Orwell, in 1949, wrote his world-known dystopian novel “1984”, which described a state, Oceania, which is under the control of Big Brother. This one, is able to spy on everyone through his cameras spotted all over the city. The question of surveillance and private life have now been raised by the widespread of CCTV (closed-circuit television) cameras around the world lately. Indeed a huge number of articles show up this obvious link between today’s world and the “Orwellian’s world”. The American civil liberties union (ACLU) write about the drawbacks of public video surveillance use, and highlights the unstable balance between privacy and safety. Orwell as well predicted an abusive use of cameras, by governments or companies, detrimental to the fundamental freedoms, but can we go as far as saying, that we’re now being spied as Orwell has imagined, by Big Brothers?
Cameras were first used during the eighties in England, to spy and to prevent from IRA’s bombing. They are now supposed to prevent from following terrorist attack and from pettier crimes. But as far are there have been investigation, all of them proved or in that case contradict the effectiveness of those public video surveillance. Indeed a research from 2005 by The British Home Office ensures that CCTV didn’t stop or decrease crime rate. Some explanations to that might be the fact that once aware of the camera’s spot, the one who want to commit his offense, just have to commit it in a hiding place, away from cameras. Then, it has been proved by some experts of the U.S government that, a police officer or everyone else, after watching monitor screens for about 20 minutes, they get their attention going to” well below acceptable levels”. Although video cameras must give citizens a lower perception of crime and reduce their fear, they actually don’t due to their ineficiency.
Additionally they are widely criticized for being intrusive whereas you are not a criminal, yet. The word intrusive, allows a wide range of understanding, as each one have his own thoughts about what we call privacy intrusion. There are almost 5.9 Millions CCTV cameras in Britain that is to say “One camera for every 11 people” notes the Telegraph, is this too intrusive? Would Big Brother be satisfied enough with this amount of surveillance? Would he be sure that no one will step out of line?
This extensive video surveillance program over England, represents approximately 20 percent of their criminal justice budget for, as we say, limited results. However cameras weren’t meant to be intrusive at first but, as any innovation is created for the common good, they are misappropriated and some abuse of their use. Mark Dice explains well this misappropriation of some innovation, by giving the example of Albert Einstein’s research: “he could have never imagined that his work would be used to design weapons capable of destroying the entire earth.” Let’s just hope cameras wouldn’t go that far, even if they have already been used for spying upon political activists during the Vietnam war, as ACLU underlines in his paper. This can be brought closely, as Dice remains us, to the Ollewian’s nightmare of having a police force “illegally spying on and smearing peaceful political activists who were seen as problematic”.
Nevertheless the title of Mark Dice “Big Brother : the Orwellian Nightmare come true” has to be qualified. There is a slight difference between Oceania where everyone were spied at their own home and today’s world, even if they have been some abuses. Lately, some raised their voice. They explained how they didn’t understand why public video surveillance could be an intrusion in our private life. They first remain us, that those public videos surveillance, were obviously spotted on.. public areas, to answer to those who were saying that “Freedom to behave as one chooses to its limited when people are aware of being monitored”. Why this point about public areas? Because when you are outside with strangers your behavior is less “natural” that he used to be inside your home because you are not alone so being monitoring definitely not affect your “self-expression” as it is the same as being watch by strangers in the street. If you feel uncomfortable of thinking that you’re being watched by both cameras or people, the best way is actually to stay home.
Another idea will be to prevent and aware more the people about camera’s presence, for them to feel less surprise and observe behind our back. Indeed, according to Technologies of control report, ” Only 33 per cent of individuals in Glasgowcity centre were aware of the presence of cameras.”, that is why it makes the citizens reluctant to such program. By just found out that you have been watched for a while, you can get goosebumps.
Then cameras, in a more positive sense, can be seen as an unknown human who is going to judge you anyway. At least, I hope they are enjoying their time watching us, fighting with ours high heels on the pavement, or picking ours noses discretely
For ages, women and men have being fighting for their rights and freedom, the abolition of the slavery, the women’s right to vote or even lately, gay marriage. Now they are determine to claim their right to privacy. “1984” was a warning that has been heart, because it has made people think about how far technologies, and cameras can be developed “against” ourselves. However, it is up to one’s own thinking to decide, whether Jeremy Harris Lipschultz and his famous sentence “Privacy is dead” is right or not. But, we also have to be aware that technologies are constantly innovated, meaning that we are not sure that the “Orwellian’s world” is that far from us. Indeed some experts wish that in a short, video cameras would possess facial recognition than “can pick you out of a crowd of tens of thousands of people in a slip second”.
Finally, nobody knows what the future holds.
Watch out 