Access Now

Police in Canada’s capital city of Ottawa are being supported by a so-called “virtual backup” team that provides front-line officers with unprecedented amounts of information as they race to service calls.

The unit, known as the the Ottawa Police Strategic Operations Centre (OPSOC), has been active since October 2016. But civil liberties advocates are raising concerns about the project, pointing out that it monitors protesters on social media and is developing ‘predictive policing’ capabilities based on crime data that could contain hidden biases.

Earlier this year, an Ontario judge ruled that a police request for a “tower dump,” which asked two of Canada’s largest telecom companies to hand over tens of thousands of Canadians’ subscriber information, was overly broad and unconstitutional.

On Thursday, Rogers—which fought the police’s request in court—released its third annual transparency report, which promised in the preamble to break down in greater detail the kinds of police requests for information that it received in 2015, including tower dumps. This kind of breakdown is a first for Rogers.

Unfortunately, the report doesn’t go nearly far enough in disclosing how many similar requests Rogers received and potentially fulfilled in the last year, leaving Canadians in the dark about the flatly unconstitutional police practice.

This isn’t the first time somebody has considered surveillance as a solution to the complex social issue of kids being absolutely horrific to each other, and it likely won’t be the last. In 2013, The LA Times noted that the Glendale Unified School District in Southern California reportedly paid a firm $40,000 to monitor kids’ social media accounts to combat bullying. The move raised the ire of privacy advocates in the US then, too.

The point, according to Hinduja, is that bullying isn’t a uniquely digital problem. You don’t solve bullying forever by putting a teacher in every hallway, and you don’t fix crime by putting a cop on every corner.

“Cyberbullying isn’t a technological problem,” said Hinduja. “You can’t blame the apps, the smartphones, or the internet. Instead, cyberbullying is rooted in other issues that everyone has been dealing with since the beginning of time: adolescent development, kids learning to manage their problems, and dealing with stress.”

This isn’t the first time somebody has considered surveillance as a solution to the complex social issue of kids being absolutely horrific to each other, and it likely won’t be the last. In 2013, The LA Times noted that the Glendale Unified School District in Southern California reportedly paid a firm $40,000 to monitor kids’ social media accounts to combat bullying. The move raised the ire of privacy advocates in the US then, too.

The point, according to Hinduja, is that bullying isn’t a uniquely digital problem. You don’t solve bullying forever by putting a teacher in every hallway, and you don’t fix crime by putting a cop on every corner.

“Cyberbullying isn’t a technological problem,” said Hinduja. “You can’t blame the apps, the smartphones, or the internet. Instead, cyberbullying is rooted in other issues that everyone has been dealing with since the beginning of time: adolescent development, kids learning to manage their problems, and dealing with stress.”