Research Article

MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Volume: 16 Number: 2 December 29, 2025
TR EN

MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Abstract

This study examines how the institution of marriage has become a key site of surveillance in the digital age. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Foucault, Althusser, and Lyon, the research explores how state and corporate control extend into the intimate domains of private life. It reveals that surveillance operates not only top-down—from governments and corporations—but also laterally, between spouses. Through qualitative content analysis of digital platforms such as Life360, Instagram, and Facebook, the study shows how voluntary surveillance within heterosexual marriages is legitimized through emotional narratives of care, trust, and efficiency. In this context, marriage functions both as an ideological apparatus that regulates reproduction and gender roles, and as a data-producing structure embedded within technological infrastructures. By foregrounding marriage as an underexplored site in surveillance studies, this article sheds light on the emotional, relational, and gendered dimensions of digital control and offers an original contribution to the literature.

Keywords

Surveillance, Marriage, Government in Power, Social Media, Data

References

  1. Allen, A. (2008). The politics of our selves: Power, autonomy, and gender in contemporary critical theory. Columbia University Press.
  2. Althusser, L. (2000). İdeoloji ve Devletin İdeolojik Aygıtları. (Y. Alp, & M. Özışık, Çev.) İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  3. Bauman, Z., & Lyon, D. (2013). Akışkan Gözetim. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  4. Belge, M. (2000). İdeoloji ve Devletin İdeolojik Aygıtları. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  5. Çoban, B. (2006). Louis Althusser. B. Çoban içinde, Kadife Karanlık 2 (s. 89-116). İstanbul: Su Yayınları.
  6. Dolgun, U. (2005) Enformasyon Toplumundan Gözetim Toplumuna: 21. Yüzyılda Gözetim, Toplumsal Denetim ve İktidar İlişkileri. Bursa: Ekin Kitabevi.
  7. Engels, F.(2010). Ailenin, Özel Mülkiyetin ve Devletin Kökeni. Sol Yayınları.
  8. Foucault, M. (1992). Hapishanenin Doğuşu. (M. A. Kılıçbay, Çev.) Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
  9. Foucault, M. (1998). The Will to Knowledge: The History of Sexuality Volume 1.
  10. Foucault, M. (1999). Yapısalcılık ve post yapısalcılık. Michel Foucault ile bir söyleşi. Ü. Umaç ve A. Utku (Çev.). İstanbul: Birey.
APA
Öğüç, Ç. (2025). MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE. Journal of Academic Approaches, 16(2), 570-594. https://doi.org/10.54688/ayd.1620780
AMA
1.Öğüç Ç. MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE. JAA. 2025;16(2):570-594. doi:10.54688/ayd.1620780
Chicago
Öğüç, Çağdaş. 2025. “MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE”. Journal of Academic Approaches 16 (2): 570-94. https://doi.org/10.54688/ayd.1620780.
EndNote
Öğüç Ç (December 1, 2025) MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE. Journal of Academic Approaches 16 2 570–594.
IEEE
[1]Ç. Öğüç, “MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE”, JAA, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 570–594, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.54688/ayd.1620780.
ISNAD
Öğüç, Çağdaş. “MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE”. Journal of Academic Approaches 16/2 (December 1, 2025): 570-594. https://doi.org/10.54688/ayd.1620780.
JAMA
1.Öğüç Ç. MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE. JAA. 2025;16:570–594.
MLA
Öğüç, Çağdaş. “MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE”. Journal of Academic Approaches, vol. 16, no. 2, Dec. 2025, pp. 570-94, doi:10.54688/ayd.1620780.
Vancouver
1.Çağdaş Öğüç. MARRIAGE, SURVEILLANCE AND POWER: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF CONTROL IN THE DIGITAL AGE. JAA. 2025 Dec. 1;16(2):570-94. doi:10.54688/ayd.1620780