Surveillance Capitalism: The Commodification of Personal Data
Surveillance Capitalism – Power to control personal data
Unlike earlier economic models that focused on labour or natural resources, surveillance capitalism treats people as both consumers and sources of data. Frank Pasquale, in The Black Box Society (2015), notes that every online action—searches, clicks, and purchases—creates valuable information. This data is then sold to advertisers, political campaigns, and even governments. As a result, big technology companies gain immense power, raising serious concerns about privacy, democracy, and individual freedom.
This essay examines how surveillance capitalism works, its effects on privacy and personal choice, and how it connects to government surveillance. It also looks at the difficulties in regulating it. Additionally, the case of India—a rapidly growing digital economy—will be explored to understand how surveillance capitalism operates in different parts of the world.
The Mechanics of Surveillance Capitalism
Surveillance capitalism operates through three main processes:
- Data Collection – Technology companies provide free services such as search engines, social media, and email to attract users. However, these platforms are not truly free; in return, they collect vast amounts of personal data. This includes browsing history, location data, purchase records, and even biometric information from wearables like smartwatches (Zuboff, 2019).
- Behavioural Prediction – Once collected, data is analysed by machine learning algorithms to detect patterns and predict future behaviour. For example, if a person frequently searches for running shoes, they will start seeing advertisements for sportswear and fitness products (Pasquale, 2015).
- Influence and Manipulation – The ultimate goal of surveillance capitalism is not just predicting but also shaping behaviour. Recommendation algorithms on platforms like YouTube and Netflix influence what people watch, while targeted ads manipulate purchasing decisions. Even political campaigns use these techniques to sway voters, as seen in the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The Loss of Privacy and Autonomy
One of the most alarming aspects of surveillance capitalism is the erosion of personal privacy. Many users are unaware of the extent to which their data is collected and used. Even simple online actions, like liking a post or searching for a product, contribute to detailed personal profiles used to influence behaviour.
Loss of Privacy: Modern digital platforms track users across websites and even offline. For instance, Facebook’s “Like” button exists on millions of external sites, allowing the company to monitor browsing behaviour outside its own platform (Zuboff, 2019). Location-tracking apps collect data about users’ movements, often without clear consent. Michel Foucault, in Discipline and Punish (1977), compares this to a panopticon—a prison where people are always watched. It means individuals are constantly monitored, affecting their behaviour and choices.
Erosion of Autonomy: Surveillance capitalism does not rely on force but instead subtly nudges users toward specific decisions. For example, when online shopping platforms recommend products based on past searches, they encourage purchases users might not have made otherwise. Similarly, as Siva Vaidhyanathan notes in Antisocial Media: How Facebook Disconnects Us and Undermines Democracy (2018), social media algorithms prioritise emotionally charged content to increase engagement, sometimes spreading misinformation in the process. Over time, this manipulation reduces the ability of individuals to make independent choices, as algorithms shape their preferences in ways that benefit corporations rather than themselves.
Surveillance Capitalism and State Power
Surveillance capitalism is not limited to corporations; governments increasingly rely on private tech firms for intelligence gathering, law enforcement, and even political control.
The Corporate-State Nexus: Governments often rely on private companies for surveillance since they already collect vast amounts of data. As Glenn Greenwald explains in No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Surveillance State (2014), Edward Snowden’s revelations exposed the NSA’s PRISM programme, where the US government partnered with Google, Apple, and Facebook to monitor communications.
China’s Social Credit System: One of the most extreme examples of surveillance capitalism’s intersection with state power is China’s social credit system. The government assigns citizens scores based on their behaviour—such as paying bills on time or posting political opinions online—using data from tech companies like Alibaba. As Rogier Creemers explains in “China’s Social Credit System: An Evolving Practice of Control” (Chinese Journal of Communication, 2018), low scores can limit travel, jobs, and financial services.
While Western democracies lack an explicit social credit system, tech-driven surveillance still exists. As Simone Browne asserts in Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness (2015), it is used for predictive policing, voter targeting, and immigration control. Browne highlights how such surveillance disproportionately affects marginalised communities, reinforcing biases in law enforcement and political influence, often limiting opportunities and freedoms for vulnerable groups.
Challenges in Regulating Surveillance Capitalism
Regulating surveillance capitalism remains a significant challenge despite increasing public awareness. Corporate lobbying, political influence, and legal loopholes allow technology firms to continue harvesting personal data with minimal restrictions. While governments attempt to introduce privacy protections, the immense power of tech giants ensures that regulatory efforts often fall short, failing to address the core issue—the commodification of human experience.
Privacy laws, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), aim to give users control over their data but do little to disrupt the business model of surveillance capitalism. Companies exploit dark patterns—misleading design tactics—that manipulate users into consenting to data collection without fully understanding the consequences. These deceptive strategies ensure a constant flow of behavioural data, allowing corporations to refine predictive algorithms while technically remaining within legal frameworks.
Corporate influence over politics further weakens regulatory efforts. Technology companies spend vast sums on lobbying to prevent stricter privacy laws, with Google, Facebook, and Amazon collectively investing over $97 million in US legislation influence in 2020 alone (OpenSecrets, 2021). Additionally, a revolving door exists between government and the tech industry, as former officials take lucrative positions in Silicon Valley, ensuring that policies remain favourable to corporate interests. This deep entanglement between political power and corporate wealth makes meaningful reform increasingly difficult.
Case Study: Surveillance Capitalism in India
India, with its rapidly growing internet user base, exemplifies the expansion of surveillance capitalism. The country’s digital transformation has enabled vast data collection, often with minimal regulation. As technology penetrates daily life, concerns over privacy, corporate control, and government surveillance continue to grow.
The Role of Big Tech: India’s digital economy is dominated by global tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon, alongside domestic firms such as Jio. These companies collect and monetise enormous amounts of user data, ranging from browsing habits to financial transactions. There is little oversight over how this data is stored, shared, or used, raising serious concerns about privacy and consumer rights.
Government Surveillance: Government initiatives have further intensified surveillance. The Aadhaar biometric identification system, initially designed for welfare distribution, has become a de facto digital identity for banking, telecommunications, and other services. While it enhances efficiency, some scholars warn that it creates a mass surveillance infrastructure, as individuals must provide fingerprints and iris scans for routine activities, increasing risks of data misuse.
Political Manipulation: Political parties have also exploited digital platforms for electoral influence. Similar to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Indian politicians use data analytics and social media to micro-target voters. Misinformation campaigns on platforms like WhatsApp and Facebook shape public opinion, deepening social and political divides.
Conclusion
Surveillance capitalism is a radical transformation of the economic and social order, turning human experience into a raw material for data-driven profit. By collecting vast amounts of personal information, companies like Google and Facebook not only predict but also manipulate behaviour, often without user consent.
This system is reinforced by the collaboration between corporations and governments, as seen in state surveillance programmes and politically motivated data usage. Attempts to regulate surveillance capitalism are often undermined by corporate lobbying and legal loopholes, making meaningful change difficult.
Subscribe to our Youtube Channel for more Valuable Content – TheStudyias
Download the App to Subscribe to our Courses – Thestudyias
The Source’s Authority and Ownership of the Article is Claimed By THE STUDY IAS BY MANIKANT SINGH
