{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04353932584269663, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007022471910112359, 'mean_word_length': 5.855769230769231, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Accounting for surveillance

This contribution discusses the ways people hold themselves and others accountable for everyday practices of surveillance. It analyses three examples: (1) the “breeching experiments” of the video artist “Surveillance Camera Man,” (2) a “stop and frisk” incident involving a 17‐year‐old boy in Harlem, and (3) the pop‐up windows on websites that ask for users’ consent to use “cookies.” Understanding the relationship between language and securitization, it is argued, requires that we pay attention to the interactional basis of surveillance and the ways rights and responsibilities are negotiated, ratified, challenged, or ignored in the moment‐by‐moment unfolding of communication.