Surveillance et vie privée

Énoncé

Évaluation de fin de première
Épreuve écrite
Durée : 2 heures

Le sujet porte sur la thématique « Imaginaires ».
Prenez connaissance des documents A, B et C et traitez le sujet suivant en anglais :
Write a short commentary on the three documents (minimum 300 words): taking into account their specificities, analyse how the documents deal with the themes of surveillance and privacy.

Document A

Outside, even through the shut window-pane, the world looked cold. Down in the street little eddies of wind were whirling dust and torn paper into spirals, and though the sun was shining and the sky a harsh blue, there seemed to be no colour in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere. The blackmoustachio'd face gazed down from every commanding corner. There was one on the house-front immediately opposite. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption said, while the dark eyes looked deep into Winston's own. Down at street level another poster, torn at one corner, flapped fitfully in the wind, alternately covering and uncovering the single word INGSOC. In the far distance a helicopter skimmed down between the roofs, hovered for an instant like a bluebottle, and darted away again with a curving flight. It was the police patrol, snooping into people's windows. The patrols did not matter, however. Only the Thought Police mattered.
Behind Winston's back the voice from the telescreen was still babbling away about pig-iron and the overfulfilment of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. 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 whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. 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 scrutinized.
Winston kept his back turned to the telescreen. It was safer, though, as he well knew, even a back can be revealing. A kilometer away the Ministry of Truth, his place of work, towered vast and white above the grimy landscape. This, he thought with a sort of vague distaste – this was London, chief city of Airstrip One, itself the third most populous of the provinces of Oceania.
George Orwell, 1984, Part One, chapter 1, 1949

Document B

Now the relationship between information and crime has changed in two ways, one absolute, one relative. In absolute terms, people generate more searchable information than they used to. Smartphones passively track and record where people go, who they talk to and for how long; their apps reveal subtler personal information, such as their political views, what they like to read and watch and how they spend their money. As more appliances and accoutrements become networked, so the amount of information people inadvertently create will continue to grow.To track a suspect's movements and conversations, police chiefs no longer need to allocate dozens of officers for round-the-clock stakeouts. They just need to seize the suspect's phone and bypass its encryption. If he drives, police cars, streetlights and car parks equipped with automatic number-plate readers (ANPRs, known in America as automatic licence-plate readers or ALPRs) can track all his movements.
In relative terms, the gap between information technology and policy gapes ever wider. Most privacy laws were written for the age of postal services and fixed-line telephones. Courts give citizens protection from governments entering their homes or rifling through their personal papers. The law on people's digital presence is less clear. In most liberal countries, police still must convince a judge to let them eavesdrop on phone calls.
But mobile-phone "metadata"—not the actual conversations, but data about who was called and when—enjoy less stringent protections. In 2006 the European Union issued a directive requiring telecom firms to retain customer metadata for up to two years for use in potential crime investigations. The European Court of Justice invalidated that law in 2014, after numerous countries challenged it in court, saying that it interfered with "the fundamental rights to respect for private life". Today data-retention laws vary widely in Europe. Laws, and their interpretation, are changing in America, too. A case before the Supreme Court will determine whether police need a warrant to obtain metadata.
Jon Fasman, The Economist online, May 31^st 2018

Document C


Official anti-crime campaign Transport for London and the Metropolitan Police, 2002

Commentaire méthodologique

1. L'analyse du sujet : on vous demande de prendre en compte la spécificité des trois documents du dossier pour analyser comment ils abordent les thématiques de la surveillance et de la vie privée.

2. Une première lecture / observation de chaque document pour le comprendre et vous familiariser avec le contenu. Identifier sa spécificité et repérer les passages ciblant la surveillance et de la vie privée.

3. Une analyse approfondie de chaque document, crayon à la main. Surligner les phrases ou éléments graphiques qui vous semblent particulièrement pertinents. Mettre en évidence les répétitions ou redondance de champs lexicaux. Noter dans la marge toutes vos réflexions par rapport à la surveillance et à la vie privée. NB : Faire cette étape directement en anglais pour gagner du temps et faciliter la rédaction du commentaire.
Document A = descriptive incipit (= beginning) of Orwell's 1984, published GB 1949 => dystopia + cautionary tale
Setting London, Airstrip One, Ingsoc. Colours = red & blue
Protagonist Winston Smith (works at Ministry of Truth) Winston kept his back to the telescreen. It was safer … => discomfort / dislike of telescreen => wants privacy. Security = absence of surveillance
Surveillance posters that were plastered everywhere => omnipresence
The blackmoutstachio'd face
gazed down from every commanding corner (// Hitler?)
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU the caption said => all-seeing, all-knowing totalitarian leader + propaganda
the dark eyes looked deep into Winston's own => oppressive
the telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously = two-way
You had to live … in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and except in darkness, every movement scrutinized. = omniscience surveillance
Privacy a helicopter … it was the police patrol, snooping into people's windows => unwelcome intrusion
Only the thought police mattered = greater danger than the police patrol; real menace = thought control
The voice from the telescreen was still babbling away about … the overfulfilment of the Ninth Three-Year Plan => form of brainwashing
How often … the Thought Police plugged in on any individual was guesswork => invisible, constant threat
Total lack of privacy except in darkness: people kept under control through propaganda + constant surveillance
Document B = extract from article in economic weekly newspaper (liberalist) 2018 GBPurely factual
No title but 1^st line = content the relationship between information and crime has changed in two ways, one absolute, one relative => structure of extract
Surveillance
§1 People generate more searchable information than they used to
Smartphones passively track and record where people go, who they talk to and for how long = form of surveillance
Their apps reveal subtler personal information = form of profiling (for police or for commercial purposes)
§2 To track a suspect's movements and conversations, police chiefs … just need to seize the suspect's phone …= police methods of surveillance
police cars, streetlights and carparks equipped with automatic number-plate readers … can track all his movements => impossibility to escape surveillance
Privacy
§3 Most privacy laws were written for the age of postal services and fixed-line telephones. … The law on people's digital presence is less clear. In most liberal countries, people (= police?) must still convince a judge to let them eavesdrop on phone calls. => the law protects people's privacy on the phone, but privacy laws are out-dated as regards our presence on digital and social media
§4 mobile-phone metadata … enjoy less stringent protection => metadata risk being used without our knowledge
Example of 2006 EU law for telecom firms to keep metadata for 2 years (to combat crime) invalidated in 2014 by EU Court of Justice because it interfered with the fundamental rights to respect for private life.
Today data-retention laws vary widely in Europe => lack of clear policy as regards privacy and digital data
Document C = campaign poster for CCTV & police on London buses 2002 = crime-control devices
Slogan: Secure beneath the watchful eyes => surveillance = security => purpose to calm bus riders' fears of crime
Logo: Transport for London (tfl) = public transport organism
1^st impression: double decker bus crossing bridge against background of figurative London skyline (one spire, one modern skyscraper). Colours red & blue (// doc A) => supposed to be warm / suggest comfort?
Analysis of symbols: four eyes of various sizes in sky with logo of tfl => intended to illustrate the slogan BUT eerie / frightening (// doc A) because all-seeing + invisible
Copy CCTV & METROPOLITAN POLICE ON BUSES ARE JUST TWO WAYS WE'RE MAKING YOUR JOURNEY MORE SECURE "We" = tfl; "just 2 ways" => there are more!; repetition of notion of security + presence of police (// doc A)
Conclusion: poster intended to inform & reassure. Message = under constant surveillance, people should feel safe. Problem: echoes of BB in doc A => is frightening!

4. Organisation de vos notes : ici, le sujet se prête à un traitement en 2 deux temps : 1) la surveillance ; 2) la vie privée.

• Introduction : présentation des trois documents en mettant en évidence leur spécificité et d'éventuels points communs (époque, nationalité). Annonce du sujet du commentaire.

• La surveillance : similitudes et différences de traitement dans les 3 documents

• La vie privée : similitudes et différences de traitement dans les 3 documents

• Conclusion : prendre du recul pour montrer votre capacité à réagir à l'écho entre la fiction et la réalité ici.

5. Rédaction de votre commentaire suivie d'une relecture attentive pour contrôler la qualité de votre expression.

Corrigé

All three documents in this dossier are English and they were all produced in the last 70 years. The oldest, document A, is the incipit of George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984, published in 1949. Document B, part of an article published in The Economist in 2018, was written by Jon Fasman, while document C is a poster commissioned in 2002 by Transport for London (tfl) in charge of public transport in the city. They all deal primarily with the topic of surveillance and its antithesis, privacy.
In Orwell's futuristic vision of London, part of Airstrip One in his fictional 1984, the population is under constant surveillance thanks to the two-way telescreens in every room, as well as the more sporadic police patrols by helicopter. Orwell insists on the pervasiveness of this monitoring organised by Big Brother: "You had to live … in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and except in darkness, every movement scrutinized." The policy of surveillance is widely advertised thanks to "posters that were plastered everywhere" that give the impression that Big Brother is staring into your eyes. Eerily, the 2002 anti-crime campaign echoes that of Big Brother: the red and blue poster was displayed at all the bus stops and on all the buses. Likewise, the four eyes hovering over the figurative London skyline with the tfl (Transport For London) logo in the place of pupils is reminiscent of Orwell's poster of Big Brother's peering eyes. Furthermore, the two slogans "Big Brother is watching you" and "Secure beneath the watchful eyes" both function as propaganda intending to brainwash rather than inform the population. Another eerie similarity with Orwell's novel is the use of police ("Metropolitan police on buses") on the tfl poster and even the CCTV (Closed Circuit Television) is not so far removed from Orwell's telescreen. Jon Fasman's article reminds us that nowadays surveillance is enabled thanks to automatic number-plate readers (which use a technology similar to telescreens and CCTV) and all the information recorded on smartphones (movements, conversations, and apps). While surveillance by Big Brother is perceived as a totalitarian policy to control people's lives, the two more recent documents present it as a tool to protect the public from crime: "We're making your journey more sure" on the buses, and "To track a suspect's movements and conversations, police chiefs … just need to seize the suspect's phone … "
However, it is also necessary to protect the public's privacy and Jon Fasman underlines the inadequacy of out-dated privacy laws in the face of today's digital technology. Although listening to people's phone conversations is considered illegal, the laws regarding mobile-phone meta-data are less clear-cut and vary from country to country. Fasman gives the example of data-retention laws which seem rather unstable as courts debate on the interference with "the fundamental rights to respect for private life". In Orwell's 1984, Big Brother clearly considers that nobody has the right to a private life. Even worse, the totalitarian leader endeavours to control the minds of the people by two means: the Thought Police and the propaganda constantly broadcast on the telescreen ("the overfulfilment of the Ninth Three-Year Plan"). Describing Winston's efforts to keep his back to the telescreen, Orwell seems to advocate the importance of privacy. Once more, we acknowledge a disturbing but dissonant echo between 1984 and the tfl poster: "Winston kept his back turned to the telescreen. It was safer … " and "Secure beneath the watchful eyes". The campaign publicists no doubt intended bus riders to feel safer because they were under constant surveillance, but it is easy to understand that people could protest at the idea of being scrutinised as potential criminals all the time.
The two more recent documents demonstrate the tendency of modern society to consider that loss of privacy is the price to pay to ensure public places are safe and to fight crime thanks to surveillance policies. However, the very obvious echoes between Orwell's novel and the tfl campaign poster are quite alarming, and lead us to think that the dystopic vision of 1984 could easily become our reality, perhaps without our actually realising it. What makes it even more disturbing is the idea of manipulating our minds to encourage us to think as the powers wish, or as the world of commerce wants us to.