Limits on surveillance: Frictions, fragilities and failures in the operation of camera surveillance

Pages9-19
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/14779960480000239
Date29 February 2004
Published date29 February 2004
AuthorLynsey Dubbeld
Subject MatterInformation & knowledge management
Limits on Surveillance: Frictions, Fragilities and Failures
in the Operation of Camera Surveillance
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The use of camera surveillance has often
been portrayed either as the ‘silver bullet’ in
crime control, or as the ultimate example of
Big Brother-like surveillance. Of course it’s
neither. Although Closed-Circuit
TeleVision (CCTV) does figure as one of
the technologies involved in many contem-
porary crime prevention strategies, and in
the creation and development of what has
been called the ‘surveillance society’, its
actual role in these utopian/dystopian per-
spectives is in fact far from unequivocal.
Theoretically, CCTV augments surveil-
lance capacities, by enabling distanced,
intense, detailed observations of individu-
als, and by allowing the recording, registra-
tion, storage and use of personal data. In
practice, however, limits are also placed on
the operation of surveillance technologies
and as a result the effects of surveillance
are often unstable, unpredictable, and
equivocal. This paper explores some of the
limits on the surveillance capacities of
CCTV brought about by the operators’
work practices and by the technical
processes implied in the operation of cam-
era systems.
1.2 Theoretical background
In the past few years, a number of sociolog-
Info, Comm & Ethics in Society (2004) 2: 9–19
©2004 Troubador Publishing Ltd.
KEYWORDS
Surveillance
Closed-circuit
television
Surveillance
capacpties
Lynsey Dubbeld
Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
CCOOVVEERRAAGGEE
Public video surveillance tends to be discussed in either utopian or dystopian terms: proponents maintain
that camera surveillance is the perfect tool in the fight against crime, while critics argue that the use of
security cameras is central to the development of a panoptic, Orwellian surveillance society. This paper
provides an alternative, more nuanced view. On the basis of an empirical case study, the paper explores
how camera surveillance applications do not simply augment surveillance capacities, but rather have to
deal with considerable uncertainties in the process of producing a continuous, effective, all-seeing gaze.
The case study shows that the actions of human operators and the operation of camera technologies each
place limits on the execution of electronic visual surveillance, instead of efficiently enhancing the powers
of the surveilling gaze. The analysis suggests that the effects of video surveillance are rather ambivalent
and uncertain, thus showing that public camera systems are not simply beneficial or malign.
ABSTRACT

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT