To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the movie Enemy of the State is maybe much more appropriate today, when balancing between private flexibilities and personal privacy and the need for securing the nation's borders, than it was when it was launched. The NSA, National Security Firm, put in location secret programs for electronic security soon after September 11. The ownership along with the control of these programs is in the hands of the executive branch or multi-national corporations, with little supervision from the legislative or judicial branch.
In 1998, the time the film was launched, some occasions like the government promoting the passage of a legislation allowing it to subject any US resident to secret security for practically any reason were yet to come real in reality.
The Patriot Act was passed only 2 months following the September 11 attacks. The law eradicated numerous constraints avoiding spying of people by the government, offering security agents power to wiretap, conduct electronic eavesdropping, and access people's personal data (Epic).
Following these advancements in the name of security, using the security innovations is cause for public argument on privacy, with some individuals supporting the usage of the technologies and others seeing it as invasion of the personal privacy of individuals.
Verified writer
Proficient in: Government Surveillance
5 (204)
“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”
The usage of surveillance innovations raises several questions. For circumstances, how far should residents in a democracy allow such surveillance to go? Should the government collect big amounts of unnecessary personal info in the name of attempting to identify lawbreakers?
What if the laws put in place to govern use of the surveillance technologies are abused? Can people rely on those managing the security to keep from abusing the power offered to them? Watching Opponent of the State, lots of people would answer "no." The movie represents how far misuse of security innovation can go and cautions about the dangers that could feature substantial government surveillance.
Carla Dean, the main actor's caring better half, voices these issues when she reacts to the notion that the surveillance will be utilized to only spy on presumed bad guys and terrorists.
She asks who will draw the line between tapping suspected criminals and suspending the good citizens’ civil liberties. She asks who will “monitor the monitors of the monitors? ” (“Enemy”). The Patriot Act allows for monitoring of library and bookstore records and while such laws targeted terrorists, lately, the lines appear to have blurred a bit. The Justice Department is said to have been conducting seminars to look at ways of extending the wiretapping provisions to cover more than just terrorism, within only 6 months of the Patriot Act’s passage (Alien).
According to Duke, passing on surveillance information beyond those responsible, tapping and spying of innocent citizens by government without warrant is privacy invasion. The reason for investing in surveillance is meant to protect citizens’ liberties, but not to take those liberties away as citizens are entitled to privacy regardless of what they are doing, and that it is even unjust for the government to spy on suspected terrorists without warrants. According to him, government invasion of individuals’ privacy erases any other rights Americans may have.
He argues that it is futile to try to protect or guard America without rights and principle (Duke). The film draws attention to the downsides of intensive surveillance. Although, to some point, surveillance may reinforce national security, it is also likely to be misused and erode personal privacy. The film also discounts assumptions that pictures do not lie. Although surveillance is effective in gathering information because the images are taken to represent reality, Enemy of the State emphasizes that they can also be quite misleading.
For instance, the FBI’s photos of Robert while at Pintero’s place imply non-existent Robert’s mafia connections. Likewise, when Carla Dean is shown pictures of her husband, Robert Dean, and Rachel Banks together, she imagines that he is having an affair, which is not true (“Enemy”). This misrepresentation of reality shows how the use of surveillance could be abused by the monitors in case they have hidden malicious interests or they are being manipulated by more powerful people in government.
Surveillance could also cause the monitors to spy on innocent citizens and unnecessarily invade their privacy because the pictures are also prone to misrepresentation. This could even cause damage to a person’s image and cause fear because there is no guarantee of personal privacy. Experts say that use of secret surveillance prompt ethical and legal privacy concerns when used in people’s homes. The worrying thing is that the use of surveillance cameras by individuals has increased considerably, following the 9/11 attacks.
Hi-tech hidden surveillance cameras, once only restricted to law enforcement and military personnel is now available to civilians. Disguised surveillance cameras are now being hidden in things like teddy bears or plants or almost anywhere and even parents who have worries about their nannies can access such technology. Tiny motion-detector-triggered cameras can even inform people when, for example, their cars are being keyed. Even things like sunglasses have fiber optic video cameras and micro-cameras built into watches are in market today at relatively low prices.
Many spy stores cater to businesses concerned about theft or industrial espionage. A Malibu restaurant, for instance, recently solved a problem of money disappearing from a safe by installing a hidden surveillance camera. All these can be bought at specialized shops like Spy Tech, the Privacy Connection, etc. (surveillance-source). It is generally accepted that it is unreasonable, to a great extent, to expect privacy in public happenings.
For instance, while one can go in front of another person’s house and probably take a picture, the issue of planting surveillance cameras in front of the house a whole day could take time to be addressed in a specific way (surveillance-source). There seems to be no escape from surveillance societies as Enemy of the State (“Enemy”), finally implies. Although Brill finally escapes, he has to follow strict rules in order to avoid the surveillance cameras which are almost everywhere.
His workplace is “unplugged from the world” (“Enemy”) and to escape from the surveillance, he is forced to abandon normal life and has to live an isolated life (“Enemy”). This kind of lifestyle seems impossible for most people, because there is no way one can lead such an isolated life. It is also ironical that the monitors or those in charge of the surveillance tools themselves fall victim to the same technology. The men, after following every move Robert makes all along, they have end up being monitored with the same cameras.
In addition, Brill says “the more the technology you use, the easier it is for them to keep tabs on you” (“Enemy”). The movie makes it clear that the more people keep fawning over the latest technology, the more they keep on enhancing the surveillance society’s power. On the whole, this film clearly demonstrates that in spite of its various flaws, surveillance society is here to stay (“Enemy”). Works Cited Alien. Citizen surveillance: Government abuse or fair play? 20 Sep. 2003. Web. 4 Jun. 2010. <http://boards. straightdope. com/sdmb/archive/index. php/t-212591. html>
Duke. Who is the Next Victim of Government Spying? 13 Mar. 2008. Web. 4 Jun. 2010. <http://socyberty. com/government/who-is-the-next-victim-of-government-spying/> Enemy of the State. Dir. Tony Scott. Walt Disney Studios Distribution, 1998. Film. EPIC. Information Center USA Patriot Act. 2009. Web. 4 Jun. 2010. <http://epic. org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/default. html> Hidden Camera Surveillance: Why the New Popularity and Availability of Gadgets May be Cause for Concern. 2010. Web. 4 Jun. 2010. <http://www. surveillance-source. com/Hidden_Camera_Surveillance. htm>
Enemies of the State: Privacy and Surveillance. (2016, Sep 10). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/enemies-of-the-state-privacy-and-surveillance-essay
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
