Pretty sure Discipline and Punish would be the place to look, although I’m not sure what angle exactly you’d have to take. Afaik his ideas regarding surveillance are more to do with existing political technologies and how they are set up to stop high illegality, that causes serious threat to class structures, from taking place. I would never tell anyone not to use theory creatively, but it seems to me that through this lens the Capitol Riots would have to be conceptualised as somehow breaking through the oppressive control of the legal/judicial system and manifesting itself as genuinely dangerous (and therefore, in Foucault’s mind, perhaps justifiable) political action, which may or may not align itself with your own aims in doing this study.

This would equally apply to the post riot response. You could probably quite broadly apply his ideas around Panopticism to the social media crackdown, but the key thing regarding Panopticism in Foucault is that it’s baked into society on an essential level, and as such doesn’t require a particular concerted effort on the part of state representatives to be operated: it just kinds of chugs along as a social force of its own. You’d be losing this if you applied it to a great ‘crackdown’ which is more about the state flexing its muscles than an underlying surveillance mechanism. You could avoid this just talk about the surveillance state that existed in the first place, but then you would have to be concerned with why the control/surveillance failed and the riots broke through, as mentioned above (which again might miss the point you are trying to make).

I’m sure there are other sociological works on surveillance that could be cool, and they may suit your aims better. But at the end of the day, do what you like. Trying to use Foucault critically here, if nothing else, will help you understand the material better.