Week 9 Takeaways 

University Privacy Discussion

Surveillance System Administrators Committee SSAC -- Representatives of many different branches of the U that help edit guidelines about surveillance - staff, faculty, some students

Where does the policy apply

• Anywhere on University property
• Inside and outside buildings
• Research Park
• 3 U Hospitals and 7 Clinics in the greater Salt Lake Valley
• Covers: University internal computer network and parking and transportation management

Privacy Safeguards

• No audio surveillance
• Certain areas are surveillance free
• Data is retained for minimum periods
• Access to data is restricted
• Use limited to investigating / preventing crime
• No location monitoring except in limited circumstances
• Reasonable notice of surveillance
• No routine facial recognition ‘

Anonymity Apps

YikYak

- Big anonymous posting site meant for college students, can lead to bullying, criminal activity, hate crimes, etc. and was shut down in 2017 and restarted in 2021

- Prevention / identification of criminals, terrorism

- Threatening language warning when posting using certain offensive words 

- Safety Center for posting guidelines

Fizz

- Requires university email registration, anonymous posting

Exercise 2 Takeaways

1. Most surprised by sheer volume and amount of data collected with time frame
2. Extent and detail of location information was surprising
3. Inaccurate information
4. Both sites collect and store personal info about you that they obtained from other sources

Discussion Points

- Should there be audio recordings in public spaces at the U or not?

- What counts as someone's reasonable expectation of privacy on campus - when other people can hear/not hear discriminatory things

- Should jurisdiction on social media and privacy depend on whether an institution is public or private? 

- When should the University take action on social media posts when it comes to 

1. Threats of violence
2. Racist/gender offensive posts causing substantial class disruption
3. Racist/gender offensive posts causing substantial controversy on campus
4. Racist/gender offensive posts causing violating University policies without causing disruption
5. Politically/Socially sensitive posts that do not cause substantial disruption

A lot voted for 1, only about 2-5 voted for 2 and 3,  almost everyone voted 4, and (almost?) no one voted for 5. Depending on the intensity of violence, it should be investigated and the individual should be identified, but for 2 and 3, many people thought that this came down to some free speech where they may be offensive and just unethical, but it's not the University's problem. But when it violates a policy that is contracted and agreed upon by students of the university, that is when universities really should take action. Lastly, with no disruption, politically sensitive posts are totally covered by free speech. 

Group Hypothetical Scenario 

Junior high school hands out iPads for academics and allows students to take them home to do homework and assignments, but John uses the iPad during and after school hours to bully Sally through Snapchat messages, posting on her FaceBook, and threatening her on Twitter. Sally's parents don't know, and other students are aware but don't report it either. Sally brings a gun to the school and commits suicide in the cafeteria during lunch posting on FaceBook that she "can't take the bullying any more." Who should bear the responsibility of this tragedy?

Group 1                           To Blame                                    Group 2

50%                                  John                                            40%

0%                                    John's Parents                            20%

0%                                    Sally                                           0%

0%                                    Sally's Parents                            10%

10%                                  Other students                            0%    

40%                                  The School                                 30%

Lots of factors went into these decisions, but both groups put majority of responsibility on John and the school. John is the one who did all of the bullying, so he received the most blame of course, but the school does hold a lot of legal responsibility because they weren't tracking the iPads, which are their property and are meant for strictly educational purposes. John shouldn't have even been able to access those sites, and they should've caught it earlier through monitoring. Group 2 put blame on the parents because John's parents should've raised him better and checked up on his activity, and Sally's parents were neglectful in letting Sally get to the point of suicide without noticing and allowing easy access for her to get a gun. Group 1 also thought that the students should have some blame because they knew and didn't tell anyone, but Group 2 saw that more of a moral "recommendation" as opposed to an obligation.