Understanding surveillance capitalism from the viewpoint of migration

Surveillance capitalism has recently emerged as a key concept in interpretations of global technology companies’ business models as seen in Zuboff’s (2019) study analysing the transition of some Silicon Valley companies into global monopolies within just a few decades. In this paper, I argue that this business model has turned into a structural element of modern-day capitalism with implications for migration and border management. Through an analysis of the technological tools being developed and used for migration and border management, the article will help to understand the power dynamics underlying surveillance capitalism. The tragic outputs of technological products for the management of migration and border security have recently entered the agenda of the academic community and activist networks. Studies have shown companies investing in border security and migration management, examine their lobbying activities and argue that refugees are being used as subjects in the development of surveillance technologies (Achiume, 2020; Akkermann, 2021; Latonero, 2019; Molnar, 2020). Analysing these, as a whole, within the scope of the surveillance capitalism provides clues of how enmeshed the interests of technology companies, military and security corporations, security bureaucracy and governments are, (Privacy International, 2021) and the oligarchic form of these interests. Although surveillance capitalism discussions mainly focus on the commercial and political aspects to send personalized messages to users, this paper argues that the manifestation of surveillance capitalism in migration and border management would allow us to understand the development of new surveillance tools (lie detectors, facial recognition systems and sensors) that would eventually affect all humanity. Therefore, this is not only related to migrants and borders, such an analysis will illuminate which direction global capitalism is gravitating through cutting-edge technologies and envisage the possible tech-oriented dystopic future at the end of the road. Since it involves affecting, managing and directing targeted communities in a systematic, routine and focussed manner, surveillance aims to categorize societies and to have those categories of people to act within pre-determined limits (Au, 2021). Even though surveillance had always been a significant subject in the history of class societies, it became a basic criterion both in the workplace and in public life as a result of capitalist developments to maximize the surplus value of the labour force. Surveillance capitalism, on the other hand, refers to the business model describing the sources of income of some Silicon Valley technology companies. The leaps in machine learning and digital technologies (smartphone applications and Internet of things) create enormous data sets, and thus, the status quo can be reproduced through comprehensive analysis using real-time and cumulative data, and as an outcome, the future “under normal conditions” can be forecasted (Zuboff, 2019). Many technology companies have access to the data of billions of people thanks to the platforms they provide (search engines or social networks), and they are able to present user-specific/ personalized advertising. In this business model, the most significant promise made to the advertiser/client is the ability to forecast the future. Accordingly, these platforms present advertisements to people who are interested in the products or services offered by a given advertiser. Therefore, this business model will grow by focusing on the collection of more data and generating more to-the-point forecasts, which requires even more thorough surveillance. Once this business model proves how profitable it is, to secure the revenue stream, clearing away the uncertainty in forecasts is of vital importance, and accordingly, manipulating the user will eliminate “this problem” (Au, 2021; Zuboff, 2019). States and political bodies very quickly recognized the power of analysis, estimation and manipulation and have used them as an effective tool in the detection and manipulation of floating voters, which was discussed extensively during elections in the United States. Furthermore, the security, military and intelligence institutions have identified opportunities associated with it, upon which they have begun to collaborate with technology companies to become the customers of miscellaneous surveillance technologies (Akhmetova & Harris, 2021; Akkermann, 2016; Delcan, 2019). In summary, the surveillance business model, discovered in Silicon Valley, could easily exceed its own sectoral boundaries and encapsulates the entire system. Migration and border management practices provide valuable examples that can help us understand how a business model takes the historical surveillance inventory of capitalism to an unprecedented level with advanced technologies (Broeders, 2007; Hosein & Nyst, 2013). Technological products that stand out in this field fall within the scope of “smart borders.” These tools make it possible to control activities beyond borders and to detect immigrants before they reach the borders using AI algorithms, drones, facial recognition systems, biometrics, satellite images, sensors, mobile operators and social media data analyses (Achiume, 2020; Akhmetova & Harris, 2021; Korkmaz, 2020). For example, Elbit, an Israeli security company that established an advanced surveillance system in Arizona, detects people approaching the border from 7.5 miles away. The laser-enhanced cameras produced by Anduril are able to detect all movement within two miles and to distinguish human activity from animal activity (Feldstein, 2019). Both the United States and the European Union have hired private companies to militarize their borders with advanced surveillance technologies. In other words, public funding is being used to pay companies to develop new and deadly technologies rather than ensure the rights of migrants or resolve the economic and political difficulties locals face. For example, the border control and immigration budget of the United States has increased by 6,000 per cent since 1980, with US$223 million of the 2019 budget set aside to Homeland Security for the development of border security technologies. The EU, on the contrary, has allocated €34.9 billion to this field for the 2021–27 period, up from €13 billion for the 2014–20 period (Achiume, 2020; Daniels, 2018; Feldstein, 2019; Sánchez-Monedero & Dencik, 2020). Frontex, which operates on the land and sea borders preventing the movements of migrants into Europe, uses the most advanced surveillance technologies and conducts push-back operations (Human Rights Watch, 2021), barring refugees from the opportunity to seek asylum. In its operations, Frontex uses military-grade drones and has signed a €50 million contract with Airbus for aerial surveillance purposes (Achiume, 2020; People & Planet, 2021). The UK also invests heavily in surveillance technologies. According to a Privacy International report (2021), ADS—the UK’s main arms lobby group—has established an Industry Reference Group together with Home Office to lead the process. Within this scope, Future Borders and Immigration System was assigned a budget of £113 million for the development of digital borders in 2020 (Au, 2021). Smart border applications are generally produced by military companies. In other words, those who produce the weapons and bombs that force refugees to flee their countries are the same companies that produce the tools for the detection of those people in border areas. And military companies are collaborating with global tech companies to develop new surveillance tools to detect migrants approaching to their borders. As the security bureaucracy and governments assign, fund and pilot these projects, we observe the emergence of the oligarchical coordination of actors under surveillance capitalism. For example, leading arms sellers, such as Lockheed Martin, Airbus, Safran and Thales, and technology companies, such as IBM, Amazon, Microsoft, Fujitsu, and Accenture, all stand out with their investments in this area (Achiume, 2020; People & Planet, 2021). Miscellaneous speculative pilot studies are being conducted in the fields of migration and border management. For example, in a project called AVATAR (Automated Virtual Agent for Truth Assessments in Real-Time) applied in Canada, the United States and the European Union, an AI lie detector algorithm has been piloted. As part of the project, people are questioned by kiosk computers at border crossings and airports, and the algorithm tries to detect whether the person is lying by analysing their eye, mouth and hand movements, and using sensors, biometrics and facial recognition systems, which is clearly concerning from ethical and legal perspectives, beyond criticisms that it is anti-scientific (Daniels, 2018). These projects are usually pilot studies and so are supported by public funds under the guise of academic research. For example, a lie detector algorithm was developed by QinetiQ, a British defence technology company and funded by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. Another project is the iBorderCtrl conducted by Manchester Metropolitan University researchers, which benefited from a €4.5 million grant provided by the European Research Council (Sánchez-Monedero & Dencik, 2020). This project made use of affect recognition technologies and was tested in Greece, Hungary and Latvia (Feldstein, 2019), while another highly criticized pilot study is the UK Border Agency's Human Provenance Pilot (HPP) Project, which aims to detect the nationality of asylum seekers through a DNA and isotope analysis (Privacy International & No Tech for Tyrants, 2020). Can such companies as IBM, Microsoft, Amazon, Palantir and Google be described as mere technology providers? Thanks to the huge tenders awarded by the U.S. defense sector, Amazon is now the largest military corporation in the United States. Developing military capabilities is not limited to weapons as Amazon, Microsoft and IBM are in a race to provide cloud system services and digital infrastructures to many military and intelligence organizations, including the U.S. Ministry of Defense and the CIA. They are active in the development of many state-of-the-art combat technologies, such as autonomous weapons and robot soldiers. For instance, the US Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate offers DHS to deploy robot dogs with cameras and sensors on the borders (Department of Homeland Security, 2022). These companies are operating actively at a state level, providing lobbying and consultancy services while enjoying public funds, and as such, they go hand-in-hand and have mutual interests with the military-security bureaucracy (Akkermann, 2016, 2021; Delcan, 2019; Privacy International, 2021). Border security and migration management are fruitful areas for the transformation of surveillance capitalism from a business model to a structural and critical feature of the capitalist system to foster the effective use of surveillance and manipulative techniques on society through advanced technologies. Therefore, when assessing innovation in migration management, one should understand the embedded economic and political interests, thus laying the foundations for objections to the dangerous outcomes of surveillance capitalism. The opinions expressed in this Commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors, Editorial Board, International Organization for Migration nor John Wiley & Sons.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.