Planning for Assessment – George Orwell’s Warning
Surveillance/Invasion of Privacy and how this is used for gain of power and control.
Main points/introduction: Mention how it doesn’t seem how anyone has even payed attention to Orwell’s warning. He warned us of intense surveillance so that people higher up could control us for their own purposes (gain control and power), and while it doesn’t appear exactly the same way in todays time, this has pretty much come true.
- Instead of actually trying to avoid letting this come true, we basically just accepted that that is the way it is and ‘edited’ our fears over time as what we once feared became reality (MAYBE THIS SHOULD NOT BE IN INTRO IDK). Instead of dealing with our fears we simply adjust as they come true and be scared of something else.
- The fact that the surveillance in 1984 doesn’t even seem to worry us too much anymore, when it was intended as a warning of a serious thing, that should be a warning sign that it has gone too far!!
- The citizens of Oceania had no real privacy – this sounds horrific to us. However, most of us don’t realise how it has gone much further than we would like to admit – most of his warning has come true even if the actual mechanisms aren’t identical.
- Orwell’s MAIN warning is of people having too much power, and how they can achieve this. In the past it was government, now it is companies.
Paragraph 1: Surveillance in the Public (if this doesn’t sound that alarming, just you wait…)
- Nineteen Eighty Four: The microphones in the woods – they have to be careful what they say and where, as it could be picked up by people.
- There were no telescreens, of course, but there was always the danger of concealed microphones by which your voice might be picked up and recognised
- “She shook her head, evidently as a warning that he must keep silent, then” […] “We’re all right here?” “Yes. look at the trees… There’s nothing big enough to hide a mike in.”
- Nowadays: Webcams and/or CCTV cameras in public places can be used to find your location at any given time if people want to – this information can be accessed by far more people than we think.
- “There are millions of webcams in London. There’s barely anywhere you can go without being under surveillance.”
The argument for use of CCTV footage in public now – and the reason that we are generally OK with this – is due to easier crime prevention. We don’t mind, and we shouldn’t mind, because we ‘have nothing to hide.’ However, if we asked “all citizens to carry location tracking devices, it would make tracing criminal acts much easier, and that it could easily be argued that people refusing to carry these devices only do so because they have something to hide. It is a matter of course that most people in our society would object to this solution, not because they wish to commit any wrongdoings, but because it is invasive and prone to abuse.” However even without this the government can already gather massive amounts of data about our habits and locations etc, so even if we have nothing to hide it is still invasive!
“It is our view that the danger of a “slippery slope” scenario cannot be dismissed as paranoia.” https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/ethics-of-surveillance/ethics.html
Paragraph 2: If being spied on in public isn’t invasive enough, try this on for size… Private home surveillance 1 = telescreens vs technology being used against us
- Nineteen eighty four: Telescreens. Being able to be watched and heard almost constantly in your own home, the one place where you should have the most privacy and freedom to be yourself with no consequences and therefore the place with the most potential for useful surveillance.
- The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing if you were being watched at any given moment.
- – “It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live – did live, from habit that became instinct – in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinised.”
- For a moment he was tempted to take it into one of the water-closets and read it at once. But that would be shocking folly, as he well knew. There was no place where you could be more certain that the telescreens were watched continuously.”
POINT: we reading this now think that, even if we think it is less outrageous since we are more accustomed to the idea of technology and surveillance, it is unacceptable to us. However, do we really understand how much of this has come true? Do we really have as much control over what people know about us as we think?
Nowadays:
- ‘Hey Google’ (owned by Google) and ‘Alexa’ (owned by Amazon) are two examples of devices that can be used for home surveillance. Constantly listening for their ‘wakeword’ that tells them to answer, the companies themselves have admitted that there is potential for this data to be collected and used to profile the people and make money off them thru targeted advertising.
- “Google keeps copies of clips made each time you activate it, but it has emerged that background chatter could be enough to trigger recording.” https://www.consumerwatchdog.org/privacy-technology/how-google-and-amazon-are-spying-you
- Your phone and computer microphones can be listened in to, same with your smart TV, and you can be watched through your phone and computer cameras in virtually the same way as a telescreen. !!! Warning bells???
Paragraph 3: Cookies/algorithms (resulting in targeted advertising) vs Kid Surveillance; both make the most of when you are most yourself and can gather the most information about you and your habits when you’re unaware, using it for their benefit.
Nineteen Eighty Four:
- “The children, on the other hand, were systematically turned against their parents and taught to spy on them and report their deviations. It was a device by means of which everyone could be surrounded day and night by informers who knew him intimately.”
- This shows how scared they were of being spied on in their own home
- The thing that knows you the most is being used against you for their purposes.
Nowadays: Algorithms watch your online habits and build a profile of you, showing you more and more things that you will like, observing your reactions, trying to obtain as much information about you as possible so that they can monetize you and use you to gain more money/power.
POINT: different mechanism, same effect. The people are desperate for your information and will gather as much as possible to use it for their purposes. Ultimate goal of eliminating thoughtcrime or monetizing you is for POWER.
Paragraph 4?: depending on word count could go into how expressing certain things results in you being ‘vapourised’ for both 1984 and on the internet today but thats not really surveillance soo idk.
Pre-conclusion if that’s a thing (maybe): LINKS. Talk about in more detail of how these examples of surveillance show how we just adapt our fears over time as what we were scared of comes true. Look in our dystopian movies and literature and see…
Conclusion: Ian Crouch, writer and editor of The New Yorker, says that in the novel 1984 “Everyone simply assumes that they are always being watched, and most no longer know to care.” Does this not apply to nowadays time?
