19 March 2003

Book Review by Don Chalfant

Whitaker, Reg. The End of Privacy: How Total Surveillance Is Becoming a Reality. The New Press. New York. 1999.

        Dr. Reg Whitaker's The End of Privacy: How Total Surveillance Is Becoming a Reality explores the connection between modern surveillance and power including a survey of the potential for technology to impact on this relationship in the coming century. Written in 1999, he primarily investigates the changing nature and political implications of surveillance in the wake of late 20th century phenomenons of the World Wide Web, the relational database, and the miniature video camera. Using social and political theories and commentary including Jeremy Benthem's 18th century creation, the Panopticon, as well as literature that includes Hobbes Leviathan, Orwell's 1984, and the recent theory of Virtual Feudalism, Whitaker envisions what our future society will consist of based on what people are presently accepting and embracing. Written for readers without a strong background in technology but with an interest in the politics of technology, Whitaker's treatise, while intriguing, presents a pleasant, if somewhat naïve view of the this topic.
         After a quick historical review of the rise and establishment of dedicated surveillance agencies mostly of the 20th century (FBI, CIA, Gestapo, Stasi, KGB), Whitaker uses a chapter to investigate Jeremy Bentham's 18th century Panopticon to form a foundation on which to rests this book. The Panopticon, as originally conceived by Bentham, was envisioned as a prison in the round with an observation tower at its center that enjoys unimpeded views of all cells. With the prisoners exposed to the tower at all times, the real power in this arrangement exists in an inspector, located in the tower and utilizing mirrors and light, to conceal his presence (or absence) from the prisoners creating the "potential" of surveillance. The result is that prisoners will be forced to avoid incorrect behavior for fear of being caught. While Bentham predicted that the Panopticon would be used by the state to reform society, later writers led by Orwell would take on the surveillance state as perilous to society. Acknowledging the potential for these kinds of surveillance states to exist in the wake of technological advances made of the 20th century, Whitaker discounts the ideas of both Bentham and Orwell as unrealistic (Whitaker, 29). Why this is so, makes up the final chapters of this work.
        After wading through the soft middle of the book, in which the author recites various technologies culled from newspaper and magazine articles, personalities and stories from the world of surveillance, we finally get to the crux of his theory involving databases, willing participants and outsourcing. In databases, Whitaker finds that information collected and stored by both private and public entities is done for one of two broad purposes: "(1) risk evaluation and exclusion and (2) consumer identification and inclusion." (Whitaker, 125) Whitaker makes the point that privacy in the wake of the Internet is the equivalent of asking to be exiled and that because people desire to be included rather than excluded, they willingly give up their private information for increased purchasing power and acceptance into groups. In addition to inclusion, people crave security thereby readily accepting video surveillance of pubic and [some] private space when necessary. Although acknowledged abuses are cited, Whitaker pronounces the desire to be included and feel safe as far outweighing any reduction of privacy. This decision to freely participate, according to Whitaker, has resulted in a "participatory Panopticon," (Whitaker, 145-148) that levels the traditional vertical, state controlled one envisioned by Bentham and Orwell. He notes, "Earlier Panopticons always engendered resistance. Today's Panopticon is more subtle, more flexible, more participatory, more consensual." (Whitiker, 152) Coercion is not required and the benefits go to the participants. In addition, he adds that technology has allowed surveillance to become multidirectional instead of the Orwellian police state that functions only from top down. Because of the Internet, people can get their news from multiple sources and devices such as video cameras in the hand of everyday people reveal abuses of the powerful and permit rectification, ala Rodney King. This "two way transparency" will, according to the author, result in a shifting of power away from the state and to the people. Whitaker, however, stops well short of viewing this as a modern utopia where all are equal and power is not abused. He considers, if only briefly, that millions of people economically or politically disfranchised are part of the "excluded" population not by choice but by circumstance. His theory, while plausible, is acceptable only to a certain point. Unfortunately, he applies it as broadly as possible and does not give much credence to the possibility that there could be increased dissatisfaction and discontent from the general public over the capture and use of personal information. The author treats the increased collusion of business and government mostly as benign and discounts how unscrupulous information sharing by business or government and business could easily tip the balance of opinion to the dissatisfied.
        Lastly, Whitaker addresses the theory of "virtual feudalism." This theory posits that if the playing field is leveled and private corporations with their resplendent databases replace the power of state, what is to stop a type of economic feudalism from arising with business assuming the role traditionally assigned to the state and wielding power over the masses? In such a system, the corporation would maintain fractionalized security forces to enforce compliance of their rules creating corporate style "weak kings" to rule in the place of traditional political leaders. Whitaker views this as unlikely. Citing global regulation of business by the government along with the assumption that it would be undesirable to organizations since it would take away from the ability to do what they do best - make money. (Whitaker, 164-165) Quoting from Thomas Hobbes, Whitaker assumes that business realizes that it needs government regulation and therefore will not seek to replace government. While reasonable, the strong influence of business on government is not explored deeply enough. Finally, he notes that the disfranchised may not be entirely powerless. Through grassroots organization and connection to others with means, many times across political borders, the speechless minority can and has found a voice and protected its interests and Whitaker cites the Mexican Zapatistas, the Serbians and the James Bay Cree Indians in Canada as a few of his examples. (Whitaker, 166-172) The argument starts to break down when seriously considering the ability of the disfranchised and oppressed to effectively use and control technology to their advantage. Although Whitaker admits that there is a digital divide, he suggests that surveillance will not lead to oppression because people connected virtually can watch the watchers. While this may be true for the citizens of the richest countries, it is doubtful that everyone will enjoy these benefits.
        In a world where it is much easier to embrace a viewpoint that technology will result in a loss of control over our personal information, our identity and possibly our history, Reg Whitaker should be commended for his enthusiastic belief that recent trends surveillance are resulting in a power shift favorable to the individual. Even with examples of problems arising from surveillance well documented in this book, his argument is not without merit. He accurately represents how people freely give up their privacy for financial gain or a renewed sense of security and it is not unrealistic to believe that they will continue to do so. It is feasible that technology can empower and result in leveling of the vertical power structure. It is also believable that the checks and balances of the present system of government regulation of business will continue play a role in the future and that business will be less interested in governing and more interested in making money. Unfortunately, Whitaker does not adequately explore how business and government, acting together or alone, can abuse the power associated with technology (the Patriot Act and Enron come to mind). The question that remains to be answered after reading this book is if and how the public will be able to recognize and/or prevent an shifts of power toward governments or businesses enabled by current events and perpetuated by surveillance methods? This question becomes more critical in the wake of recent government actions in response to terrorist attacks. My final criticism of this book is that too much time was spent listing potential existing technologies and cultural events, some of which had little to do with surveillance or the argument he is proposing. While much of the book is fascinating, there are whole sections that could be easily skipped without much loss of effect. Overall, I found Reg Whitaker's case compelling and his idea for the future one that I only hope is correct but fear it is somewhat naively unrealistic.