Being watched and being seen: Negotiating visibility in the NYC ride-hail circuit

Abstract

App-based, ride-hail drivers are a highly visible workforce, yet previous research has generally understood their visibility primarily in terms of surveillance. Using data from an ethnographic study of the New York City (NYC) ride-hail circuit, this article explores how drivers experience and negotiate their visibility. Findings reveal that constant monitoring on ride-hail apps feels oppressive to drivers, and it requires them to engage in significant unpaid labor in the form of reputation auditing. Nevertheless, drivers also find ways to “caption” surveillance outputs and thus shape their meanings. They engage in three strategies—juxtaposing existing metrics, expanding the field of vision, and requiring others to bear witness—to clarify, contextualize, and reclaim their visibility. The ability to reconfigure meanings of visibility, and specifically to navigate between the experience of being watched and that of being seen, represents an underexplored avenue of agency within studies of work surveillance.

Keywords

Digital platform economy inequality labor surveillance visibility

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abidin

(2016) Visibility labour: engaging with influencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media International Australia 161(1): 86–100.

Ajunwa

Crawford

Schultz

(2017) Limitless worker surveillance. California Law Review 105(3): 735–776.

Alexander

(2010) The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York and London: The New Press.

Anand

(2017) Juno promised it was better than Uber, but now its drivers feel cheated. BuzzFeed News. Available at: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/priya/drivers-in-nyc-feel-cheated-by-juno-which-promised-to-save (accessed 14 July 2020).

Bain

Taylor

(2000) Entrapped by the ‘electronic panopticon’? Worker resistance in the call centre. New Technology, Work and Employment 15(1): 2–18.

Ball

(2010) Workplace surveillance: an overview. Labor History 51(1): 87–106.

Banet-Weiser

(2018) Empowered: Popular Feminism and Popular Misogyny. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.

Benjamin

(2019a) Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Medford, MA: Polity.

Benjamin

(2019b) Captivating Technology: Race, Carceral Technoscience, and Liberatory Imagination in Everyday Life. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.

10.

Bishop

(2019) Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society 21(11–12): 2589–2606.

11.

Brighenti

(2007) Visibility: a category for the social sciences. Current Sociology 55(3): 323–342.

12.

Browne

(2015) Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.

13.

Bucher

(2012) Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society 14(7): 1164–1180.

14.

Chan

(2019) The rating game: the discipline of Uber’s user-generated ratings. Surveillance & Society 17(1/2): 183–190.

15.

Chen

(2018) Thrown under the bus and outrunning it! The logic of didi and taxi drivers’ labour and activism in the on-demand economy. New Media & Society 20(8): 2691–2711.

16.

Cotter

(2018) Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram:. New Media & Society 21(4): 895–913.

17.

Crain

Poster

Cherry

(2016) Invisible Labor: Hidden Work in the Contemporary World. Oakland, California: University of California Press.

18.

Daniels

(1987) Invisible Work. Social Problems 34(5): 403–415.

19.

Derousseau

(2017) The tech that tracks your movements at work. BBC WorkLife. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20170613-the-tech-that-tracks-your-movements-at-work (accessed 14 July 2020).

20.

Duffy

(2017) (Not) Getting Paid to Do What You Love: Gender, Social Media, and Aspirational Work. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press.

21.

Duffy

Chan

(2019) “You never really know who’s looking”: imagined surveillance across social media platforms. New Media & Society 21(1): 119–138.

22.

Duffy

Hund

(2019) Gendered visibility on social media: navigating Instagram’s authenticity bind. International Journal of Communication 13: 1–20.

23.

Foucault

(1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.

24.

Fuller

Smith

(1991) Consumers’ reports: Management by customers in a changing economy. Work, Employment and Society 5(1): 1–16.

25.

Gandini

(2016) The Reputation Economy: Understanding Knowledge Work in Digital Society. London: Springer.

26.

Gandini

(2019) Labour process theory and the gig economy. Human Relations 72(6): 1039–1056.

27.

Goodwin

(1994) Professional vision. American Anthropologist 96(3): 606–633.

28.

Gray

Suri

(2019) Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

29.

Hochschild

(1983) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

30.

Irani

(2015) The cultural work of microwork. New Media & Society 17(5): 720–739.

31.

Joshi

Cowan

Limone

, et al. (2019) E-hail Regulation in Global Cities. New York: NYU Wagner Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management.

32.

LaFrance

(2017) Uber did what!? The Atlantic, 24 April. Available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/04/ubers-pr-nightmare-a-field-guide/523269/ (accessed 14 July 2020).

33.

Leidner

(1993) Fast Food, Fast Talk: Service Work and the Routinization of Everyday Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

34.

Levy

Barocas

(2018) Privacy at the margins refractive surveillance: monitoring customers to manage workers. International Journal of Communication 12: 23.

35.

Lyft Inc (2020) Become a driver—drive with Lyft. Available at: https://www.lyft.com/driver (accessed 15 July 2020).

36.

Lyon

(2003) Surveillance as Social Sorting: Privacy, Risk, and Digital Discrimination. London and New York: Psychology Press.

37.

Mann

Nolan

Wellman

(2003) Sousveillance: inventing and using wearable computing devices for data collection in surveillance environments. Surveillance & Society 1(3): 331–355.

38.

Marwick

(2013) Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

39.

Mears

(2011) Pricing looks: circuits of value in fashion modeling markets. In: Beckert

Aspers

(eds) The Worth of Goods: Valuation and Pricing in the Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 155–177.

40.

Neumayer

Rossi

(2018) Images of protest in social media: struggle over visibility and visual narratives. New Media & Society 20(11): 4293–4310.

41.

Newell

(2019) Context, visibility, and control: police work and the contested objectivity of bystander video. New Media & Society 21(1): 60–76.

42.

O’Connor

(2016) Bosses reading your emails are not breaching your privacy. Financial Times, 13 January. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/bf5cc95c-ba1c-11e5-b151-8e15c9a029fb (accessed 14 July 2020).

43.

Pager

(2003) The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology 108(5): 937–975.

44.

Parrott

Reich

(2018) An Earnings Standard for New York City’s App-based Drivers: Economic Analysis and Policy Assessment. Report for the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/53ee4f0be4b015b9c3690d84/t/5b3a3aaa0e2e72ca74079142/1530542764109/Parrott-Reich+NYC+App+Drivers+TLC+Jul+2018jul1.pdf

45.

Poster

(2011) Emotion detectors, answering machines, and e-unions: multi-surveillances in the global interactive service industry. American Behavioral Scientist 55(7): 868–901.

46.

Preston

(2011) Start-up handles social media background checks. The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/technology/social-media-history-becomes-a-new-job-hurdle.html (accessed 14 July 2020).

47.

Reagle

(2015) Geek policing: fake geek girls and contested attention. International Journal of Communication 9: 1–19.

48.

Rollins

(1996) Invisibility, consciousness of the other and ressentiment among black domestic workers. In: Macdonald

Sirianni

(eds) Working in the Service Society. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, pp. 223–243.

49.

Rosenberg

(2019) N.Y. Ride-hailing drivers file suit against Uber, allege they are owed millions in undercut wages. Washington Post. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/11/07/uber-drivers-say-they-are-owed-millions-dollars-wage-theft-case-against-company/ (accessed 30 January 2020).

50.

Rosenblat

(2018) Uberland: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Rules of Work. 1st ed. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

51.

Rosenblat

Levy

KEC

Barocas

, et al. (2017) Discriminating tastes: Uber’s customer ratings as vehicles for workplace discrimination. Policy & Internet 9(3): 256–279.

52.

Rosenblat

Stark

(2016) Algorithmic Labor and information asymmetries: a case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication 10: 27.

53.

Scheiber

(2017a) How Uber uses psychological tricks to push its drivers’ buttons. The New York Times, 2 April. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/02/technology/uber-drivers-psychological-tricks.html (accessed 26 February 2019).

54.

Scheiber

(2017b) Uber says it just noticed error on pay, but it was no secret. The New York Times, 1 June. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/business/uber-driver-commissions.html (accessed 12 October 2020).

55.

Selod

(2018) Forever Suspect: Racialized Surveillance of Muslim Americans in the War on Terror. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

56.

Sewell

Barker

(2006) Coercion versus care: using irony to make sense of organizational surveillance. The Academy of Management Review 31(4): 934–961.

57.

Sewell

Wilkinson

(1992) ‘Someone to watch over me’: surveillance, discipline and the just-in-time labour process. Sociology 26(2): 271–289.

58.

Sharone

(2017) LinkedIn or LinkedOut? How social networking sites are reshaping the labor market. In Vallas

Kovalainen

(eds) Research in the Sociology of Work: Emerging Conceptions of Work, Firms and the Labor Market. Binkley, UK: Emerald, pp. 1–31.

59.

Simonite

(2018) Call centers tap voice-analysis software to monitor moods WIRED. Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/this-call-may-be-monitored-for-tone-and-emotion/ (accessed 14 July 2020).

60.

Stark

Levy

(2018) The surveillant consumer. Media, Culture & Society 40(8): 1202–1220.

61.

Strauss

Corbin

(1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

62.

Ticona

Mateescu

(2018) Trusted strangers: carework platforms’ cultural entrepreneurship in the on-demand economy. New Media & Society 20(11): 4384–4404.

63.

Uber Technologies, Inc (2019) Form S-1: registration statement. United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Available at: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1543151/000119312519103850/d647752ds1.htm (accessed 14 July 2020).

64.

Uber Technologies, Inc (2020) Drive with Uber—be your own Boss. Available at: https://www.uber.com/au/en/drive/ (accessed 15 July 2020).

65.

Vallas

Christin

(2018) Work and identity in an era of precarious employment: how workers respond to “personal branding” discourse. Work and Occupations 45(1): 3–37.

66.

Van Oort

(2019) The emotional labor of surveillance: digital control in fast fashion retail. Critical Sociology 45(7/8): 1167–1179.

67.

Warhurst

Nickson

Witz

, et al. (2000) Aesthetic labour in interactive service work: some case study evidence from the “New” Glasgow. The Service Industries Journal 20(3): 1–18.

68.

Weil

(2014) The Fissured Workplace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

69.

Wingfield

Alston

(2013) Maintaining hierarchies in predominantly white organizations: a theory of racial tasks. American Behavioral Scientist 58(2): 274–287.

70.

Wodinsky

(2018) In major defeat for Uber and Lyft, New York City votes to limit ride-hailing cars. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/8/17661374/uber-lyft-nyc-cap-vote-city-council-new-york-taxi (accessed 26 February 2019).

71.

Zelizer

(2004) The Social Meaning of Money. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.