Introduction In contemporary times, the phenomenon of globalization has had great impacts on the world economy, global trade, currency, and communication. In Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, Jeremy made visibility a kind of trap. Visibility among prisoners made them control their behaviors as they were constantly being watched. In this case, visibility was a mechanism of endearing the public to the authorities, homogenizing societal behaviors, and limiting people’s autonomy (Bentham 32). In contrast, Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death , the public was oppressed by their addiction to media, particularly television entertainment. Based on these readings, this paper makes three main arguments; first, that Panopticon control exists in contemporary society as well, especially with regard to our online culture; second, online surveillance and data mining by law enforcement make the public conform, as complete anonymity is not possible; and third, television commercials have implications on public life and modern politics. The Panopticon Writings Bentham’s panopticon was a structure with a central tower where the warders could see each prisoner. It represented an inclination of society towards normalizing behavior and discouraging dissent. In contemporary terms, it is a symbol of disciplinary power, a form of control. The panopticon building provides a surveillance environment where inmates or people are conscious of their behavior (Bentham 54). According to Bentham, the authority should be visible and felt by all prisoners. The panopticon perfected the operations of power as it reduced the number of staff/warders operating it as well as the number of prisoners under control. In different aspects, the theoretical basis of panopticon lies in how punishment and control work in contemporary society. Modern society, as sophisticated as it is, offers many opportunities for control that compel subjects to conform to the “norm.” While this is largely true in most prisons, the deployment of panoptic systems such as surveillance by closed-circuit television cameras in cities is indeed an extension of the dominating power of law enforcement authorities. Similarly, panoptic observation has been extended to online users. People feel that their online activities are being monitored. Even in institutions, ISPs record the user’s activities through an account tied to a specific computer. Moreover, organizations use cookies to compile the user’s profiles, and data mine their buying practices. Law enforcement also monitors online users in the pretext of preventing criminal activities or terrorism. Through the Internet Protocol addresses, online activities can be traced to a particular identity. Thus, with this form of surveillance, the public has to conform, which is to engage in simple and acceptable activities when online so as not to stand out. Individuals have to monitor their own behavior and autonomy to ensure that they coincide with societal expectations. This has the effect of controlling than freeing people as it forces them to control their behavior, as well as those of others. Dissents or those who act differently are treated with suspicion. This enhances conformity at the expense of diversity. Moreover, contemporary so