Quantcast

Call for Papers: PopMatters Celebrates The Jam in Massive Special Section

Surveillance and the Social Layer

Wednesday, Mar 2, 2011
As always with social media, the goal is to get you to invest enough of yourself in someone else's proprietary network so that you become trapped by it. Then the company can hold that part of yourself hostage if you object to the way they whore it out.

I didn’t listen to the interview with the founder of startup company Hashable described in this Silicon Alley Insider post, but a section of the recap caught my attention. It details the thinking process behind a serial entrepreneur’s approach to the “social layer”—the industry jargon for how immaterial labor can be captured in digital form through internet connectivity:


They thought about the gestures that business people and white collared professionals were conducting day after day that were not making it to the Internet.


They recognized that the acts of people meeting with and introducing other people were not making it in a structured way to the Internet. When you have breakfast/lunch/coffee/drinks with friends, that data would be valuable to users if a service would gather it and make it shareable. So, they decided it might be cool to build an application that was fun to use, social, and drives people to create that information and send it to Hashable. While the interface looks a lot like Foursquare, instead of saying “I’m at Starbucks”, you would say “I’m having coffee with Mark”. Hashable is saving very important information for its users and creating a multipurpose address book of the people its users interact with.



  
Notice how this exchange is structured. What is regarded as in inherently intolerable is that any sort of social behavior could escape digital capture, could slip through the net of commercial surveillance. Innovation has become a matter of perfecting that surveillance, allowing all our behavior to be mediated and translated into marketing data to fuel the engines of consumerism—perfect the management of demand.


The contemporary tech startup’s critical (“cool”) task is to somehow entice you to share your private information in a standardized digital form in as close to real time as possible by making it “fun” and “social” and more or less compulsive, if not compulsory. It should find ways to “drive” users to report on themselves without the burden becoming intolerable.


“Fun” and “social” in this sort of context tend to be undefinable; their meanings are presented as obvious common sense, and thus they can only be elaborated through tautology: what is fun is social, and what is social is fun. Behind that screen, gamification tactics are deployed to encourage users to regard the progressive surrender of privacy as individuating accomplishment, a kind of glory that can measured only insofar as we let ourselves be tracked. The surveillance apparatus disguises itself as a giant scoreboard.


The point of all this data collection is, of course, privatized profit.


To the question of how Hashable plans to monetize, Mike answered honestly that “we’re not sure”. Hashable is creating unique data sets. The relationships that users have with people, the strength of those relationships – Hashable may be able to monetize access to that information. Users gain points every time they use Hashable. A certain number of points could be required for certain access, so Hashable might offer an option to pay for points or charge for access if you don’t have points.


It’s interesting that though users supply the content, it is Hashable that “creates” the data sets—a subtle rhetorical move that allows social-media companies to justify the property rights they claim with regard the information they collect. And here we also see that the original purpose of the service—to “sae very important information for users” has shifted to “monetizing access to that information” by selling it to outside parties. It’s also interesting to see how using the service is convertible to currency from the company’s perspective—it extracts more value from users using the service than those users get from being ostensibly served by it. One would have to pay to not use it, presumably after one had invested just enough labor into building a personal network within Hashable’s proprietary clutches to not just give it up altogether.


As always with social media, the goal is to get you to invest enough of yourself in someone else’s proprietary network so that you become trapped by it. Then the company can hold that part of yourself hostage if you object to the way they whore it out.

Comments
Now on PopMatters
The Walkmen: Heaven (Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
King Tuff: King Tuff (Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Lake Street Dive: Fun Machine EP (Capsule Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Theresa Andersson: Street Parade (Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
AlunaGeorge: You Know You Like It EP (Capsule Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Mean Jeans: Mean Jeans on Mars (Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Yarn: Almost Home (Capsule Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Lee Bannon: Fantastic Plastic (Reviews) [Tue, 2:00 am]
Devil May Cry: HD Collection (Reviews) [Tue, 1:00 am]
'Battleship': What Did You Expect? (Short Ends and Leader) [Mon, 2:00 pm]
East Meets Least: 'Thirteen Women' (Short Ends and Leader) [Fri, 4:00 pm]
'Man to Man' is an Early Talkie that's Not Stagey at All (Short Ends and Leader) [Fri, 4:00 pm]
  1. The Top 10 Overplayed Songs You Hate by Artists You Love (Sound Affects)
  2. Tea with 'Sherlock': Investigating the Investigators (Features)
  3. Sunk? This 'Battleship' Stunk! (Short Ends and Leader)
  4. Tenacious D: Rize of the Fenix (Reviews)
  5. Top Ten Lost Midwest Punk Singles (Sound Affects)
  6. 10 Pieces of Cinematic Art That Require Revisiting (Short Ends and Leader)
  7. Like 'Doom', In Heels (Moving Pixels)
  8. Punk Rock's Pet Sounds: An Interview with Bomb the Music Industry! (Features)
  9. She's a Rainbow: A Tribute to Donna Summer (Features)
  10. Counterbalance No. 82: U2's 'Achtung Baby' (Sound Affects)
  11. 'Albatross': A Not-So-Weighty Coming-of-Age Meets Mid-Life-Crisis Film (Reviews)
  12. Counterbalance No. 83: The Stooges' 'Fun House' (Sound Affects)
  13. We Will Avenge Them Or… Be Avenged?: The Individual in the US Experience (Features)
  14. Go Goth!: Ranking the Burton/Depp Collaborations (Short Ends and Leader)
  15. The Queen and Her Crayons: An Interview With Donna Summer (Features)
  16. The Best Canadian Records of the Year? The Fun Agony of Voting for the Polaris Prize Long List (Sound Affects)
  17. Flash Points: Mommy's Breast, Marriage Equality and Why Chipotle Is King (Features)
  18. Something’s Wrong with the Black Widow! (Graphic Novelties)
  19. Sergio Leone: Something to Do with Death (Columns)
  20. Killer Mike: R.A.P. Music (Reviews)
  21. Sherlock Holmes, Dirk Gently and the Case of the Eccentric Detective (Columns)
  22. Early Summer 2012 New Music Playlist (Mixed Media)
  23. In Support of Supports (Moving Pixels)
  24. In Defense Of... Rock Radio: A Force in Popular Culture (Columns)
  25. Flash Points: Chicks, Sluts and Facebook (Features)
  26. The Cult: Choice of Weapon (Reviews)
  27. Willie Nelson: Heroes (Reviews)
  28. Garbage: Not Your Kind of People (Reviews)
  29. 'People's Pornography': The Mundanities of Pornography and Surveillance Culture (Reviews)
  30. Like a Jack London Story on Steroids: 'The Grey' (Reviews)
Categories
PM Picks
Music Archive
Announcements
Ratings

10 - The Best of the Best

9 - Very Nearly Perfect

8 - Excellent

7 - Damn Good

6 - Good

5 - Average

4 - Unexceptional

3 - Weak

2 - Seriously Flawed

1 - Terrible

© 1999-2012 PopMatters.com. All rights reserved.
PopMatters.com™ and PopMatters™ are trademarks
of PopMatters Media, Inc.

PopMatters is wholly independently owned and operated.
PopMatters is a member of BUZZMEDIA Music, MOG and Guardian Select.