.png)
Soft
Surveillance Power
What is in this Section
Introduction
“Public spaces have become paradoxical in that young people will continue to use public space as one of the few places where they are free from the surveillance and regulation that they are subject to in the home or at school, yet, these spaces are becoming more regulated and surveilled” (Wilson, Rose, & Colvin, 2010, p.11).
Surveillance is an integral feature of the design and functions of the built environment. However, it is sometimes argued that surveillance can make people feel uncomfortable because of a given sense of being observed and restricted, making them feel they do not want to be in space. This idea particularly comes to an issue for youth because they are often disproportionately surveilled and regulated due to stereotypical ideas against them.
“The gaze of the cameras does not fall equally on all users of the street but on those who are stereotypically predefined as potentially deviant, or who, through appearance and demeanor, are singled out by operators as unrespectable. In this way youth, particularly those already socially and economically marginal, may be subject to even greater levels of authoritative intervention and official stigmatization, and rather than contributing to social justice through the reduction of vicitimization, CCTV will merely become a tool of injustice through the amplification of differential and discriminatory policing”
(Wilson, Rose, & Colvin, 2010, p.17).
Cities and community members are constantly feeling a fear of crime and try to put boundaries in public space to exclude those displaying behaviors perceived as different from the mainstream. Many of the identities youth adopt within the public domain are contradictory and opposite to the dominant culture (e.g., messy, dirty, loud, smoking, sexual); others can be accepted easily (e.g., clean, neat, polite, in school uniform). Their distinctive and visible expressions are perceived as ways of winning the place from dominant culture and thus, they are often stereotyped and portrayed as potential threat or intruders (Malone, 2002, p.157 & 163), which has led to “a number of regulatory, surveillance and exclusionary regimes to be introduced to provide police (and other community members, such as security guards, etc.) with powers to physically remove young people from public spaces” (Malone, 2002, p.163). For young people to generally prefer loitering and hanging around in groups on the street corners talking, playing, or merely observing others (Malone, 2002, p.162; Ludicology, 2021), these activities are even perceived as inappropriate or potential threat in the structured ordered cities (Malone, 2002, p.162). Given that, young people frequently become the target of the observations, and are under regulatory practices.
The reason why this section focuses on surveillance is, however, the general notion of disproportional surveillance over young people in public society may not apply to the rooftop of Miyashita. Our ethnography revealed that while the rooftop installs a surveillance system, young people who loiter/hang around here are not likely to experience as much of a sense of being observed and regulated as they could have in other spaces. With that in mind, the rooftop possibly becomes a youth-friendly space surveillance-wise, allowing those young people to freely stay at this location to socialize. This section first covers several surveillance elements that can be observed on the rooftop followed by youth’s perception about it.
Surveillance on the Rooftop
Surveillance elements installed on the roof include those of materials that are used for conducting surveillance such as established rules and CCTV cameras as well as the observers who use them for surveilling such as Miyashita Park Center Staff and security guards.
Established Rules
Rules themselves do not directly surveil people. However, surveillance activities are governed by rules and regulations. Therefore, it is important to first understand them. The picture on the left shows Miyashita’s established rules.
Descriptions
“No sitting” sign suggests that sitting on the tables attached to the fence walls along the border of the rooftop is prohibited (pictures in the bottom). Several rules (pictures in the center) are especially more clearly displayed with its size and illustrations compared to text-only rules (on top). It can be said that these rules are emphasized more by park operators. As starred in yellow, most of those picture-based rules (“No smoking”, “No skateboarding”, “No graffiti and littering”, “No playing music at a loud volume” & “No blocking ways”) seem to be related to the behaviors Malone (2002) says are youth-specific (e.g., loitering/hanging around, messy, dirty, loud, smoking). What it implies is that youth may be the primary target of surveillance here.
CCTV cameras
CCTV cameras are attached to the poles. As shown in the picture on the right, they are primarily located on the North block and seating areas where most people are likely to gather and stay.
Based on those established rules mentioned above, park operators conduct surveillance which may be directly by walking around the roof or indirectly by monitoring security footage. They are permanent observers for visitors. However, our ethnography found out that those park operators do not possess strict scrutiny.
Surveillance Materials
Park Operators
Miyashita Park Center Staff
The Park Center staff are in charge of overall park maintenance.
Regarding CCTV cameras, the staff in the Park Center monitor security footage of the rooftop. However, based on the following key scenarios, their surveillance doesn’t seem to be very strong.
Scenario 1
While observing the rooftop, somehow looking inside the park center, there is one female staff casually sitting on a chair and watching a computer screen on a desk. Few security footages are projected on the computer screen. The Hachiko doll placed by the window is slightly blocking the view but the monitor is fully visible from the outside. The female sometimes happily talks to a male standing next to her. Her eyes get back on the computer screen.
Looking at this female, although she monitors security footage, she doesn’t seem to be closely observing youth and others’ actions reflected on the screen.
Scenario 2
While standing on the rooftop around 6 p.m., three staff, two males and one female, are walking toward the South block edge. With plastic bags and tongs in their hands, they are looking around the floor whether there is garbage. One male picked up an empty canned drink with his tong and put it in the bag. Talking with each other, three staff are engrossed in their conversation and are not specifically watching users’ behaviors.
Based on scenario 1 and 2, the Park Center staff do not seem to focus their surveillance gaze on young people or other users to that extent. Although plenty of surveillance cameras are present, it doesn't seem that they are being fully utilized by these staff to have a close monitoring. Additionally, when they actually walk around the roof, there were no indications that people’s actions are being suspiciously scrutinized. Instead, the Park Center staff may prioritize the maintenance and management of park facilities over strict monitoring.
Security Guards
Similar to the Park Center staff, security guards don’t appear to put severe surveillance as well. One important take from our ethnography is that it has never been observed the security guards standing and observing youth.
Scenario 1
At night, two security guards in black uniforms are walking toward the North block edge. Slowly walking, they never stop and look around to see what youths on the rooftop are doing. Once they arrive, they check the hotel doors whether they are locked. They turn and start walking toward the South block side. Slowly walking, they never stop and pay attention to what youth are doing. They went downstairs by escalators.
In addition to the scenario, security guards were rarely observed on the rooftop especially during daytime throughout our ethnography. As shown in the scenario, while security guards in other city spaces usually stand and look around to find any suspicious behavior, those guards on the rooftop do not usually commit this type of typical security guard action. It indicates security guards’ weak surveillance gaze on the roof.
Some established rule signs on the rooftop are emphasized with illustrations, unlike text-only rules, and many seem to be targeting young people in particular (e.g., “No smoking”, “No skateboarding”, “No graffiti and littering”, “No playing music at a loud volume” & “No blocking ways” etc.). In the North block of the seating areas where people are likely to linger, there are especially surveillance cameras installed, and it adds to the Park Center staff and security guards, which gives the impression of strong rooftop surveillance specifically on youth. However, based on the scenarios, the surveillance from these staff and guards doesn't appear to be very intense. Given that, how have youth been actually experiencing the surveillance of the roof?
Interview#2 (Couple)
Couple is sitting on a pole bench facing toward the chain-link fence wall and chatting happily. The researcher succeeds in conducting an interview. Same questions as interview#1 were asked.
The boyfriend looks around as though he is trying to find CCTV cameras, and says:
“え、ない、ですね。” “Ah, I have…not.”
A girl shakes her head showing “no.”
The girlfriend answers a question about her experience of contact with the Park Center staff and security guards:
“一度もないです。” “Never.”
The boyfriend:
“え、ないです。そもそも警備員いるの知らなかったです。“ “No. I didn’t even know there were security guards here.”
A girl nods and agrees with her boyfriend.
Youth's Perception about the Roof Surveillance
In addition to regular ethnographic observations, the following three interviews were conducted to see whether young people are conscious about CCTV cameras and to know their experience with the Park Center staff or security guards. The interview day was not their first visit to the roof.
Interview#1 (Two high school girls)
Two high school girls are sitting on a bench nearby Starbucks while taking pictures with drinks they got from the Starbucks store. A researcher succeeds in interviewing.
The researcher:
“屋上に配置されている監視カメラが気になったことはありますか？” “Have you ever concerned about those CCTV cameras on the rooftop?”
Two high school girls laugh and look into each other’s eyes.
Girl A:
“全く気にしたことないです（笑）。” “I have never paid attention to them. lol”
Girl B nods and agrees with her friend.
The researcher:
“今までにパークセンターの人や警備員の人に声をかけられたことはありますか？” “Have you ever been approached by the Park Center staff or security guards?”:
Girl A & B:
“声かけられたことないです。” “I have never been approached by them.”
Based on the first interview, these interviewees never paid attention to the presence of CCTV cameras. Nor have then been talked to by the Park Center staff and security guards.
Same as the first interview, second interviewees have not cared about the cameras. Looking at behavior, it seems that the boyfriend at least didn’t even know its existence. Moreover, both of the girlfriend and boyfriend have never been approached by the Park Center staff and security guards like the first interviewees. They didn’t know the presence of security guards.
Interview#3 (Two high school boys)
Two high school boys are sitting on the South side stairs. They are facing toward the downstairs as well as resting and chatting. The researcher approaches from behind and succeeds in interviewing. Same questions as interview#1 were asked.
Two boys look embarrassed as if they want to finish our conversation as fast as they could.
Boy A quickly answers:
“あー気にしたことないですねえ。（笑）” “Ah, I have never cared about them. lol”
They keep turning their backs.
Boy B asks the researcher:
“どこにあるんですか？””Where are they?”
A question about boys’ experience of contact with the Park Center staff and security guards:
Boy A & B:
“ないです。” “No.”
Boy B asks the researcher:
“どこにその警備員っているんですか？” “Where do the security guards appear?”
Again, same as the first and second interviews, third interviewees also have never cared about CCTV cameras. Nor have they been approached by the Park Center staff and security guards. These boys didn’t even know the existence of those cameras and observers as well.
What these three interviews clearly show is that first, the existence of CCTV cameras on the rooftop most likely do not possess surveillance pressure on youth. Nor young people do not even care or pay attention to them. Next, it appears that youth don’t get moved or approached by the Park Center staff or security guards. Many don’t even know the existence of security guards. Based on the ethnographic observations, the park operators do not seem to impose strict surveillance in the first place, and these three interviews revealed that young people, in reality, have not experienced such monitoring and regulations. In other words, it means that there is no such intense scrutiny on the rooftop. Youth are not particularly targeted as potential intruders or risk creators on the rooftop.
While it is said that young people are often perceived and stereotyped as potential threats in public spaces and become the target of strict surveillance, this notion isn’t likely to apply to the rooftop. CCTV cameras don’t make youth feel observed. Nor rather do they even care or pay attention to them. Also, although some rules seem to be particularly targeting young people as mentioned earlier, results of observations and interviews on youth revealed that park operators including the Park Center staff and security guards do not specifically put the strict surveillance gaze on youth. It implies that young people are not necessarily considered to be potential threats. Thus, youth don’t feel uncomfortable being within that space. Free of surveillance pressure makes the rooftop youth-friendly, enabling those young people to freely stay and socialize with peers.