Order ready-to-submit essays. No Plagiarism Guarantee!
Note: Our papers are 100% human-written, not AI-generated.
We Write Essays for Students
Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper
Get Help Now!
Citizenfour Most of the governments and bureaucratic organizations loathe the probability of a whistleblower. The whistleblowers often have to deal with the possibility of a denouncement or are disregarded as individuals who are imbalanced and incapable of viewing issues based on an objective perspective. Smear campaigns are always orchestrated to invalidate the whistleblowers and reduce the possibility of any credibility being assigned to the individuals (Greenwald, 2014). The reaction of the government and bureaucracy targeted in the whistleblowing often follows the level of seriousness of the information awarded to the people. The denouncement of the whistleblowers promises little promises on the part of the government while increasing the risk of the denouncement being used as a platform for the additional accusation of the government for more offences. Citizenfour covers the extent of the government surveillance on the world population.
Citizenfour accounts the trials and tribulations of Edward Snowden while holed up in a Hong Kong hotel. He represents a daring breed of whistleblowers that are willing to tackle the government and draconian ways in a bold manner (Poitras, Bonnefoy,& Wilutzky, 2014).
Snowden presents the demeanor of an individual who is unwilling to take the center stage but expose the government for their continued surveillance of the Americans and other people in the world.
The surveillance activities are conducted in conjunction with the British intelligence services. During the interviews, Snowden is painted as a camera shy individual who is unwilling to take the spot for the sake of glory unlike the other whistleblowers in history who seek fame.
He is seemingly condemned by his nature and convinced that the best way of dealing with the issues outlined is through the confession and outlining of the actions of the government (Greenwald, 2014).
The story tends to center on his information as opposed to the source. He seeks to distance himself as an individual from the center while pushing for his points of contention to be aired in the media.
He may have been breaking numerous laws through his confession but there is a question of the written law’s superiority over the moral compass in the determination of who is right and wrong in a given context.
He is an individual who is willing to stand up and be counted as a bastion for justice for all and the respect of human rights while embracing human rights. The candor in the film can reflect the genuineness of the move to expose a government that had by all standards taken care of his needs well through a good remuneration package and other additional benefits (Greenwald, 2014).
He comes across as a selfless individual hoping to use the media as a way of protecting the people from the dangers of the government surveillance period. Snowden is not an attention seeker since he opts to dump the files on the reporter’s laps and let them make the decisions on what bits of the information ought to be released and what is to be kept private. He is, therefore, less egomaniacal with the driving force being the utilization of his freedom of speech as manifested in the universal declaration of human rights (Klein & Bamford, 2009). Series of clandestine meetings lead to the filming of the real events behind the release of the information. The documentary covers how the limitations of freedoms of speech and association were operationalized in order for the government to secure its clandestine and illegal surveillance of the American citizens and any other individual.
To put the issues highlighted in the film into an accurate perspective, it is imperative that one revisits the history. The risk of the whistleblowers can be traced back to the Watergate scandal.
The scandal centered on the republican surveillance of the democrats campaign headquarters. Since the release of the information, the media was never gagged. There was genuine exposure of the issues underlying the surveillance argument in the media.
As a result of media coverage, there was a genuine release of the information on the issues to the public hence increasing the genuineness of the government. However, this issue can be perceived to have been a major detriment to the intelligence community since if it was left to them; they would have preferred unsanctioned surveillance to the people.
The mocking modus operandi was operationalized in the recent leaks since the intelligence community was not in any way validated of allowed to air in the free media (Poitras, Bonnefoy,& Wilutzky, 2014).
The results of Church Committee formed to regulate the surveillance activities on operatives in the United States led to the identification formulation of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Klein & Bamford, 2009).. The act was formulated with the aim of targeting the foreign operatives who were in the country illegally to collect information on the operatives.
The provisions of the act allowed unwarranted surveillance on the foreigners while requiring that a warrant be issued by a judge in order for the intelligence services to collect information from the Americans.
The government had to present the probable cause in order for them to have been effective warrant to surveil the citizen (Lucas, 2014). The probable cause was only valid if the government could indicate that the individual could be in any way connected to the foreign powers or was aiding an operative.
The warrant was to be granted by a bench of at least three judges. This was not the case in the NSA surveillance. The 9/11 attacks led to the complete revolution of all the modes of operation dealing with the surveillance.
Essentially, what seemed unacceptable was the new norm. The government was involved in ambitious surveillance programs that targeted any one similar to the Project Minaret that was rolled out during the Vietnam War.
Before Snowden gained the access to the media, the Bush administration had applied different intimidation tactics to ensure that the former analyst could not access the media (Klein & Bamford, 2009). Most of the tactics were geared towards the reduction of access to media while threatening the news houses into refusal of the story even when it was important for the people to know about the actions of government.
The mainstay of the government had been the surveillance of the external threats alone. The bush administration had applied numerous intimidation tactics to ensure that the perception of the mainstay NSA operation was sustained.
The threats ranged from the emotional intimidation assuming the form of blame apportionment in the event that there was a successful attack to threats of different Pentagon Suits. Eventually, the Times magazine published the story out of fear of potential embarrassment if the information was released by another outlet since they were aware of the story for a significantly long period.
The universal declaration of human rights and the Geneva Convention are the guild lines on the main human rights (Lucas, 2014). The rights to access to information are allowed to all the people. The Snowden saga indicates the difficulties in the access to media in the period when every action is put under strict surveillance by the government in blatant contravention of the rules that had been developed to protect the people from the same issues that the system failed to handle effectively.
The need to use a pseudonym in the communication indicates the inability of the reporters to act as they would prefer in the dissemination information concerning themselves and any other relevant activity (Klein & Bamford, 2009). The government does not come across as a major source of security and it does not necessarily present the united front in matters to do with civil liberties.
The film echoes the concerns voiced by Church Committee decades before the saga had unfolded (Poitras, Bonnefoy,& Wilutzky, 2014). The propensity of the government to use the military and intelligence mechanisms for the violation of human rights is eventually manifested in the movie. As the reporters reach out to Snowden, there is palpable fear given that they are wary of the listening ear and the ever seeing eye of the government through the NSA surveillance satellites. The cost of truth and journalistic freedom is manifested in the movie as it progresses. The movie is capable of painting the accurate picture of America. Instead of the movie focusing on the individual, it has an adept way of depicting the reality of the whistleblower whose main dream was to ensure that the people understood the extent of governmental betrayal of their trust through constant surveillance and blatant disregard of the FISA provisions.
Secret meetings held in a Hong Kong hotel lead to the uncovering of the real image behind the NSA surveillance and its extent in the degeneration of the situation. The journalists as well as the whistleblower tend to operate in a state of anticipatory secrecy with the tension and possibility of their freedoms of expression being manifested in the real life. The threat of the military industrial complex and absolutism seems to have been operation right under the unnoticing eyes of the Americans (Klein & Bamford, 2009). The government seems to have focused more on the sustenance of the military interventions and other supportive activities such as collection of intelligence as opposed to the fundamental rights of all the people that had been instrumental in the definition of the United States as a country and a global human rights champion.
However, even as the defense for Snowden leaks on governmental surveillance on its citizens is valid, there are fewer aspects surrounding the time that may have warranted the adoption of extreme measures (Verble, 2014). Firstly, the government was reacting to the largest attack on domestic soil ever. This meant that there was no that could be adopted to reduce the impact of the action. It also means that the government was at liberty to use any other applicable law in the protection of the people.
From the ethical standpoint, the government was actin in the interests of the majority. Given the surprising nature of the attack, the government was concerned over the validity of any intervention that was both delayed and potentially unviable (Greenwald, 2014).
For instance, the government could have followed the provisions laid by FISA. However, the interventions were not necessarily sealed and behind doors. Since the media could have taken up the information on warrant hearing sessions, the targets in the surveillance could have been invalidated (Van Cleave, 2013).
The best way of dealing with the issues was uncertain with the majority of the government mechanisms being incapable of meeting the urgency and secrecy needed in the given situation. As a result, the government intervention was mandated and justifiable even if its implementation and cover up attempts that followed, including silencing Snowden, were in contravention of the universal declaration of human rights; specifically on matters pertaining the right to information and freedom of the press.
In conclusion, Citizenfour outlines the struggle for a chance to be heard by all concerned parties versus the strong arm of a well-meaning government. It indicates the numerous violations of human rights and the risk of loss that affects all the people. It also connotes the inability of the government to fully meet the security needs of all the people while staying within the limits of the law.
Welcome to originalessaywriters.com, our friendly and experienced essay writers are available 24/7 to complete all your assignments. We offer high-quality academic essays written from scratch to guarantee top grades to all students. All our papers are 100% plagiarism-free and come with a plagiarism report, upon request
Tell Us “Write My Essay for Me” and Relax! You will get an original essay well before your submission deadline.
