Chapter 1 Exercises: What Is Surveillance?

How to Use These Exercises

These exercises are organized according to Bloom's Taxonomy of cognitive levels, from foundational recall through higher-order evaluation and synthesis. Work through them in order; later exercises assume familiarity with earlier material. Estimated completion time for all exercises: 2.5–3.5 hours. Individual exercises are labeled with their estimated time.

Level 1: Recall and Comprehension

Exercise 1.1 — Definitional Precision (15 minutes)

Write out David Lyon's definition of surveillance from memory, then compare your version to the original. For each of the five key terms in the definition — focused, systematic, routine, personal details, purposes of influence/management/protection/direction — write one sentence explaining why that specific word matters. What would the definition lose if each term were removed or replaced?

Exercise 1.2 — Taxonomy Matching (10 minutes)

For each of the following surveillance examples, identify which of the five categories it best fits (state, commercial, domestic, environmental, self). Some examples may plausibly fit more than one category; if so, explain your primary classification and the secondary one.

1. A fitness app tracking daily step counts and heart rate
2. A city government's network of traffic cameras
3. A teenager's parent checking their text messages
4. A streaming platform building a viewing profile for targeted content recommendations
5. Wildlife researchers using acoustic monitoring to track bird populations
6. An employer requiring workers to log all tasks in a time-tracking app
7. A person journaling about their eating habits for personal accountability
8. A Neighborhood Watch Facebook group posting descriptions and photos of strangers
9. A hospital tracking patient outcomes for quality improvement
10. Border Patrol using satellite imagery to detect unauthorized crossings

Exercise 1.3 — Concept Definitions (20 minutes)

Without consulting the chapter, write definitions for each of the following terms in your own words. Then revisit the chapter and assess your accuracy.

• Dataveillance
• Synopticism
• Visibility asymmetry
• Function creep
• Social sorting
• Chilling effect
• Panopticism (as introduced — full treatment in Chapter 2)

Level 2: Application

Exercise 1.4 — Your Own Tuesday (45 minutes)

Conduct a surveillance audit of your own life. For one full day (or reconstruct the most recent full day you can remember in detail), log every encounter with a surveillance system. For each encounter, note:

1. The type of surveillance (use the five-category taxonomy)
2. The agent of surveillance (who is watching?)
3. The stated purpose (why, officially, is this happening?)
4. What data is collected
5. Who else might have access to that data
6. Whether you would characterize your consent as meaningful

Produce a written log of at least ten surveillance encounters. At the end, write a paragraph reflecting on what surprised you — either encounters you had not noticed before, or encounters you noticed differently after reading the chapter.

Exercise 1.5 — Applying the Definition (20 minutes)

For each scenario below, determine whether it meets Lyon's definition of surveillance. If it does, explain which elements of the definition are satisfied. If it doesn't, explain what's missing.

1. A friend glancing at your phone screen while you're texting
2. A building security guard who can see the lobby on a monitor but rarely pays attention to it
3. A doctor recording detailed notes about a patient's condition during every appointment
4. A journalist photographing a crowd at a public political rally
5. An algorithm that scans all emails on a platform for spam keywords but deletes non-spam immediately without human review
6. A company conducting an annual salary review using each employee's sales records
7. A neighbor who watches from their window when unusual cars park on the street
8. A teacher who reads students' in-class writing but does not save or discuss it outside class

Exercise 1.6 — Marcus and the Smart Speaker (25 minutes)

Return to the scene in the chapter: Jordan and Marcus disagree about the smart speaker. Marcus says, "I don't care. I'm not doing anything wrong."

Write two responses to Marcus, each 150–200 words:

Response A: Use the Power Objection (Section 1.7.1) to explain why Marcus's position is insufficient.

Response B: Use the Equity Objection (Section 1.7.3) to explain why Marcus's position is insufficient.

Then write a 100-word paragraph in which you play devil's advocate — articulate the strongest version of Marcus's position that takes the structural critique seriously.

Level 3: Analysis

Exercise 1.7 — Analyzing Function Creep (30 minutes)

The chapter provides the example of the Social Security number as a case of function creep. Research (or reason through) one of the following additional examples of function creep and write a 300–400 word analysis:

1. GPS in smartphones (original stated purpose: navigation assistance)
2. School attendance records (original stated purpose: administrative tracking)
3. Hotel key card systems (original stated purpose: security access)
4. Credit scores (original stated purpose: credit risk assessment)

Your analysis should address: (a) the original stated purpose; (b) the subsequent purposes the technology came to serve; (c) whether users/subjects were informed of the expansion; (d) who benefited from each expansion; and (e) what, if any, safeguards were in place to prevent or limit creep.

Exercise 1.8 — Analyzing Visibility Asymmetry (25 minutes)

Consider a college's learning management system (LMS) such as Canvas or Blackboard, which your institution likely uses.

Construct a visibility map with two columns:

After completing the map, write a 200-word analysis of the visibility asymmetry you have identified. Address: Is this asymmetry appropriate? Who defined what the institution should be able to see? Did students consent meaningfully? What would need to change for this to be a more symmetrical arrangement?

Exercise 1.9 — Dissecting Synopticism (20 minutes)

Thomas Mathiesen's concept of synopticism describes the many watching the few.

Identify two contemporary examples where many watch the few and two examples where the few watch the many. For each example, analyze: 1. What power does the "watcher" have? 2. What power does the "watched" have? 3. Does the direction of watching (many→few or few→many) determine who has more power in this case, or are there cases where the "watched" retains more power? Why?

Level 4: Synthesis

Exercise 1.10 — Design a Surveillance Audit Framework (45 minutes)

Using the conceptual tools from this chapter, design a practical framework that a person could use to audit the surveillance systems in their home, school, and workplace. Your framework should:

• Include specific questions to ask
• Apply the five-category taxonomy
• Assess visibility asymmetry for each system
• Evaluate whether consent was meaningful
• Identify potential function creep risks
• Be usable by a non-expert

Present your framework as a structured document (checklist, table, or flowchart described in writing) and test it against two specific surveillance systems from your own life.

Exercise 1.11 — Synopticism and Social Media (35 minutes)

Write a 500-word analysis that examines whether social media platforms create genuine synopticism (the many watching the few) or whether they ultimately serve panoptic structures (the few watching the many through data extracted from the many's watching activities).

Your analysis should: - Draw on both Mathiesen's synopticism and Lyon's definition of surveillance - Consider at least two specific platforms (e.g., TikTok, Twitter/X, Instagram, YouTube) - Distinguish between the user experience of watching (which feels synoptic) and the platform's structural operation (which may be panoptic) - Reach a conclusion — but acknowledge the strongest counterargument to it

Level 5: Evaluation

Exercise 1.12 — Evaluating the "Nothing to Hide" Argument (40 minutes)

The chapter presents the "nothing to hide" argument and several critiques of it. Now it's your turn to evaluate the debate rigorously.

Write a 600-word evaluative essay that: 1. Presents the strongest possible version of the "nothing to hide" argument 2. Presents the three most powerful counter-arguments from this chapter 3. Evaluates which side is more persuasive and why 4. Identifies the conditions under which the "nothing to hide" argument might be more or less valid 5. Considers how your own social position (race, class, gender, citizenship status, etc.) might affect your evaluation

Exercise 1.13 — Evaluating Lyon's Definition (30 minutes)

David Lyon's definition has been enormously influential in surveillance studies, but no definition is perfect.

Write a 400-word critical evaluation that: 1. Identifies two ways the definition succeeds — what it captures well 2. Identifies two limitations — cases where the definition is ambiguous, too narrow, or too broad 3. Proposes a modification or addition to the definition that addresses one of the limitations you identified 4. Justifies your modification with specific examples

Discussion Questions (for classroom or study group use)

1. Is it possible to refuse surveillance in modern life without significant social costs? What would refusal look like, and who can afford it?

2. The chapter argues that "routine" surveillance is the hardest to see and contest. What social mechanisms normalize surveillance? Can you identify an example where something that was once recognized as surveillance has become so normal it is no longer discussed?

3. How does the concept of "consent as fiction" apply to the terms-of-service agreements you click through? Is there a meaningful difference between consent that is freely given and consent that is extracted as a condition of social participation?

4. Jordan's two friends — Marcus ("nothing to hide") and Yara (activist, counter-surveillance perspective) — represent two poles of a common debate. Where do you position yourself on that spectrum, and why? What would change your position?

5. The chapter identifies surveillance as a mechanism of power. But it also notes that surveillance can serve protective purposes (baby monitors, medical monitoring, security systems). How do you reconcile these two aspects? Does the protective use of surveillance justify its power asymmetries?

Chapter 1 | Part 1: Foundations | The Architecture of Surveillance