I think it's a terrific point, and one that I've been reading about a lot lately, in particular some interaction between sousveillance (the many watching the few) and self-surveillance in the private realm, not necessarily in the context of any dictated authoritarian measures.

In particular, the thought that bothers me is (not in all cases of course) that social media and this pseudo-egalitarianism of internet presence puts us in both perspectives: the one doing the sous-veillance (ourselves viewing the celebrities, micro- and otherwise), as well as the self-surveillance that, in conjunction with the idea that nowadays the self and our actions have been commodified, lead to the idea that to have value you have to be worth being sous-veilled(?).

This isn't incredibly new, knowing that our morals and behavior and tastes can be co-opted from other sources, but maybe just how ubiquitous it is and easily accessible, added to the idea that we are the same as those we sous-veill (just making up words all over the place) can be a homogenizing factor that we interact with internally and display for those also doing the sous-veilling.

Promise I'm not stalking you flagamuffin :)

Also, I think that the concept of sous-veillance of the ones doing the surveillance is the idea that is vetted a lot by technologists as the prescription for surveillance, but to be effective it may have to be constant, just like any reputable surveillance system.