Malaysian Social Media Users and Empowerment through Social Surveillance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26623/themessenger.v14i3.2788Keywords:
Surveillance, Perceived Surveillance, Malaysian Social Media Users, Empowerment, Facebook MessengerAbstract
Introduction: Surveillance is traditionally associated with negative authoritative monitoring to control society and often viewed as invasion of state authority that disregarded citizens’ right to privacy. However, ongoing technological advancements in networked, mobile and digital technologies facilitate social transformations in surveillance. Users of digital technology can also engage in surveillance. This research explored Malaysian social media users’ awareness and perception of social surveillance and investigated the manner of which social surveillance was utilised.
Methods: Drawing upon a series of in-depth interviews conducted via Facebook messenger with a selected group of Malaysian social media users, this paper explored how Malaysians understand social media as a tool of surveillance and empowerment. Malaysians, being some of the most active users on social media platforms in the world were selected for this study.
Findings: Findings suggested that surveillance did not merely subject individuals to scrutiny but also offered opportunities for empowerment because of that scrutiny. Empowerment through social surveillance brought benefits to individual users and also encourages an expansion of surveillance activities. However, most do not perceive such conduct as surveillance because the interviewees viewed institutional surveillance as actual surveillance while social surveillance as a concept was foreign to them.
Originality: Surveillance studies is still an emerging field in Southeast Asia and is rarely taught as an independent subject in Malaysia. This perspective of this research considered the use of surveillance as a tool for empowerment and this is not an area that is studied much in this part of the world.Downloads
References
Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance. First Monday, Vol. 13(3). https://doi.org/http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2142/1949.5
Andrejevic, M. (2004). The work of watching one another: Lateral surveillance, risk, and governance. Surveillance & Society, 2(4). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v2i4.3359
Bischoff, P. (2019). Data privacy laws & government surveillance by country: Which countries best protect their citizens? Comparitech.Com. https://doi.org/https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/surveillance-states/
Cheung, A. S. Y. (2014). Revisiting privacy and dignity: Online shaming in the global e-village. Laws, 3(2), 301–326. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/laws3020301
Duffy, B. E., & Chan, N. K. (2019). “You never really know who’s looking”: Imagined surveillance across social media platforms. New Media & Society, 21(1), 119–138. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818791318
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Penguin.
Fuchs, C. (2011). New media, web 2.0 and surveillance. Sociology Compass, 5(2), 134–147. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2010.00354.x
Hernández-Santaolalla, V., & Hermida, A. (2020). Malicious social surveillance and negative implications in romantic relationships among undergraduates. Surveillance & Society, 18 (3), 387-399. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v18i3.13149
Ivana, G.-I. (2013). A Postmodern Panopticon: Lateral Surveillance on Facebook. Global Media Journal: Mediterranean Edition, 8(1). https://doi.org/https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/183174/
Johnson, D. G., & Regan, P. M. (2014). Transparency and surveillance as sociotechnical accountability: A house of mirrors. Routledge.
Joinson, A. (2008). ‘Looking at’, ‘Looking up’ or ‘Keeping up with’ people? Motives and Uses of Facebook. Proceedings of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1027–1036. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753613
Kravchenko, S. A., & Karpova, D. N. (2020). The Rationalization of the Surveillance: From the’Society of Normalization’to the Digital Society and Beyond. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 16(3), 197–206. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2020.16-3.16
Laidlaw, E. B. (2017). Online shaming and the right to privacy. Laws, 6(1), 3. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/laws6010003
Lewis, R. M. (2018). Social media, peer surveillance, spiritual formation, and mission: Practising Christian faith in a surveilled public space. Surveillance and Society, 16(4), 517–532. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v16i4.7650
Lyon, D. (2003). Surveillance technology and surveillance society. Modernity and Technology, 161, 184.
Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Polity.
Mahmood, A., Hashim, H. N. M., Zain, F. M., Suhaimi, N. S., & Yahya, N. A. (2018). A survey on the culture of online shaming: A Malaysian experience. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(10), 1125–1134. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i10/5270
Mann, S., & Ferenbok, J. (2013). New Media and the power politics of sousveillance in a surveillance-dominated world. Surveillance & Society, 11(1/2), 18–34. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v11i1/2.4456
Manokha, I. (2018). Surveillance, panopticism, and self-discipline in the digital age. Surveillance and Society, 16(2). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v16i2.8346
Marwick, A. (2012). The public domain: Surveillance in everyday life. Surveillance & Society, 9(4), 378–393. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v9i4.4342
McCahill, M., & Finn, R. (2010). The social impact of surveillance in three UK schools: Angels, devils and teen mums. Surveillance & Society, 7(3/4), 273–289. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v7i3/4.4156
Monahan, T. (2010). Surveillance as governance: social inequality and the pursuit of democratic surveillance. In Surveillance and democracy (Issue 2010, pp. 91–110). Routledge New York, NY.
Netceteraeterahitailova, E. P. (2012). Facebook as a surveillance tool: From the perspective of the user. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 10(2), 683–691. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v10i2.404
Opennet.net. (2012). Malaysian. Opennet.Net. https://doi.org/https://opennet.net/research/profiles/malaysia#footnote820f8nnp2
Pearce, K. E., & Vitak, J. (2016). Performing honor online: The affordances of social media for surveillance and impression management in an honor culture. New Media & Society, 18(11), 2595–2612. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815600279
Perlroth, N. (2013). Researchers Find 25 Countries Using Surveillance Software. Nytimes.Com. https://doi.org/https://archive.nytimes.com/bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/13/researchers-find-25-countries-using-surveillance-software/
Reeves, J. (2012). If you see something, say something: Lateral surveillance and the uses of responsibility. Surveillance & Society, 10(3/4), 235–248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v10i3/4.4209
Romele, A., Gallino, F., Emmenegger, C., & Gorgone, D. (2017). Panopticism is not enough: Social media as technologies of voluntary servitude. Surveillance and Society. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v15i2.6021
Schneider, F., & Goto-Jones, C. (2014). Revisiting the emancipatory potential of digital media in Asia–Introduction to the inaugural issue of Asiascape: Digital Asia. Asiascape: Digital Asia, 1(1–2), 3–13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1163/22142312-12340002
Sheldon, P., & Bryant, K. (2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 89–97. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.059
Shilton, K. (2010). Participatory sensing: Building empowering surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 8(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v8i2.3482
Skoric, M. M., Wong, K. H., Chua, J. P. E., Yeo, P. J., & Liew, M. A. (2010). Online shaming in the Asian context: Community empowerment or civic vigilantism? Surveillance & Society, 8(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v8i2.3485
Statista.com. (2021). Facebook usage penetration in Malaysia from 2017 to 2020 and a forecast up 2025. Statista.Com. https://doi.org/https://www.statista.com/statistics/490527/share-of-the-malaysia-internet-users-using-facebook/
Sullivan, J. (2014). Uncovering the data panopticon: The urgent need for critical scholarship in an era of corporate and government surveillance. The Political Economy of Communication, 1(2). https://doi.org/https://www.polecom.org/index.php/polecom/article/view/23/192
Talvitie-Lamberg, K. (2018). Video Streaming and Internalized Surveillance. Surveillance and Society, 16(2). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v16i2.6407
Taylor, K., & Silver, L. (2019). Smartphone ownership is growing rapidly around the world, but not always equally. https://doi.org/https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/02/05/smartphone-ownership-is-growing-rapidly-around-the-world-but-not-always-equally/
Tokunaga, R. S. (2011). Social networking site or social surveillance site? Understanding the use of interpersonal electronic surveillance in romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 705–713. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.014
Trottier, D. (2017). Digital vigilantism as weaponisation of visibility. Philosophy & Technology, 30, 55–72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0216-4
Verduyn, P., Ybarra, O., Résibois, M., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2017). Do social network sites enhance or undermine subjective well‐being? A critical review. Social Issues and Policy Review, 11(1), 274–302. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12033
Vitis, L. (2023). Surveillant assemblage: Overt, covert, movement and social surveillance in domestic and family violence in Singapore. Women’s Studies International Forum, 96, 102664. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2022.102664
Wilson, D., & Serisier, T. (2010). Video activism and the ambiguities of counter-surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 8(2), 166–180. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v8i2.3484
Zlatolas, L. N., Welzer, T., Heričko, M., & Hölbl, M. (2015). Privacy antecedents for SNS self-disclosure: The case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 158–167. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.012
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright Transfer Form
The copyright to this article is transferred to the Department of Communication, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication, Universitas Semarang if and when the article is accepted for publication. The undersigned hereby transfers any and all rights in and to the paper including without limitation all copyrights to the Department of Communication, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication, Universitas Semarang. The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required. The undersigned represents that he/she has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment.
We declare that:
1. This paper has not been published in the same form elsewhere.
2. It will not be submitted anywhere else for publication prior to acceptance/rejection by this Journal.
3. A copyright permission is obtained for materials published elsewhere and which require this permission for reproduction.
Furthermore, I/We hereby transfer the unlimited rights of publication of the above mentioned paper in whole to the Department of Communication, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication, Universitas Semarang. The copyright transfer not covers the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute the article, including reprints, translations, photographic reproductions, microform, electronic form (offline, online) or any other reproductions of similar nature.
The corresponding author signs for and accepts responsibility for releasing this material on behalf of any and all co-authors. This agreement is to be signed by at least one of the authors who have obtained the assent of the co-author(s) where applicable. After submission of this agreement signed by the corresponding author, changes of authorship or in the order of the authors listed will not be accepted.
Retained Rights/Terms and Conditions
1. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in the Work.
2. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the work or derivative works for the authors personal use or for company use, provided that the source and the Department of Communication, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication, Universitas Semarang copyright notice are indicated, the copies are not used in any way that implies the Department of Communication, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication, Universitas Semarang endorsement of a product or service of any employer, and the copies themselves are not offered for sale.
3. Although authors are permitted to re-use all or portions of the Work in other works, this does not include granting third-party requests for reprinting, republishing, or other types of re-use.
