Advertisement

Reality TV: Instilling Fear to Avoid Prison

  • Erin DiCesareEmail author
Chapter
  • 61 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter analyzes how reality television shows like Lock-Up and the Netflix original Girls Incarcerated use what Gary T. Marx notes as soft forms of control and helps to instill fear into the viewing public as a way to promote conformity to what is deemed “socially acceptable behavior.” These shows promote the heavy-handed surveillance that is prominent within our society and invokes a fear that since we are constantly under surveillance, and since we feed into this surveillance, we must conform to avoid the dangers of the prison life. Using the concept provided by the works of Brian Massumi, these shows invoke fear, much as the terror alert systems do, and force a reaction from the viewers. The utilization of the confessional forum, which was popular in shows like The Real World, gives a human face to the criminal world, making fear tangible. This confessional/interview style allows the acceptance of the surveillance within our society but also within the prison walls. Viewers conform to social expectations out of fear of encountering those in prison, not necessarily on the streets, because it is up to the viewer to behave appropriately and avoid a stint in prison.

References

  1. Andrejevic, Mark. 2007. ISpy: Surveillance and Power in the Interactive Era. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  2. Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  3. Haggerty, Kevin D. 2006. “Tear Down the Walls: On Demolishing the Panopticon.” In Theorizing Surveillance: The Panopticon and Beyond, edited by David Lyon. Devon: Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Howlett, Debbie. 2006. “Chicago Plans Advanced Surveillance.” USA Today, March.Google Scholar
  5. Kinzer, Stephen. 2004. “Chicago Moving to ‘Smart’ Surveillance Cameras.” The New York Times, September 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/21/us/chicago-moving-to-smart-surveillance-cameras.html.
  6. Lyon, David. 2003. Surveillance After September 11. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Marx, Gary T. 2006. “Soft Surveillance: The Growth of Mandatory Volunteerism in Colleting Personal Information—‘Hey Buddy Can You Spare a DNA?’” In Surveillance and Security: Technological Politics and Power in Everyday Life, edited by Torin Monahan. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Massumi, Brian. 2005. Fear (The Spectrum Said). Positions: East Asia Cultures Critique 13, no. 1: 31–48. Durham: Duke University Press. Project Muse.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Philosophy, and ReligionJohnson C. Smith UniversityCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations