Abstract [i]
Counter-Surveillance as Creative Practice: Privacy Activism and Algorithmic Resistance in European Digital Spaces [ii]
Serhat Koç[iii]
When Berlin activists projected “This is not your data” onto a tech company headquarters in 2023, they demonstrated how counter-surveillance has evolved into a creative repertoire that simultaneously resists, negotiates with, and reimagines algorithmic systems. This chapter examines counter-surveillance practices and privacy activism as sites where resistance meets innovation, exploring how European civil society organizations, grassroots collectives, and transnational networks develop sophisticated strategies to contest AI-driven surveillance while building alternative digital infrastructures.
Research Question: How do privacy activists and digital rights movements in European contexts—particularly Germany’s robust data protection culture—engage in counter-surveillance practices that both challenge algorithmic control and create alternative visions of digital sovereignty, and what do these practices reveal about evolving digital citizenship?
We position counter-surveillance not merely as defensive action but as a generative site of experimentation where activists negotiate with, appropriate, and repurpose algorithmic systems while constructing decentralized alternatives. Contemporary privacy activism operates across three registers: tactical resistance (legal challenges, encryption adoption), algorithmic negotiation (strategic platform use), and infrastructural imagination (building federated networks).
Theoretical Framework: Drawing on platform studies (Gillespie, van Dijck), critical algorithm studies (Noble, Eubanks), surveillance studies beyond the Panopticon (Browne), and tactical media theories (Lovink, Hands), we move beyond binary resistance models. We engage with “data sovereignty” from Indigenous data studies and employ STS approaches to analyze mutual shaping between activist practices and algorithmic systems—examining how GDPR itself emerged from decades of activist pressure.
Methodology: We combine discourse analysis of activist campaigns with ethnographic engagement including participatory observation at CryptoParties and digital security workshops, semi-structured interviews with activists from Chaos Computer Club (CCC), Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF), and European Digital Rights (EDRi), and analysis of tactical media and alternative platform architectures.
Empirical Focus: Three interconnected case studies from Germany:
- Encryption as Infrastructure: How CCC promotes end-to-end encryption not simply as protection but as foundation for alternative communicative spaces, making encryption accessible beyond technical communities.
- Südkreuz and “Reclaim Your Face”: Campaigns against facial recognition combining legal challenges, grassroots actions, and transnational coordination. Activists employed both traditional protest and algorithmic tactics—creating datasets that “poison” recognition systems, developing counter-apps detecting surveillance cameras.
- Decentralized Platforms as Prefigurative Politics: German activists’ engagement with Fediverse platforms (Mastodon, PeerTube) as experiments in post-platform digital sociality embodying privacy-by-design, community governance, and resistance to advertising models.
Contribution: This chapter contributes to the volume’s exploration of algorithmic mediation’s dual nature by demonstrating that resistance and control exist in dynamic tension. We show how counter-surveillance exemplifies both mechanisms of control and sites of possibility, documenting tactical innovations in platform-based movements, analyzing privacy activism’s intersection with algorithmic sovereignty demands, and tracing transnational solidarity networks. The chapter reveals how activists don’t simply react but actively shape algorithmic governance’s socio-technical assemblages, prefiguring alternative digital citizenship grounded in collective care, transparency, and democratic control over data infrastructures.
Keywords: Counter-surveillance, Privacy Activism, Algorithmic Resistance, Digital Rights, Platform Alternatives, Encryption, Transnational Solidarity
Bibliography: Core Texts and Relevant Works[iv]
This list includes key works by the authors mentioned, which either established or significantly contributed to the fields of “platform studies,” “critical algorithm studies,” “surveillance studies beyond the Panopticon,” and “tactical media theories.”
1. Platform Studies
- Gillespie, Tarleton
- Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Power, and the Politics of Algorithms. Yale University Press.
- Analyzes how platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) are not neutral tools but rather cultural and political actors that shape content and user experience through their rules, algorithms, and business models.
- Gillespie, T. (2010). The Politics of ‘Platforms’. New Media & Society, 12(3), 347–364.
- Critically examines the political and ideological meanings of the term “platform” itself, how it is used, and companies’ claims of neutrality.
- Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Power, and the Politics of Algorithms. Yale University Press.
- van Dijck, José
- van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford University Press.
- Offers a historical and critical perspective on the rise of social media platforms, their core features (data, algorithms, sharing), and how these reconfigure public and private life.
- van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World. Oxford University Press.
- Analyzes the impact of platforms on public services such as health, education, and journalism, and how platformization threatens or transforms public values.
- van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford University Press.
2. Critical Algorithm Studies
- Noble, Safiya Umoja
- Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press.
- Critically demonstrates how search engine algorithms are not neutral but instead reproduce and reinforce racist and sexist biases. A foundational text on algorithmic injustice and power dynamics.
- Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press.
- Eubanks, Virginia
- Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. St. Martin’s Press.
- Provides an empirical examination of how algorithmic systems and AI target, surveil, and automate inequality for poor and disadvantaged groups in areas such as social services, education, and criminal justice.
- Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. St. Martin’s Press.
3. Surveillance Studies Beyond the Panopticon
- Browne, Simone
- Browne, S. (2015). Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness. Duke University Press.
- Moves beyond typical Panopticon-centric analyses in surveillance studies to explore the specific impacts of surveillance on racialized bodies, particularly how Blackness has historically become an object of surveillance. Examines “invisible” surveillance mechanisms and the historical depth of racialized surveillance.
- Browne, S. (2015). Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness. Duke University Press.
4. Tactical Media Theories
- Lovink, Geert
- Lovink, G. (2008). Zero Comments: Blogging and Critical Internet Culture. Routledge.
- Offers a critical examination of internet culture and tactical media, discussing the potential and limitations of blogging and other online platforms. Focuses on the relationship between network culture and activism.
- Lovink, G. (2011). Networks Without a Cause: A Critique of Social Media. Polity Press.
- Critically analyzes the commercial logic of social media platforms and how supposedly “social” networks are transformed into capitalist structures.
- Lovink, G. (2008). Zero Comments: Blogging and Critical Internet Culture. Routledge.
- Hands, Joss
- Hands, J. (2011). @ is for Activism: Dissent, Resistance and Rebellion in a Digital Culture. Pluto Press.
- Examines activist practices, forms of resistance, and the potential and limitations of online actions within digital culture. Questions the role of tactical media in the digital age.
- Hands, J. (2011). @ is for Activism: Dissent, Resistance and Rebellion in a Digital Culture. Pluto Press.
[i] This abstract was prepared in accordance with the Call for Chapters for “Algorithmic Mediations: Resistance, Control, and Synthetic Presence in Digital Culture,” published at https://erkansaka.net/2025/08/22/algorithmic-mediations-call-for-chapters/. The drafting and language polishing were completed with partial assistance from AI language models (Claude, Gemini, and SciSpace). All content and arguments remain the sole responsibility of the author.
[ii] The word count for this abstract, excluding the title, keywords, and reference list, is 466 words.
[iii] Serhat Koç, LL.M. is an attorney and lecturer specializing in digital rights, information technology law, and intellectual property. A founding partner of Güreli & Koç Law Firm, he advises various ICT and IP-based companies. He holds an LL.M. from Istanbul Bilgi University’s Information and Technology Law Institute and is preparing for doctoral research focusing on generative AI’s impact on democracy, algorithmic manipulation, and human rights. His work, deeply rooted in Internet law and policy expertise, addresses the protection of online freedom of expression and digital privacy. A Creative Commons supporter and Free Software Foundation volunteer, His recent publications include book chapters on personal data protection, location data privacy, and digital resistance (for further details, please refer to: www.serhatkoc.com/publications).
[iv] All listed references are either openly accessible digitally or available through legal access via university library memberships and systems.