This paper details the theoretical background and the production of an educationaldocumentary film whose main purpose is to get its audience involved in a widerdiscussion on digital surveillance and technology.Some contemporary theories on digital surveillance view the extraction of datafrom users as part of a mechanism of “behavior modification”, a potential threatwhose consequences might have troubling implications for the meaning of humanagency itself. At the same time, studies show that users might not care enoughabout their privacy as to take action, due to a feeling of “digital resignation”. Gettinga user involved into a discussion on his or her own privacy is further complicatedby the fact that issues of surveillance and algorithmic intelligence seemalmost “non-human” for us to understand. Therefore, the question might arise ofof how can digital surveillance be represented and communicated.Starting from the central role that the concept of “human nature” has in thediscourse on surveillance, this paper proposes a theory of “digital humanism” asa strategic shift in focus towards the human user and the experiential nature ofinteracting with algorithms. To attempt at answering the question of how cansurveillance be represented, an educational documentary film was produced accordingto the framework of digital humanism. The film aimed at encouragingviewers’ self-reflection by looking at the tight interplay between user behavior, algorithmicknowledge, and the folk theories that are developed to understand theworld of algorithms. The film included a varied set of characters, their everydaylife and beliefs on the topic of technology. Eventually, the film suggested the ideaof “personal data obfuscation” as a tactic to deceive algorithms and retain one’sown privacy and autonomy.Qualitative testing was carried out eight participants, with the aim of investigatingwhether the film was able to impact the viewer’s own algorithmic awareness,especially in relation to tactics of personal data obfuscation. Results showedthat the film as an educational method succeeded in getting the audience engagedon the topic of digital surveillance, which was thought to be very relatable to theviewer’s own everyday life. However, not all communicative goals were reached,and the film was criticised for lacking technical information. Constructive criticismwas also raised towards the concept of “personal data obfuscation”. Future researchcan consider the educational framework described in the paper and furtherbroaden it in conjunction with traditional methods for computer science literacy.