Open peer review. Vol.16 N.2

Cyborgs in the Panopticon

 

Reviewer A:

Please, comment on the most relevant aspects (positive points and areas to improve) of the reviewed article.

The idea of the Panopticon should be elaborated on to make it also reflect the bottom-up and peer-to-peer aspects of mobile social media. While the surveillance aspect remains quite true (and is the most important part of it), and the use of Zuboff to stress this is great, social media can also foster sousveillance and horizontal communication. It is a key part of what Steve Mann calls Veillance Society. It does tip heavily toward surveillance so don’t cut anything about that.
* A line early on about how it often (usually even, and most importantly) functions as a mobile node of the surveillance system that seems to be spreading and deepening today would make good foreshadowing of the conclusion.
* The article needs a little more nuance in the portrayal of the younger generations’ relationship to these technologies. As the PEW study cited below shows, in their age group only YouTube use is at 90%, and YouTube is really just another form of mass push media, not true social media except in the case of producers of clips. It isn’t interactive. Interactive apps are used at roughly a 75% rate. So many young people are not taking part in this social media frenzy. Also interesting, but a bit limited to draw full conclusions from, is that Pew shows such use in 2018 is the same as the year before for the first time. Maybe a plateau has been reached. We can hope.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchanged-since-2018/
And there are a few minor issues to be fixed.

* The wording that “Primates are our relatives makes it sound like humans are not primates. “Our fellow primates” or “our relatives the other primates” is clearer.

* Shouldn’t series be in italics and individual TV shows in “ “? So I think it should be Star Trek. And nerds will note that the hive mind aspect of the Borg is only clear in the movie First Contact. The Borg canon on TV climaxes with the individualization of “Hugh of Borg” which destroys his collective when the concept of being an individual infects it. In the movies First Contact there is a queen and all and it seems different, more hierarchical. Although I’ve had students tell me that there is an understanding that links the totally distributed Borg collective of TV with the hive Borg of the movie.

* In the spirt of nuance, perhaps consider changing the last sentence slightly to “certainly manipulated, perhaps even controlled”?

 

Recommendation: Revisions Required.

 

Reviewer B:

Please, comment on the most relevant aspects (positive points and areas to improve) of the reviewed article.

The paper is nicely written and flows quite well. However, an introductory paragraph or sentences identifying the main points and structure would help the reader know what to expect and how to approach the paper.
The abstract and keywords are missing.
The manuscript would benefit from incorporating more literature on the cyborg debate and embodiment. Key texts in both areas of the literature are missing.
It is unclear to me what the author/s’ position on the notion of “cyborg.” In some cases, it is argued that cyborgs are a reality (pp. 4 and 9); in other cases, it is claimed that cyborgs are still to come (p. 7).
More specific comments are included in the digital copy of the paper that I have attached to my review.


Would you suggest any changes or make any recommendations to improve the quality of the article?

Some of the arguments in the paper are speculative and/or unsupported. Further analysis is needed to strengthen the arguments. I will identify what sentences I am referring to in the digital copy of the paper attached to my review.
In some parts, the paper follows Foucault’s work very closely. The analysis would benefit from other sources as well as from a critical engagement with Foucault’s ideas.

Recommendation: Resend for Review.

  

The text included important modifications before publication