Exhibitionism, Privacy
 
 

Thursday, June 1, 2000

Media Convergence... the New York Times Magazine had a nice article 2 weeks ago called 'The Electronic Fishbowl'(you have to login the Times site and then search.. quite simple and worth it). It made some nice points about celebrity, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and the quest for the 'real' or 'authentic' within the artificial confines of 'reality' tv shows and webcam sites. I have this theory that there's an age thing happening, where younger people who have had their every important moment videotaped are much more able to disregard being observed, and thus behave 'naturally' (although 'natural' itself has changed). I wonder if this is reflected in photographs as well -- have candid snaps become even more candid; are people able now to completely inhibit the reflex to pose?
When I first got my computer, I thought about using a webcam to create live performances, perhaps interactive. This idea is now quite dated, as every webcam broadcast is a performance, and to some degree interactive. I've noticed that my writing responds to a perceived 'audience', and even if you don't perform stripteases for your regular viewers, you notice what they come back for, you maybe try to be a bit more interesting than you'd be unobserved.

I wonder if voyeurism and authenticity will circle back on computer use itself. Sure, I could watch someone watch tv on their webcam, but I'd really love a peek at their harddrive and email. I'd like to watch a real-time scroll of their cybersex while I also watched their reactions.

Imagining the limits of a totally documented and observed life.. say every one of their personal papers were scanned in, every one of their possessions had a picture and description; a list of their caloric intake was posted... It's a bit like a lab animal -- standing in for 'everydog' but in no way getting to be a dog. But it also shows the limits of empirical knowledge. The more data there is, the more life seems transparant and all brought to the surface, the more elusive the inner gestalt.

This is reminding me of why I had to stop taking acting lessons. The exercises were improvisational, combining increasingly complex emotional conditions with 'normal' activities. In my quest for 'normal activities', I began spectating on my own life to such a degree, that nothing I did felt authentic anymore. I was always evaluating it for its success as a 'real' moment for an acting exercise. The webcam was in my head, and I needed some time off to see what I was actually feeling. Have the webcam broadcasters found the elusive holy grail of acting? To be completely spontaneous and unaffected while observed? Or has being observed become so ubiquitous that everyone is secretly now living at a deeper level of privacy while 'putting on a good show'?
 

Wednesday, May 17, 2000

The blogging/ journaling/ webcam explosion seems to be counterintuitively coinciding with the privacy/ paranoia hype. Yesterday I read of law enforcement types cautioning against webpages for new babies, which might lure babynappers. This apb news article details the lawsuit against an online information broker by the parents of a young woman killed by her stalker. In Texas, a student goes to meet his internet sweetie who is only the alter ego of a man who then shoots him.

The cases are quite different, as the first stalker had been obsessed with his quarry since junior high and knew who she was. The online component was in obtaining her social security number from a datrabase service, and thence her workplace, where he killed her. He also maintained a Geocities page on his obsession and plans.

The second case is one of those.. 'can any of us trust our judgements' ones, as this guy had an email relationship with a woman whose pic he had, his family and friends knew, and yet she didn't exist. I've read those 'online safety' things about meting in public and making safety calls, and yet I've met a lot of online friends and not followed guidelines because I trusted my judgement.

And yet gabgab has her cam and journal and bloggers (even women) give real names and personal info. In fact, you can hardly GIVE your cam images away these days; I don't know how the girlpaycams survive; maybe their loyal follwings. Is there some mechanism at work here that the more one reveals oneself the safer one is; whereas any form of 'hiding' is invitation to stalk? Or is it all the luck of the draw. You hit someone's special spot of insanity, by a phrase, an interest, an image.. and voila..

Yet, why does 'the internet' make everyone see lurky pedophiles and strange socially maladept losers in every interaction? Newspapers have published birth announcements, pictures and names of schoolchildren, names and ages and pictures and even locations of newsmakers... Artists want publicity. I get excited if my events are correctly listed and my name spelled right. But would I post performance times and place on my blog? Why does it seem more likely that a stranger will show up with nefarious intent than that a local person who picks up one of my fliers will simply look me up in the phone book and camp outside the door?
 

 Exhibitionism and Privacy Links

 
Why Webjournals Suck -- from a very successful journaler
Journalists' defense
Make Your Own Online Diary
LiveJournal Directory
Keep Journal, Get Fired-- Salon article
Index of Salon Articles on Topic
Campeople -- About.com's list of webcam people
Camgirls -- some are commercial
Webcam Article
Live from my Bedroom -- Salon article
Amateur Sexcamguide
Sleepstation-- webcam folk sleeping
Voyeur Links
Voyeur Sites
Artist Elke Krystufek -- interview with woman artist on controlling the voyeuristic gaze
Webcam Discussion (ghosts?) -- Slashdot thread
Salon's Table Talk on the Net -- must register to post but anyone can browse
Privacy Digest
Privacy Forum
Stalking Victims Sanctuary
Suite 101 Stalking page
ZDNet Scare Article
Definitions and Info -- on stalking
Net Detective (the other side)