Big data - or is it "Big Brother is watching you"?
George Orwell describes a bleak future in his novel "1984". The all-seeing and data-hungry totalitarian state - or "Big Brother" - has the population firmly in its grip. States and companies are still hungry for data today. Collecting data is easier than ever, as Big Data proves. Is big data the big brother of our time?
French philosopher Michel Foucault's panoptism, or panoptic principle, is a good way to explore this question. An explanation of Foucault's concept of power is necessary for a better understanding.
Power with Foucault
Foucault sees power as a process of exercising power and the effects of power. Power does not lie with a subject, but rather spans like a grid between people and social conditions. Who is the bearer of power is constantly being negotiated. Foucault calls power in modern societies disciplinary power. Its goal is the subjugation of individuals and the associated economic utilisation. Disciplinary power is an individualised power technique that involves monitoring, controlling behaviour and aptitude, increasing performance and improving an individual's abilities. Behaviour that deviates from the set norm is corrected. If the behaviour of individuals can be permanently controlled through hierarchical monitoring and standardising sanctions, Foucault speaks of disciplinary power.
The panoptism
Foucault's panopticism is based on Jeremy Bentham's panopticon. According to Bentham, the panopticon is the ideal prison. Due to its architectural design, it allows all inmates to be constantly monitored by one person. The prisoners are at the mercy of the surveillance, but they cannot see the person monitoring them. This gives inmates the impression that they are under constant surveillance, even if this only takes place sporadically. According to Foucault, the Panopticon is a machine that creates a power relationship. The machine automates and de-individualises power. The person looking on is interchangeable, as the power relationship is created by the machine. Individuals can be subjugated without the need for coercion or violence. The coercive means of power are adopted by the inmates, they become the principle of their own subjugation.
Source: wikipedia
The Panopticon can be detached from the prison in its mode of operation and transferred to other areas. Foucault transfers the mode of operation to the modern state and draws the picture of a society completely permeated by disciplinary mechanisms. Two things are prerequisites for the panoptic principle. Firstly, it requires a large number of individuals on whom certain patterns of behaviour are to be imposed.
The panoptic principle in Orwell's "1984"
The panoptic principle can easily be applied to Orwell's novel: In the totalitarian state, a certain behaviour is imposed on a large number of individuals. This is done through constant surveillance and, in the case of non-compliant behaviour, through repression. Individuals - who do not conform - are encouraged to conform. According to Foucault, the power here does not lie with the individual, but with the Party, with Big Brother. This is why the characters in the novel use the saying "Big Brother is watching you". Power is a constant process of negotiation. The party is confronted with external and internal enemies against whom it must legitimise or defend its power. It is not imperative that the party is in power. Parties could also be in power through the surveillance machinery. The surveillance apparatus establishes the balance of power. The aim of the totalitarian state in Orwell's dystopia is to get the population to serve Big Brother despite their miserable situation in life.
1984 is a prime example of the panoptic principle. "Big Brother is watching you" describes the situation in the Panopticon exactly.
The panoptic principle for big data
Does the same apply to Big Data as to Big Brother? The first prerequisite, that you are dealing with a large number of individuals, applies to big data. Today, constant accessibility and networking are virtually a prerequisite for social life (with the exception of a few marginalised regions or digital ascetics). In contrast to Orwell, big data doesn't just affect the population of one country; big data is global. No one can escape the collection of data.
What about the imposition of behavioural patterns? More or less everything we do online is recorded, analysed, shared or sold. However, big data does not restrict people's behaviour. Everyone is free to post what they want. The data that is recorded along the way only limits user behaviour to a limited extent. Illegal behaviour does not only take place in the anonymity of the dark web. Social media, for example, is also used for illegal activities. In contrast to Big Brother, with Big Data people (usually) disclose their lives voluntarily. They are not monitored against their will, but give their consent or, alternatively, can live in digital asceticism. In Orwell's classic novel, people are deprived of their freedom. Being trapped or forced is a central element of the Panopticon. This is not the case with big data.
Big data vs. big brother
Big data cannot (at least for the time being) be summarised using the panopticon principle. Big data could become a 1984-style surveillance machine. The systems are in place. Certain people or organisations are already trying to evade data collection. Activities on the dark web are one example. At present, people can only be controlled to a limited extent by collecting large amounts of data. This is probably based on two assumptions. Firstly, people assume that their activities will remain undetected in the immense flood of data. Secondly, a certain level of data protection exists today, at least in Switzerland and the EU. In addition, in our constitutional state, with its various instances, it is not possible to punish people arbitrarily. The possibility of adapting non-compliant behaviour is not given to the same extent as in "1984". We (fortunately) do not live in a totalitarian state.
Scenarios in which big data becomes big brother are conceivable outside of a totalitarian state. One example is social media, which standardises us and our actions. The science fiction series "Black Mirror" shows such a scenario in the episode Nosedive. Users rate each other via an app and a star rating system determines people's social status. If you want to be socially accepted, you have to behave accordingly. If behaviour is not accepted, there is the threat of a social crash. Conforming behaviour is rewarded with social advancement. The panoptic principle applies here: a certain behaviour is imposed on a large number of people. The power does not lie with an individual, but with the app.
Power is a constant process of negotiation. As long as we successfully resist being controlled by a surveillance apparatus, there is no threat of a "1984" scenario. For us to succeed, we need to be aware of the underlying structures and constantly scrutinise them.
From big data to big brother, Cyborgs to Sci-Fi. All aspects of technology and society fascinate me.