The technology and the artefacts of social control – Monitoring criminal and anti-social behaviour through and in media cultures
The technology and the artefacts of social control – Monitoring criminal and anti-social behaviour through and in media cultures
复制标题
社会控制的技术和人工制品——通过媒体文化监控犯罪和反社会行为
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Richard Huggins
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Connor;Richard Huggins
当代形式的监视所提供的监测大量信息的潜力引起了一些问题，包括“谁或什么”应被区分为监视的对象，以及如何在不侵犯自认为无辜者的感情的情况下使监视的扩大和加强合法化。有人认为，“查夫”，一个下层阶级话语的最新变种之一，出现在英国，提供了一个例子，说明如何可以利用一个意识形态的数字，以证明引进纪律监督技术，并成为拟议的识别目标，这种设备。下面一个大纲的术语下层阶级和指导的语言和图像的“chav”，本章中提出的论点是开发和代表通过一系列的媒体代表和应对反社会行为的检查。利用媒体揭露和代表那些被视为应对反社会和犯罪行为负责的人，既是对新的监视技术的应用，也是对旧形式的集体和社区惩罚、控制和监管的重新发明。这些例子的共同之处在于传达了一个框架，即将“chavs”等同于“反社会”行为和监视作为任何社区安全战略的核心组成部分。因此，与其说存在“chav”，或任何所谓的威胁“其他”需要监视，有人认为，这是监督，需要存在的“chav”。换句话说，如果“chav”不存在，那么，至少对于监视的倡导者来说，他们必须被发明出来。
The potential afforded by contemporary forms of surveillance to monitor vast amounts of information raises a number of problems, including ‘who or what’ should be distinguished as the subject of surveillance and how is the extension and intensification of surveillance to be legitimated without encroaching on the sensibilities of those who deem themselves innocent. It is argued that the ‘chav’, one of the latest variants of an underclass discourse to emerge in the United Kingdom, provides an example of how an ideological figure can be employed both to justify the introduction of disciplinary surveillance technologies and become the proposed identification of targets for such apparatus. Following an outline of the term underclass and a guide to the language and imagery of the ‘chav’, the argument presented in this chapter is developed and represented through an examination of a range of media representing and responding to anti-social behaviour. The utilisation of media to render visible and represent those seen as responsible for anti-social and criminal behaviour is both an application of new technologies of surveillance and a re-invention of older forms of collective and communal punishment, control and regulation. What these examples share is the communication of a frame that equates ‘chavs’ with ‘anti-social’ behaviour and surveillance as a central component of any strategy for community safety. Thus, rather than the existence of ‘chavs’, or any allegedly threatening ‘other’ requiring surveillance, it is argued that it is surveillance that requires the existence of the ‘chav’. Put another way, if ‘chavs’ did not exist, then, for the exponents of surveillance at least, they would have to be invented.