Joseph Gordon-Levitt Asks Public to Submit Videos for Project on Tech and Democracy
Gordon-Levitt to Donate Acting Fee From Snowden Movie to ACLU and hitRECord Project
LOS ANGELES — Actor and filmmaker Joseph Gordon-Levitt launched a new community-sourced video project today with his production company hitRECord and the American Civil Liberties Union, putting out a call for people to submit videos with their takes on the connections between technology and democracy. The submissions will be used for a series of collaborative short films about the subject.
Gordon-Levitt, who stars in the upcoming Oliver Stone film “Snowden” as the NSA whistleblower, said that he is donating his entire acting fee from the movie to help facilitate the conversation about technology and democracy. Part of the fee will compensate those individuals whose contributions wind up being used in the finished hitRECord production. The remainder will be given to the ACLU to support the organization’s work on free speech and digital privacy rights.
In a , Gordon-Levitt asks viewers to three questions:
- Is today’s technology good or bad for democracy?
- How might the technology of the future be bad for democracy?
- How might the technology of the future be good for democracy?
“One thing you could talk about is what new technology means for privacy,” Gordon-Levitt says in the video. “Some people believe that the right to privacy is a cornerstone of democracy, and without privacy, we don’t really live in a free country. Other people, and especially perhaps people who are so open about their lives online anyway, don’t seem to mind being watched. So I’m curious how you feel about it.”
Other topics people could talk about include freedom of expression, news, education, and anything else that they can think of, he said.
“There’s no right answer to these questions. In fact, the answers I’m most interested in are not the expert, political pundit, left-wing, right-wing, talking points kind of thing. I’d much rather hear a personal story or something that’s unique to you.”
Gordon-Levitt and hitRECord will use the answers sent in to make a short documentary-style film exploring a wide range of perspectives on democracy in the digital age, as well as several other short films that will take a variety of forms, such as animated music videos or dramatizations of people’s experiences, depending on the contributions received.
The films will be produced using hitRECord’s signature collaborative process, which employs animators, musicians, writers, video editors, and other artists to work on the films through the hitRECord website and app.
The films will be completed in time for the theatrical debut of “Snowden,” which is set for release in May.
“I’ve grown to care a lot about these questions since playing Edward Snowden,” Gordon-Levitt said. “I think it’s a really worthwhile conversation for us all to be having, so I’m going to be donating my acting fee from the Snowden movie to help facilitate that conversation. Some of that money will go towards this project, to pay the contributors, and the rest will be going to the ACLU to support the work they do in the areas of technology and democracy.”
Today’s video is at:
Videos from the public can be submitted and are shown at:
%3Ciframe%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20height%3D%22384%22%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FvZcaQ2Aeff8%3Fautoplay%3D1%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%22%20thumb%3D%22%2Ffiles%2Fyt_jgl.jpg%22%20width%3D%22580%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube.com.
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
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.