Playing in the panopticon addresses the subjects of surveillance
and social media, and how these can affect children. Long before I started doing any scholarly research, these were issues I had been dealing with for
some years in raising my children. The choice to
focus on Facebook was drawn from very recent personal experience with my
22-year-old son who has consistently refused to ‘friend’ me on Facebook – until he
went overseas.
Two of my children (aged 18 & 20) agreed to be interviewed to give
their perspective on privacy on Facebook. Fortunately for me, I was provided with
soundtrack material by my son who agreed to let me use an audio file of him playing his guitar. Artwork is my own work. One of the biggest challenges was doing a piece to camera. I found it very difficult to speak naturally so kept this to a minimum. I should have also allowed more time for viewers to read text on screen.
Creating the video footage ironically raised surveillance issues about me
as a lone, middle-aged woman filming in children’s playgrounds raised a few eyebrows.
Holly Blackford’s article addresses just this situation as the only way she was
able to conduct her study of mothers watching their small children at
playgrounds was because she actually was one of them (Blackford 2004). I was careful to film only unoccupied public playgrounds.
This reinforced my argument that children today are not playing so much
in the outdoors but online.
One of the playgrounds I filmed had a maze with 1.2m walls which allowed children some degree of privacy, and hedged spaces from
which little children could peep out. This aligned with playgrounds in fast
food outlets where children are relatively hidden from parental eyes (Blackford
2004). The concept of the panopticon in relation to playground behaviour (of
adults and children) is fascinating and, as my interviews my two children in
the video show, is directly relatable to young people’s online experiences.
Baruh & Soysal provided background discussion of social network sites and the levels of disclosure and self
expression they permit, along with a look at privacy concerns.
Marx & Steeves (2010) provided insight into the privacy
implications of online engagement for children and the way information and
communication technologies are now such a part of everyday life that humans are
affected from cradle (even before birth: think of fuzzy
ultrasound images) to the grave and beyond, as we
grapple with the ramifications of digital legacy.
From RFID* enabled baby's pyjamas,
to baby monitors, to CCTVs in childcare centres and schools, to nanny cams,
biometric ID and fingerprinting for library borrowing, GPS locators, to online
monitoring software, to testing your teenager’s underwear for the presence of
semen, Marx & Steeves note that ‘increasingly restrictive controls are part of a broader
societal trend towards a “politics of fear”’ (2010, p214).
More than one scholarly source focused on the concepts of risk and trust
(in relation to children’s online experience) and suggested that constant surveillance
is denying children opportunities to learn about these fundamental aspects of
human interaction (Rooney 2010, Verberne 2014, Media Smarts, Johnson 2012). The
development of children’s autonomy is an important part of parenting and the
research suggests that if the balance of trust and risk that parents and
children are constantly negotiating is out of kilter then children’s ability to
develop autonomy is hindered (Rooney 2010, p350-351).
Foucault’s concept of panopticonic surveillance, as it applies to
parenting, was discussed by Blackford (2004) and Henderson, Harman and Houser
(2010) mostly with the focus on how fear governs modern parenting practices (Henderson, Harman and Houser 2010, p233).
Consistent with my small survey, the Kanter, Afifi and
Robbins 2012 article states that children ‘friending’ a parent on Facebook ‘did
NOT result in perceptions of greater privacy invasions’, conversely it was
‘associated with decreased conflict in the parent-child relationship’ and my
personal experience endorses this.
*Radio Frequency Identification
References:
Baruh, L and Soysal, L 2010, ‘Public
intimacy and the new face (book) of surveillance: the role of social media in
shaping contemporary dataveillance’, in Dumova, T and Fiordo, R (eds.), Handbook
of Research on Social Interaction Technologies and Collaboration Software:
Concepts and Trends, Information Science Reference, Hershey, pp. 392-403
Blackford, H 2004, ‘Playground
Panopticism: Ring-Around-the-Children, Pocketful of Women’, Childhood, 2004 Vol. 11, pp 227-249
http://chd.sagepub.com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/content/11/2/227.full.pdf+html?
retrieved 29 August 2014
Fowler, G A 2013, ‘Life and Death online:
who controls a digital legacy?’, The Wall Street Journal, Eastern
Edition, 5 January 2013, A1, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324677204578188220364231346 retrieved 11 September 2014
Henderson, A, Harman, S & Houser J
2010, ‘A New State of Surveillance? Applying Michel Foucault to Modern
Motherhood’, Surveillance & Society,
Vol. 7, No 3/4, pp231-247
http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/surveillance-and-society/article/viewFile/4153/4156
retrieved 29 August 2014
Johnson, M 2012, ‘Resilient resourceful
and under surveillance,’ Our Schools /
Our Selves, Fall 2012, Vol. 22 Issue 1, p151-153
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=14b780f8-8700-48cd-b9e3-bf5eadc08cee%40sessionmgr4002&vid=35&hid=4205
retrieved 29 August 2014
Kanter, M, Afifi, T and Robbins S 2012,
‘The Impact of Parents "Friending" Their Young Adult Child on Facebook on
Perceptions of Parental Privacy Invasions’, Journal
of Communication, Vol. 62 Issue 5, October 2012, pp.900-917
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy-m.deakin.edu.au/eds/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=f83f8cf6-4c5a-4f00-9cbe-123ff3f65aa5%40sessionmgr198&hid=115&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=ufh&AN=82180042
retrieved 4 September 2014
Marx, G and Steeves, V 2010, ‘From the
Beginning: Children as Subjects and Agents of Surveillance,’ Surveillance & Society, July 2010,
Issue 3/4, pp.192-39
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/eds/detail/detail?vid=12&sid=7dbba6fd-243c-4aac-8b76-771989b0ec09%40sessionmgr4004&hid=4111&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=sih&AN=53696178
retrieved 30 August 2014
Media Smarts (n.d.), ‘Types of
Surveillance’, http://mediasmarts.ca/privacy/types-surveillance,
retrieved 29 August 2014
Rooney, T 2010, ‘Trusting children: How
do surveillance technologies alter a child's experience of trust, risk and
responsibility?’, Surveillance & Society, July 2010, Vol 7, Issue
3/4, p344-355.
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=1480fc8e-663d-4f29-bd3c-b0bebc851aaf%40sessionmgr113&hid=104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=sih&AN=53696188
retrieved 30 August 2014
Verberne, M 2014, ‘The Sad State of Play
in Australian Schools’, The Age
newspaper, 1 September 2014
http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/the-sad-state-of-play-in-australian-schools-20140827-1084kb.html