Panda to Panda is an example of ethico-political subversion, in which authority is undermined in a number of ways. First, the project in its totality is a complaint against government surveillance and state power. As Ai, Appelbaum, and Poitras were working on the project, they continuously filmed each other. Some of the material has been shared on social media, thereby engaging their followers. In her The New York Times article on the project, Poitras writes that they have created a zone of hyper surveillance. With the constant filming they emphasize and visualize the surveillance they are under: while they film each other, they are also watched by the surveillance cameras placed in front of Ai’s studio by the Chinese authorities. There is a constant awareness of always being under watch.

Second, the pandas also have a symbolic meaning. In The New York Times Poitras calls the title of the project “the synthesis of two terms created by dissident cultures”. Where Appelbaum likes to take direct action, Ai rather uses symbolism to make his point. And where Appelbaum aims to spread information, Ai tries to find the hidden, deeper meaning in ordinary objects. From Appelbaum’s frame of reference, Panda to Panda is a variation on peer-to-peer communication, a means of communication in which there is no hierarchy and that allows all peers to interact in an equal way. This system is seen as a philosophy of egalitarian human interaction on the Internet. This reference also materializes the goals of the movement. From Ai’s frame of reference, the pandas satirically reference popular culture: in China, the secret police, the “government spies” that also surveil Ai, are often referred to as pandas. It is common for elements of popular culture to become mixed with social movement cultures and to sometimes be twisted by movements. From Ai and Appelbaum’s collective reference, the shredding of the documents is a clear expression of resistance against the state oppression they both experience. Taking the original stuffing out of the pandas and re-stuffing them with documents of surveillance programs can be explained as an internalization of censorship. And by placing the data on a micro SD card in the pandas, the artwork performs the practical function of spreading the information in the documents, something the privacy movement has in various ways taken risk to do.

Poitras’ short film about the project, The Art of Dissent, adds an extra dimension to the project; capturing and historicizing different aspects of the movement. During the Seven on Seven conference Poitras explained that the goal of her work is to bridge the divide between our intellectual understanding and an emotional understanding of things like torture, occupation, and surveillance. This can be perceived in The Art of Dissent, when Ai and Appelbaum explain their harrowing experiences with surveillance and oppression. This also clearly shows that the art is based on personal experiences of the artists. It makes the story very emotional and personal, which makes it easy for activists to identify with and experience a shared strength. The film has an implicit and yet very clear way of showing the privacy movement’s ideas, values, and concerns to both insiders and outsiders to the movement.