Analysis of Ethics in Film
The film, Enemy of the State, is about a lawyer named Robert Dean who unknowingly winds up with evidence showing the assassination of a U.S. Congressman (who was believed to have committed suicide), which was arranged by a top official for the National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA goes to great lengths to acquire the evidence in Dean's posession, which Dean is unaware that he has.
The ethical issues surrounding technology in this film would be invasion of privacy. In order to track Dean so they can find the evidence, the NSA agents break into Dean's home and plant bugs in his phone, in his shoes, and on his clothes. They also put cameras in his home so they can not only hear everything that goes on, they can see it too. The NSA freezes Dean's accounts, so neither him nor his wife are able to use their credit cards or withdraw money from their accounts. NSA agents are able to track Dean's every move--he cannot do or say anything without them knowing about it. Is it ethical for the NSA (or any other agency) to plant bugs among your personal items and to put cameras in your home? Should they be allowed to freeze your accounts so you have no way of accessing your money?
The media in this film was led to believe that Dean was still seeing a woman he had an affair with several years earlier, and that he murdered her. They treated Dean like a criminal, so even if Dean discovered the evidence he had in his posession and tried to take it to the media or the police, it would not be credible--who would believe a criminal who had evidence of a Congressman being assassinated?
I think this film does portray ethical issues. The issue of whether or not the government should be allowed to monitor phone conversations and e-mail in order to target threats to the country is one that exists today. However, I do not know if the government has gone or would go to the lengths the NSA did in the movie in order to get what they want...although I would not be surprised if they would or have already. With all the technology available today, it is easy for someone to track you through a satellite above the Earth, which is what the NSA used some to track Dean.
I think this film might influence public perceptions of government agencies, such as the NSA, in a negative way. In this film, Dean committed no crime, yet the NSA was pursuing him as if he had. Dean did not receive criminal justice-the NSA could not simply arrest Dean since he hadn't really done anything wrong, and if they did arrest him, it probably would've come out that the Congressman was actually assassinated. If Dean had been arrested and the cover-up remained in tact, he would've been found guilty in court because of all the evidence the NSA agents planted implicating Dean, and thus would've gone to prison for something he did not do--all in order to keep the government cover-up a secret. This is significant because it shows that the government is willing to let someone take the fall for something in order to keep what the government did a secret.
In this film, the only law enforcement officials present were those from the NSA, and those specifically brought in by the NSA. The local police were not present. I found it odd that the NSA could be chasing Dean to that extent (through a hotel, in a tunnel, etc.) without the local police becoming suspicous and getting involved. In reality, I do not think it would be possible for all that to happen without the police being involved.
This film makes me wonder whether or not something like what happens in the film has actually happened in real life. Have there really been governement cover-ups? I believe there have been, but we won't know what they were. And if I accidentally gained posession of something the governement wanted to keep a secret and I didn't know I had it, would they go to the same lengths to get it from me?
The ethical issues surrounding technology in this film would be invasion of privacy. In order to track Dean so they can find the evidence, the NSA agents break into Dean's home and plant bugs in his phone, in his shoes, and on his clothes. They also put cameras in his home so they can not only hear everything that goes on, they can see it too. The NSA freezes Dean's accounts, so neither him nor his wife are able to use their credit cards or withdraw money from their accounts. NSA agents are able to track Dean's every move--he cannot do or say anything without them knowing about it. Is it ethical for the NSA (or any other agency) to plant bugs among your personal items and to put cameras in your home? Should they be allowed to freeze your accounts so you have no way of accessing your money?
The media in this film was led to believe that Dean was still seeing a woman he had an affair with several years earlier, and that he murdered her. They treated Dean like a criminal, so even if Dean discovered the evidence he had in his posession and tried to take it to the media or the police, it would not be credible--who would believe a criminal who had evidence of a Congressman being assassinated?
I think this film does portray ethical issues. The issue of whether or not the government should be allowed to monitor phone conversations and e-mail in order to target threats to the country is one that exists today. However, I do not know if the government has gone or would go to the lengths the NSA did in the movie in order to get what they want...although I would not be surprised if they would or have already. With all the technology available today, it is easy for someone to track you through a satellite above the Earth, which is what the NSA used some to track Dean.
I think this film might influence public perceptions of government agencies, such as the NSA, in a negative way. In this film, Dean committed no crime, yet the NSA was pursuing him as if he had. Dean did not receive criminal justice-the NSA could not simply arrest Dean since he hadn't really done anything wrong, and if they did arrest him, it probably would've come out that the Congressman was actually assassinated. If Dean had been arrested and the cover-up remained in tact, he would've been found guilty in court because of all the evidence the NSA agents planted implicating Dean, and thus would've gone to prison for something he did not do--all in order to keep the government cover-up a secret. This is significant because it shows that the government is willing to let someone take the fall for something in order to keep what the government did a secret.
In this film, the only law enforcement officials present were those from the NSA, and those specifically brought in by the NSA. The local police were not present. I found it odd that the NSA could be chasing Dean to that extent (through a hotel, in a tunnel, etc.) without the local police becoming suspicous and getting involved. In reality, I do not think it would be possible for all that to happen without the police being involved.
This film makes me wonder whether or not something like what happens in the film has actually happened in real life. Have there really been governement cover-ups? I believe there have been, but we won't know what they were. And if I accidentally gained posession of something the governement wanted to keep a secret and I didn't know I had it, would they go to the same lengths to get it from me?
posted by Emily @ 1:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home