In February, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and his web-based production company, hitRECord, teamed up with the American Civil Liberties Union to create a five-part educational series on the topics of technology and democracy.
The actor became passionate about issues of mass surveillance and digital privacy while preparing for his role as Edward Snowden in Oliver Stone’s upcoming movie, “.” Gordon-Levitt asked the public to submit videos to hitRECord answering the question: “Is today’s technology good or bad for democracy?” The goal of the project was not to gather expert opinions or talking points but instead to hear personal stories from people all over the world. Keeping with the style of hitRECord productions, each documentary is edited with music and interactive DIY animations.
The first installment of the series was released with the same title as the project, “Are You There, Democracy? It’s Me, the Internet.” From military professionals in the U.S. to practicing attorneys in India, we hear from a range of people on how they believe the internet has affected their democracies. People discuss how activism has increased across borders with technology and how technology creates a platform for reaching public consensus. At the same time, people raise privacy concerns around social media companies exploiting personal information and advertisers using surveillance to gather data on internet users. The video stars familiar faces like Emma Watson, Bryce Dallas Howard, Shailene Woodley, and Snowden himself. With no conclusion proposed, the video lays out the multifaceted relationship between technology and the global community.
%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20id%3D%22media-youtube-vzcaq2aeff8%22%20width%3D%22576%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22Are%20you%20there%2C%20Democracy%3F%20It%E2%80%99s%20me%2C%20the%20Internet.%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%22%20src%3D%22%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FvZcaQ2Aeff8%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Benablejsapi%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Bplayerapiid%3Dmedia-youtube-vzcaq2aeff8%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%3EVideo%20of%20Are%20you%20there%2C%20Democracy%3F%20It%E2%80%99s%20me%2C%20the%20Internet.%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
“REC the vote” spotlights a single submission from Ayesha Nasser, a college student from Pakistan. Ayesha tells the story of how she used social media to expose election rigging in Pakistan. When she posted videos of the voting stations on Facebook, she noticed many others were doing the same, resulting in protests across the region. In response, the Election Commission of Pakistan aired a PSA this year addressing the polling concerns, and Ayesha hopes that through the use of other technologies, her country’s elections will gain further transparency.
%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20id%3D%22media-youtube-0r-shygfohy%22%20width%3D%22576%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22REC%20the%20Vote%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%22%20src%3D%22%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2F0R_ShygfoHY%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Benablejsapi%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Bplayerapiid%3Dmedia-youtube-0r-shygfohy%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%3EVideo%20of%20REC%20the%20Vote%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
“That’s What She Said” stars an editor for hitRECord who calls into question the assumption that mass surveillance is necessary for national security. After sifting through a multitude of submissions arguing different facts, hitRECord’s editor, Rebecca, recognizes the difficulty in getting reliable information about surveillance on the internet. The video focuses on one submission from a high school student who debated the topic for seven months and argued that mass surveillance is saving lives. To counter that narrative, Rebecca interviews the ACLU’s Alex Abdo, who outlines the importance of accountability and targeted surveillance over mass surveillance.
%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20id%3D%22media-youtube-ywn9y6wwei4%22%20width%3D%22576%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22That%E2%80%99s%20What%20She%20Said%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%22%20src%3D%22%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2Fywn9Y6WWEi4%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Benablejsapi%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Bplayerapiid%3Dmedia-youtube-ywn9y6wwei4%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%3EVideo%20of%20That%E2%80%99s%20What%20She%20Said%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
“A Very Different World” features a submission from Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project Director Ben Wizner, who illustrates the psychological impact of mass surveillance on society. Wizner answers Gordon-Levitt’s question more philosophically, expressing concern that the effect of widespread knowledge about mass surveillance may stifle minority opinions and alter behaviors. Wizner concludes that technology is neither inherently good nor bad, but a tool for society to decide how to use.
%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20id%3D%22media-youtube-tfu-iumd1l0%22%20width%3D%22576%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22A%20Very%20Different%20World%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%22%20src%3D%22%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FtfU_iuMd1L0%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Benablejsapi%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Bplayerapiid%3Dmedia-youtube-tfu-iumd1l0%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%3EVideo%20of%20A%20Very%20Different%20World%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
The project ends on a hopeful note with a submission from Edward Snowden: “It’s Only Getting Better.” Snowden speaks optimistically about the potential for technology to improve society. He addresses the importance of sustainable energy technologies, access to knowledge on the internet, and how technology, when used right, can work for liberty.
%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20id%3D%22media-youtube-yscqfx-uepa%22%20width%3D%22576%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22Edward%20Snowden%3A%20It%E2%80%99s%20Only%20Getting%20Better%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%22%20src%3D%22%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FysCQfx-UEpA%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Benablejsapi%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Bplayerapiid%3Dmedia-youtube-yscqfx-uepa%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%3EVideo%20of%20Edward%20Snowden%3A%20It%E2%80%99s%20Only%20Getting%20Better%20%28HITRECORD%20x%20ACLU%29%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
He’s right, of course, that technology has enabled progress. But there is no satisfying or concrete answer to whether technology is an ultimate force for good or evil. Like the woman in the first video, outraged by data mining, or the Pakistani student ripping off the tape from her webcam before discussing how Facebook helped expose election rigging, we see that technology is a tool that serves different incentives. Ultimately, it is up to us to decide how to maintain accountability and transparency as technology gains power as a platform for democracy.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
ACLU Applauds Arizona Supreme Court Historic Decision That Police Need a Warrant to Access DNAACLU Applauds Arizona Supreme Court Historic Decision That Police Need a Warrant to Access DNA
PHOENIX — In a 7-0 decision, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a warrant is required to extract and analyze people’s DNA, saying that a person’s limited consent to a search of biological material for a specific purpose—in this case, a blood alcohol test for a DUI arrest—does not overcome that requirement. The ACLU and the ACLU of Arizona filed a friend-of-the-court brief in State v. Mitcham, arguing the government cannot genetically test biological material it already has in its possession—whether that’s blood taken from newborns to test for diseases or swabs collected from sexual assault survivors—to investigate the donors for a crime without first obtaining a warrant. In the decision, the court wrote that “in reaching this conclusion, we emphatically reject the State’s position that it was free to analyze Mitcham’s blood in any way it pleased simply because the State lawfully possessed the blood vials.” “Government analysis of our DNA can expose detailed information about our identity, appearance, family relationships, medical conditions, and more. We don’t consent to sharing all of that information each time we involuntarily shed our DNA or consent to a blood draw. The government’s argument in this case was a privacy nightmare,” said Vera Eidelman, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “We are greatly heartened by the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision to preserve the privacy of our sensitive genetic information.” In 2015, during a DUI arrest, the defendant in this case consented to the government collecting a sample of his blood solely to test it for blood-alcohol content, and was advised that the sample would be destroyed after 90 days. Instead, law enforcement held on to this sample for three years, at which point it used it for a completely different purpose—to extract and analyze his DNA, without a warrant or consent—while investigating another crime. Had the court accepted the government’s rationale here, all of us who consent to a biological sample collection, at any point in time, for any purpose, to any government entity, could have been subject to a warrantless DNA search after the fact. “Our DNA can reveal so much about us that our genetic privacy must be protected,” said Jared Keenan, legal director of ACLU of Arizona. “The Court’s decision is vital to protecting the strong constitutional rights that keep all Arizonans’ information safe from warrantless searches and unconstitutional intrusion.” -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
Face Recognition Threatens to Replace Tickets, ID at Sports Events – and BeyondFace Recognition Threatens to Replace Tickets, ID at Sports Events – and Beyond
You shouldn't participate in face recognition ticketing schemes. -
MississippiJul 2024
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
NetChoice v. FitchNetChoice v. Fitch
Whether a law that mandates age verification for all users of social media services violates the First Amendment. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Privacy & Technology
AI Generated Police Reports Raise Concerns Around Transparency, BiasAI Generated Police Reports Raise Concerns Around Transparency, Bias
AI-generated police reports threaten to exacerbate existing problems in law enforcement, and to create new ones.