Capturing Injustice: The Screenshot as a Tool for Sousveillance

Abstract

Framing the screenshot as a tiny-but-mighty tool for digital sousveillance, this case study explores the use of screenshots in online social justice movements, specifically those dedicated to identifying and eradicating systemic racism. Using one antiracism-focused Twitter account as a single case for analysis, we examined how social justice advocates may use the screenshot to “watch from below.” Grounded theory qualitative analysis of 228 screenshots posted to the Racism Watchdog account (@RacismDog) between June 2019 and June 2020 revealed that screenshots offer a means to capture and call attention to injustices in online spaces. Equipping users with the ability to select and frame content appearing onscreen, screenshots also allow users to emphasize portions of racist comments, incorporate information to support an argument, juxtapose bits of information to highlight rhetorical contradictions, and occasionally to bring levity to those engaged in online activism. We discuss the screenshot as an effective, visually persuasive tool in online sousveillance.

Keywords:

• Screenshot
• social justice
• social media
• sousveillance

Notes

1 Thomsen ultimately concludes that distinction between surveillance and sousveillance proves too precarious a foundation upon which to accept “sousveillance” as a concept in its own right. Instead, he suggests academics “should avoid the neologism, and simply clarify what sense of surveillance is at stake when necessary” (2019, p. 23). However, since 2019, an upwards of 30 articles have been published with “sousveillance” in the title, several addressing resistance to police brutality and racialized surveillance (see, for example, Inoue, 2020; Mohler et al., 2022; Ross, 2020). We suspect the concept has gained traction with national racial reckoning prompted by the murders of Floyd and Taylor, along with increased global attention to police brutality and control. So, despite Thomsen’s conclusion, we view his work as a foundational piece in the theorizing of this relatively nascent concept. Here, we proffer those conditions we believe are strongest in distinguishing sousveillance from surveillance: power differentials, public availability/control, individual/collective observation, and reciprocity.