Microchipping: where it’s at and why it still hasn’t gotten under our skin

By Alma Fabiani

Published Nov 21, 2019 at 11:07 AM

Reading time: 3 minutes

4595

Some of you might not remember, but August 2017 was definitely microchipping’s ‘breakthrough’. Wisconsin-based company Three Square Market had lined up its employees in its cafeteria to be implanted with microchips. Just after that, the news named the event the “chipping party” and bombarded us with futuristic tales of cashless payments and phoneless calls. We were all going to be transhuman. Back to 2019, and most of us are still microchip-free. So why are microchips still not the norm?

Let’s start with the obvious—the idea of living with a chip under your skin potentially monitoring your every move is not one that is easy to accept. After the famous chipping party, religious groups panicked, convinced that the small implants actually marked people with “the mark of the beast”, and accused Three Square Market of being the antichrist. While this sounded highly improbable, more rational worries have since then been stated and proved right.

I Got Chipped Tshirt

Microchip implants are similar to the ones we’ve started putting under livestock and our pets’ skin. In other words, the tiny bar codes have been around for a while. Kevin Warwick, a professor of cybernetics at Reading University, had already implanted a chip in his hand by 1998. Warwick wanted to show the world that it was doable, but also that microchipping was the future. To him, fusing technology with our bodies had to be the next big step. He obviously didn’t take data breaches and exploitation of labour into consideration.

So far, the few people that have been microchipped are digital-savvy people from wealthy countries. Well-educated Swedes—“chips and beer” evenings were quite big in Stockholm—do not make up the world’s population. Talking to The Guardian, Urs Gasser, executive director at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, made a very valid point about the way people reacted to the chipping party, stating that “[s]eeing employees get implanted at the workplace made people question what it means to be an employee. Are you a person being paid for your work, or are you the property of the company you work for?” These implants probably weren’t the “mark of the beast”, but they definitely reminded us of the dystopian novel 1984.

The implications that microchipping technology brings with itself are exactly what stops us from getting them. Having a chip under our skin equals increased worker surveillance for most. And, more recently, it could also mean that data collection methods could go up a notch—something that we clearly don’t need while Facebook is still around. After all, microchips could surveil us non stop, and monitor us wherever we go. Remember the nightmare that was Snapchat Map, when all your Snapchat contacts could see where you were at any time of the day? Imagine this with microchips, only this time we won’t be able to turn its signal off.

The same kind of concerns have recently been raised by lawmakers in the US. The states of Arkansas, New Jersey and Tennessee have started drafting new bills to make involuntary microchipping illegal, while Nevada has already passed its own version of the bill. The message is: feel free to microchip yourself if you want, but don’t force anyone to do the same, especially not if they’re your employees. And yet, surveillance tech still is a big issue in the US, with companies forcing their employees to wear an Apple watch constantly to monitor their health. There doesn’t seem to be that much difference between this and microchips.

To try and look at microchipping under a different light than this ethically problematic one, Screen Shot spoke to Jowan Österlund, founder and CEO of the microchipping company Biohax, and the body piercing professional that microchipped the lucky employees who attended 2017’s chipping party. Österlund, like many others, can’t ignore the risks that microchips could entail, but for him, it’s part of a good thing, “People say that [they’re scared of microchips] while they’re on Facebook, on their smartphones logged into their Google accounts, so I can’t really take that seriously. I wouldn’t want people to blindly accept any kind of new technologies, because that would be repeating the same mistakes again. If people are scared, it’s good—they get informed, and they’re not afraid anymore.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/BwBwvr_nCBE/

Österlund furthered his point by pinpointing the many benefits that microchips could bring to adapters, such as health-related tracking, “you could get all the information you need about your heart rate patterns, your sleeping patterns, your blood oxygenation, and breathing patterns.” According to him, most of us react that way to microchips because of the small body modification they come with. What needs to be changed, for them to be 100 per cent safe, are the regulations that have been proven to be already problematic, even without most of us having a chip implant.

Instead of panicking about microchips, our attention should be focused on demanding stronger labour regulations and data protection laws, such as Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In other words, don’t shoot the messenger. Microchips could be our society’s gamechanger—the only question is: are we ready for that kind of change?

Keep On Reading

By Abby Amoakuh

Netizens expose Glen Powell’s viral story about a cannibal encounter as fake

By Emma O'Regan-Reidy

What is Americana style? From problematic roots to Beyoncé’s modern reinterpretation

By Charlie Sawyer

What does the angel number 333 mean? Breaking down Gen Z’s favourite cosmic trend

By Charlie Sawyer

Flo Health achieves unicorn status, but is a male-led team fit for femtech?

By Charlie Sawyer

What is Project 2025, the extreme right-wing wish list being compared to The Handmaid’s Tale?

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

As faces of UK rioters are revealed, communities mobilise to stand against far-right violence

By Abby Amoakuh

Sex scenes in Netflix’s It’s What’s Inside pose questions about sexual consent during body-swapping

By Abby Amoakuh

The central feminist issue for the UK general election? Nudify apps and image-based abuse

By Abby Amoakuh

The Menendez brothers star in new documentary to hit back at Ryan Murphy’s Monsters

By Abby Amoakuh

UK police officers complain unisex uniforms lead to squashed testicles and fungal infections

By Nicolas Nhalungo

The internet has declared it’s going to be a Brat summer

By Charlie Sawyer

French protesters to poo in the Seine amid Paris 2024 Olympics controversy

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

MrBeast launches his own investigation into Ava Kris Tyson after disturbing grooming allegations come to light 

By Abby Amoakuh

Donald Trump versus Joe Biden: how will the candidates’ approach to student loans impact votes?

By Abby Amoakuh

Ashton Kutcher in hot water again for advocating AI use to cut Hollywood costs

By Charlie Sawyer

Defence lawyer fined £2,000 after asking rape victim if she had narcissistic personality disorder

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Hollywood actor reveals Andrew Tate inspired his psychological thriller Speak No Evil character

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

US politics this week: Biden continues to use TikTok after signing ban and Trump rises among Black voters

By Charlie Sawyer

American Airlines blames 9-year-old girl for not detecting flight attendant’s hidden bathroom camera

By Fatou Ferraro Mboup

Child stars Demi Lovato and Drew Barrymore reveal they were given substances as young children