillance turns into institutional violence.
In what ways do Daniels and Eubanks challenge the notion that digital technologies are essentially "neutral" or liberating?
DEarly cyberfeminist views has been questioned by Daniels over believing that online spaces offer liberation from embodied categories like gender and ethnicity. They note that many theories overlook the middle-class norms and the whiteness keep to dominate online culture. From Eubanks, welfare technologies that are meant to improve productivity often punish individuals who are less fortunate by automating bias. Both authors argue that because technology is embedded in the existing power structures, it can encourage injustice rather than to fight it.
How do the authors critique the impact of the technology sector on living and public policy?
Both authors say about how industry tech firms have begun to impact decisions that were previously the responsibility of governments. Eubanks discusses how companies profit from surveillance technologies used in public welfare, education, and housing systems, occasionally without little accountability or transparency. Daniels describes the way Big Tech shapes online culture and laws, frequently promoting hate speech and false information while doing little to protect those who are most in need. These concerns suggest that business-driven technology rarely results in fairness.
Daniels, J. (2009). Rethinking cyberfeminism(s): Race, gender, and embodiment. WSQ: Women's Studies Quarterly, Volume 37, Numbers 1 & 2, Spring/Summer 2009, pp. 101-124 (Article)Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality













