Surveillance has existed for as long as human history. Over the centuries, organizations or individuals have used it as a means to understand the societal realities around them. The major purpose of surveillance, regardless of era, has always been the collection of data to serve the specific objectives of specific entities. Another factor that has remained constant through the centuries is the major element targeted by surveillance: the individual (Hughes-Wilson 2017; Andrew 2018; Crowdy 2006). Although the contemporary understanding of surveillance has reached beyond the traditional perspective that was linked mostly to security objectives, the individual remains the most important actor in this process. Different entities can supervise the individual at the moment he/she is perceived as representing a threat to national security—and here, we talk about state surveillance. In this case, the latter has one major purpose, which is to quickly pinpoint the threat, to obliterate it, and to achieve security objectives (Andrew et al. 2020; Warner 2014). However, the individual cannot be associated solely with negative activities that render him/her subject to supervision, but some entities that conduct state-wide surveillance may seek to improve specific marketing policies that could (for example) help companies to strengthen their sales strategies. In this case, surveillance has nothing to do with achieving national security objectives, but is conducted in order to build efficient strategies that could help individuals to make better decisions when choosing a specific product (Ball and Webster 2003; Ball et al. 2012).