Online Surveillance in a Swedish Context: Between acceptance and resistance
References
- Ball, K. S., & Murakami Wood, D. (2013). Editorial: Political economies of surveillance. Surveillance and Society, 11(1/2), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v11i1/2.4933
- Ball, K. (2017). All consuming surveillance: Surveillance as marketplace icon. Consumption Markets & Culture, 20(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2016.1163942
- Barnard-Wills, D. (2012). Surveillance and identity: Discourse, subjectivity and the state. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
- Barth, S., & de Jong, M. D. T. (2017). The privacy paradox – Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior – A systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013
- Bauer, M. (1997). Resistance to new technology: Nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Boerman, S. C., Kruikemeier, S., & Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J. (2018). Exploring motivations for online privacy protection behavior: Insights from panel data. Communication Research, 1–25. Online first. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0093650218800915
- Brosnan, M. J. (2002). Technophobia: The psychological impact of information technology. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203436707
- Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, second life, and beyond: From production to produsage. New York: Peter Lang.
- Budak, J., Rajh, E., & Anić, I.-D. (2015). Privacy concern in western Balkan countries: Developing a typology of citizens. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 17(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2014.990278
- Cadwalladr, C., & Graham-Harrison, E. (2018, March 17). Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election
- Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.1.104
- Delhey, J., & Newton, K. (2005). Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: Global pattern or Nordic exceptionalism? European Sociological Review, 21(4), 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jci022
- Denemark, D. (2012). Trust, efficacy and opposition to anti-terrorism police power: Australia in comparative perspective. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2011.643163
- Doyle, A. (2011). Revisiting the synopticon: Reconsidering Mathiesen's ‘The Viewer Society’ in the age of web 2.0. Theoretical Criminology, 15(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480610396645
- Facebook. (2020, August 21). Data policy. Retrieved December 7, 2020, from https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy
- Flyghed, J. (1992). Rättsstat i kris: Spioneri och sabotage i Sverige under andra världskriget [The constitutional state in danger: Spies and sabotage in Sweden during World War II]. Stockholm: Federativ.
- Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
- Friedewald, M., Rung, S., van Lieshout, M., Ooms, M., & Ypma, J. (2015). Report on statistical analysis of the PRISMS survey [Deliverable 10.1, PRISMS Project]. Karlsruhe, Germany: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI. http://publica.fraunhofer.de/documents/N-367427.html
- Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M. (2018). Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & Security, 77, 226–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002
- Google Privacy & Terms. (2020, March 31). Google terms of service. https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en-US
- Gunnartz, K. (2006). Välkommen till övervakningssamhället [Welcome to the surveillance society]. Stockholm: Bokförlaget DN.
- Haggerty, K. D., & Ericson, R. V. (2000). The surveillant assemblage. The British Journal of Sociology, 51(4), 605–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071310020015280
- Internetstiftelsen [The Swedish Internet Foundation]. (2019). Svenskarna och internet 2019 [The Swedes and the Internet 2019]. https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/rapporter/svenskarna-och-internet-2019/
- Kerr, I. R., Barrigar, J., Burkell, J., & Black, K. (2006). Soft surveillance: Hard consent. Personally Yours, 6, 1–14. https://ssrn.com/abstract=915407
- Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling R. (2017). Self-branding, ‘micro-celebrity’ and the rise of social media influencers. Celebrity Studies, 8(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.2016.1218292
- Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
- Laufer, R. S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: A multidimensional developmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22–42. https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01880.x
- Lee, A., & Cook, P. S. (2014). The conditions of exposure and immediacy: Internet surveillance and Generation Y. Journal of Sociology, 51(3), 674–688. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1440783314522870
- Lyon, D. (2001). Surveillance society: Monitoring everyday life. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press
- Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Lyon, D. (2017). Surveillance culture: Engagement, exposure, and ethics in digital modernity, International Journal of Communication, 11, 824–842. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/5527
- Lyon, D. (2018). The culture of surveillance: Watching as a way of life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Marx, G. (2006). Soft surveillance: The growth of mandatory volunteerism in collecting personal information – “Hey buddy can you spare a DNA?” In T. Monahan (Ed.), Surveillance & security: Technological politics and power in everyday life (pp. 37–56). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203957257
- Mathiesen, T. (1997). The viewer society: Michel Foucault's ‘panopticon’ revisited. Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362480697001002003
- McCahill, M., & Finn, R. L. (2014). Surveillance, capital and resistance: Theorizing the surveillance subject. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203069974
- Milne, G. R., Labrecque, L. I., & Cromer, C. (2009). Toward an understanding of the online consumer's risky behavior and protection practices. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 43(3), 449–473. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2009.01148.x
- Nagenborg, M. (2014). Surveillance and persuasion. Ethics and Information Technology, 16(1), 43–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-014-9339-4
- Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
- Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen eighty-four: A novel. London: Secker & Warburg.
- Patil, S., Patruni, B., Lu, H., Dunkerley, F., Fox, J., Potoglou, D., & Robinson, N. (2014). Public perception of security and privacy: Results of the comprehensive analysis of PACT's pan-European survey [PACT Deliverable 4.2]. Brussels: RAND Europe. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR704.html
- Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. The Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803
- Smith, G. J. (2018). Data doxa: The affective consequences of data practices. Big Data & Society, 5(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2053951717751551
- Strauss, S. (2015). SurPRISE synthesis report: Citizen summits on privacy, security and surveillance. Vienna: Institut für Technikfolgen – Abschaätzung / Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. http://surprise-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SurPRISE-D6.10-Synthesis-report.pdf
- Svenonius, O., & Björklund F. (2018). Explaining attitudes to secret surveillance in post-communist societies. East European Politics, 34(2), 123–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2018.1454314
- Swedish Higher Education Authority. (2018). Higher education in Sweden 2018 status report [Report 2018:10]. https://english.uka.se/download/18.7f89790216483fb85588e86/1534509947612/Report-2018-06-26-higher-education-in-Sweden-2018.pdf
- Svenskarna och internet [Swedes and the Internet]. (n.d.). Summary in English: Meaningful time online and the pros and cons of digital society. https://svenskarnaochinternet.se/rapporter/svenskarna-och-internet-2019/the-swedes-and-the-internet-2019-summary/
- Sønderskov, K. M., & Dinesen. P. T. (2016). Trusting the state, trusting each other? The effect of institutional trust on social trust. Political Behavior, 38(1), 179–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9322-8
- Trepte, S., Scharkow, M., & Dienlin, T. (2020). The privacy calculus contextualized: The influence of affordances. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.022
- Watson, H., & Wright, D. (Eds.). (2013). Report on existing surveys [Deliverable 7.1, PRISMS Project]. Karlsruhe, Germany: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI. http://publica.fraunhofer.de/eprints/urn_nbn_de_0011-n-5022795.pdf
- Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: Public Affairs.
Language: English
Page range: 179 - 193
Published on: Dec 18, 2020
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
Related subjects:
© 2020 Coppélie Cocq, Stefan Gelfgren, Lars Samuelsson, Jesper Enbom, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.