Panoptic Mediation: From Bentham's Panopticon to the P-Chip
Robert Craig
continued . . .
Foucault saw the exercise of power in space as axed on three variables of "territory, communication and speed" (Rabinow 244). The Panopticon satisfies these three criteria, as its territory is a closed one in which the guardian holds the key. The Panoptic Cinema is a closed territory in one sense, but in another it is not. The spectator is free to get up and leave anytime. However, what if one expands the territory? The Panoptic Cinema is really just a model in which surveillance has been added to mediation. Within the current technological context a Panoptic Mediation could fully master territory, communication and speed. The fundamental technology already exists for a panoptic network in which surveillance data on the citizenry could be collected in a way far more comprehensive than it already is. Certain commentators have warned that government and technology are moving in this direction (cf. Lyon). If we do not live in a panoptic society already, conceivably we will evolve into such a society at some point in the future. For the sake of argument, I will call this decisive moment a future date when the government begins dissemination of the P-Chip (the Panoptic Chip). This moment will usher in a technology that will result in pivotal changes in relations of space and power.
An ordinary chip that would fit into any personal computer, the P-Chip's main function would be to gather data on citizens for purposes of government surveillance. This data collection could take many forms. As there is ever more application of the personal computer to communications, finance, consumption and culture, and as the personal computer and mass media converge into one system that is rendered mobile, monitoring many activities from one source will be possible. In a world in which electronic currency replaces hard currency, the type of data that could be collected might include comprehensive financial information. This would include earnings, bank transactions and extensive details regarding consumption habits. They could combine this with a type of ideological profile. This profiling would be based on straightforward data analysis. It could be predicated on what Internet sites they visit, what books they purchase or borrow, what mass media sources they use, what cultural preferences they have and even what a person writes. Technological adjuncts to the P-Chip might include a visual or voice recognition system that would empirically situate the individual citizen in space and time.
Panoptic Mediation in the form of the P-Chip satisfies Foucault's criteria for the mastery of communication, speed and territory for the exercise of power in space. In the age of computer technology territory becomes limitless. The question becomes: How could government impose discipline in something as nebulous as cyberspace? The key would be to master key conduits of information and a universal personal identification code. That code would then be wedded to activities of government interest. There have already been rumblings in Canada about creating a universal identity card for reasons of government expedience. If governments were politically successful in imposing such a system, other steps could follow. Dictates of the technical rationalism of efficiency and control would make it desirable for them to consolidate existing information. They could co-opt or legislate corporations such as financial institutions and other companies into being partners in the information gathering process. Once they have established this data bank on citizens they would distribute the first P-Chips. They could achieve this through incentives such as a tax credit to those already owning personal computers and free or subsidized computers to those without. The cost of the technology dissemination would be justified through more efficient taxation, state profits from the sale of information to polling firms, automated census gathering, reduced election costs, more accurate ballot counting and so on. After a transitional period in which many would take advantage of the non-compulsory tax rebates and free technology, they would address the issue of the rest of the population. Escaping the P-Chip net would depend on what form opposition to the technology takes. The P-Chip would become compulsory after a transitional period or conceivably one could become exempt for a fee. A privacy guaranteeing P-Chip exemption tax which could go toward the cost of the surveillance of others. This would ultimately create two classes of citizen. One group subjected to the government's gaze and another whom are exempt from its power. No matter what the scenario, the techne of the P-Chip satisfies Foucault's three great variables of territory, communication and speed, and would effectively render government masters of space by way of cyberspace.
Nevertheless, just as imagining a panoptic mediated society is possible, one can also imagine multiple forms of reaction and disturbance that could take place. This could range from various civil disobedience tactics, outright refusal to use the technology, to various forms of sabotage and disruption such as P-Chip viruses for example. This possibility of resistance and rebellion begs the question Michelle Perrot asks Foucault in her interview in Power/Knowledge: Is there any point in the prisoners taking over the central tower? To which Foucault replies: "Oh yes, provided that isn't the final purpose of the operation. Do you think it would be much better to have the prisoners operating the Panoptic apparatus and sitting in the central tower, instead of the guards?" (P/K 158).
