We are living in an era some people refer to as the Information Age. It’s not just because hundreds of gigabytes of data can be transformed across the universe in a fraction of a second; it’s because information is power. The more you know, the more control you have. With every device and service we use becoming “smart,” we are now living in an endless ocean of sensors and tracking mechanisms that watch our every move, heartbeat, thought, emotion, question, and decision. Simultaneously, another endless ocean of complex and often biased algorithms is making sense of the data collected from us.
Shoshana Zuboff, American media theorist, calls this age “The Era of Surveillance Capitalism,” and she argues that we have become commodities of the Tech Giants, such as Meta, Google, and Amazon, as they watch over us, not only getting to know us but also shaping us into what they want.
And now, it’s not just the Tech Giants capitalising on knowing us; the governments want in on the smart game too! Enter smart cities: a teeming ecosystem of electronic devices, private and public, collecting data from our behaviours, bodies, buildings, public spaces, and everything but our dreams (hopefully). The narrative is that smart cities aim to increase efficiency and sustainability for better governance. But International Business Review is going to take a look at the flip side of the coin: Surveillance Totalitarianism.
The Data-Driven Shenanigan
We are constantly told that everything is getting digitalised and “smart” so they can serve us more efficiently and in a more personalised manner. To understand this uncanny statement better, let’s take a look at what kind of data is being collected from us, and to what extent.
“Modernity has become algorithms. Our reality is now intercepted by the exploration and exploitation of our psychic cues that rewrite history by rerouting consumption, elections, public opinion, and civil war.”
Roger Spitz, author and speaker
Besides the platoon of cameras and microphones, a typical smartphone has over 48 sensors, from gyroscopes to pedometers to barometers. As you enjoy scrolling down TikTok, which, by the way, keeps tabs on everything you do online, including what you type and how your typing speed changes within and beyond the app, your phone is monitoring you with its 48 sensors and software. Now, add in your smart fridge that knows how close you are to diabetes and your smart speaker that knows all your family secrets.
Now add in public devices and services, such as the innocent-looking traffic cameras and, in the Malaysian context, your MySejahtera app. I doubt these facts are news to many of our readers. However, the danger I would like to put under the spotlight is that these smart systems are not just self-operating; they are context-aware. They “know” us better than we know ourselves. This means that, based on what they “know” about us, they “react” to what we do, think, feel, and hope. Now that a whole city is being watched on both personal and communal levels, the limitless amount of information vests limitless power in the government, which is not particularly in line with democracy.
Not only is this far from democracy, it is what we would like to call surveillance totalitarianism. The behavioural and emotional patterns derived from smart devices can be used to shape our political thoughts just as well as they do our purchasing decisions or the social media trends we all want to be part of.
And this is the flip side of the nice “smart city” coin. Now that governments are also part of the algorithm game, we are moving from surveillance capitalism to surveillance totalitarianism, where the state can and does utilise algorithms to shape our socio-political existence. They are training us to be who they want us to be.
Demon! Thy Name is Algocracy
The notion of smart cities is part of a larger concept called algocracy, which is the idea of an automated governance in which algorithms, especially AI, blockchain, and IoT, are applied in regulations, law enforcement, and basically all aspects of everyday life. It is said that algocracy is the future of governance as it reduces the size of the government and minimises human intervention. But how will that help us, if the soulless governance method is to constantly monitor us and manipulate all aspects of our lives? This is already scary, even disregarding the fact that it is mathematically impossible to create unbiased algorithms.
“These algorithms are systems that favour a narrow set of epistemic elites over the broader public.”
David Estlund, political philosopher
The official narrative is that algorithms are supposed to learn our regulatory needs based on how we interact as individuals and as a society and adapt regulations to enhance the legal framework. But how can we trust them, considering how algorithms have affected us so far?
Algorithms have been used by policymakers to reshape us. For a less serious example, just look at how the algorithms got the entire planet dancing to PPPA (Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen) and Gangnam Style a few years back! Were they up to our aesthetic standards, or were they just the results of algorithms exploiting our desire to be part of something larger than ourselves? What and who decides what goes viral on the internet? Is it really us, or the algorithms running our social media feeds?
On a more serious note, consider is the Cambridge Analytica fiasco in the US 2016 presidential elections. The data analysis mogul and Facebook used their psychographic profiling algorithms and unconsented data collection practices to reach potential voters with tailored messages that appealed to their individual interests and fears. This is how our political viewpoints are being manipulated. Is this what they mean by “personalised” services? Sign me out then.
The official narrative is that algorithms are supposed to learn our regulatory needs based on how we interact as individuals and as a society and adapt regulations to enhance the legal framework. But how can we trust them, considering how algorithms have affected us so far?
The Big Brother or The World Controller?
Viewing the idea of smart cities through the lens of algocracy can reveal the potential threat that it poses to freedom, individuality, and, in general, humankind. The algorithms have been manipulating all our decisions for quite a long time now.
And this is the new path that totalitarianism has taken. No longer does the dictator have to impose his will through brutal force; he can get us to hallucinate having freedom of will. The main difference between oppressive totalitarianism and algocracy is that algocracy will not make us feel we are being forced. It instead micro-doses us with thoughts to run its agenda, as it exposes us to engineered content. This can eventually turn us into amorphous masses of cogs in the economic machine, devoid of individuality.
“It is no longer enough to automate information flows about us; the goal now is to automate us.”
Shoshana Zuboff, philosopher
And once again, Huxley is proven to be more accurate than Orwell! In Orwell’s 1984, there is an omnipresent Big Brother who polices our every thought and move, but Huxley’s Brave New World illustrates a gentle World Controller who has indoctrinated people into complacent worker/consumers that love whatever and whomever they are turned into. Today’s dictator is a World Controller and not a Big Brother, and that is why we do not even know we are living in dictatorships.
We are going deeper into the black hole of surveillance totalitarianism, and there is little to nothing we can do about it. However, we must be aware of where the world is going and keep an open mind to see the dark side of the comfortable, convenient, personalised, and accessible concept of smart living. As The Brave New World suggests, it takes a few non-conformists who think differently to at least shake the system a little. Let us be among that few.
