‘Spy High:' Amazon Documentary Probes Dangers of Online Student Surveillance
That's what happened to 15-year-old Blake Robbins, who was accused by officials in Pennsylvania's affluent Lower Merion School District of dealing drugs in 2009 after they surreptitiously snapped a photo of him at home with the chewy candy in his hand. The moment was captured by the webcam on his school-issued laptop, one of some 66,000 covert student images collected by the district, including one of Robbins asleep in his bed.
Robbins sued and the subsequent case, dubbed 'WebcamGate,' is at the center of Spy High, a four-part documentary series now streaming on Amazon Prime, that examines the high-profile student surveillance scandal and the explosion of student privacy threats that followed it.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
The Lower Merion School District, which settled the class-action lawsuit, was an early adopter of one-to-one computer education technology programs that provide school-issued laptops to students. Such programs have since become mainstream nationwide, particularly since the pandemic. So, too, have digital surveillance tools like Gaggle and GoGuardian, which alert educators when students express thoughts of self-harm or discuss topics deemed taboo, like sex, violence or drugs.
Directed by Jody McVeigh-Schultz and executive produced by Mark Wahlberg, the documentary offers a cautionary tale about what happens when student monitoring initiatives — often intended to promote young people's safety and well-being — go awry. It also explores how covert student surveillance intersects with far-reaching school equity issues involving race, disability, privilege and discipline.
After years of reporting on digital student surveillance myself, I caught up last week with McVeigh-Schultz, whose other documentaries include Shiny Happy People about reality TV's seemingly wholesome Duggar family and the Emmy-nominated The Murders at Starved Rock, which delves into the brutal 1960 killing of three women in an Illinois state park. We talked about what he wants viewers to take away from the Robbins' scandal 15 years after it unfolded and the lessons it holds for contemporary student privacy debates and schools' growing reliance on ed tech.
The interview was edited for length and clarity.
What motivated you to take a deep dive into the Robbins case, and why is it important right now?
I grew up just outside of Philly in a suburb called Cheltenham and I had heard about this story. I knew Lower Merion as the high school that Kobe [Bryant] went to. That's what it was famous for, but I knew about the Robbins story and I was like, 'That's crazy,' when I heard about it back in 2010 and then I kind of never heard anything more about it. It was a really big story and then just kind of went away.
When we talked to folks from wealthy suburbs outside of Philadelphia, I think it's very clear to me that one of the key indicators of status is education. It's more important than anything else to people.
The public schools in Lower Merion are really highly rated and people care a ton about the quality of the education and the image of the institution. What are the real world implications of that?
In this case, the way it played out, some of the things that happened were counterintuitive. Many folks from that community didn't want to see a lawsuit come to bear against their school. It was like, 'Oh well, you know, this actually is perhaps going to affect our home values,' if you're selling your home and the biggest selling point is the quality of the education.
That's something that you wouldn't expect to be one of the first reactions to finding out that the schools may be surveilling your kids. But it was, and the fact that the Robbins family had lived in the community for a long time but just weren't considered part of the in-group just because of who they were was very interesting and, I think, led to people being skeptical of them.
The documentary leaves it up to you to decide whether that skepticism is deserved or not.
Absolutely. The documentary certainly highlights how people are complex and have complicated stories. What did you learn about debates over personal privacy, especially when it comes to information about children?
People's expectations of how much privacy you should be afforded, and how much you should expect without having to ask any questions, those expectations vary a lot.
Somebody who was interviewed in a news piece that ran in 2010 said, 'You know, this is the school district's laptop, they could tap in at any time and rightfully so.' I'm a parent, I have a 2-year-old and a 7-year-old who's in first grade. To me, that seems a bit absurd, but the truth is, I think there are certain contexts where a school-issued laptop is going to be surveilled. We know it's going to be surveilled, but we don't expect that it will be able to take pictures in our kids' bedrooms.
Related
To me it's a matter of where are [the] spaces where we should reasonably expect privacy? Transparency is the most important aspect of all of this. Not only were there no conversations going on like, 'Hey look, these laptops are going to be surveilled in a number of ways. You should not be leaving them open in your bedroom, You should not be going on any website you wouldn't want your principal to also see.' The IT department specifically thought it would be a bad idea if parents and students were alerted to the existence of the software that could take images. They felt like, 'Well then we won't be able to recover the stolen laptop because people will just put tape over it.'
Well, that is their decision not to have images taken of them in their bedroom, right? One of the journalists we interviewed said it was like trying to kill a fly with a bazooka. This level of surveillance was not required to track inventory. It just wasn't.
Hindsight is 20/20 but it's obvious from what transpired that they spent a lot more money on legal fees and settling these lawsuits than they ever saved by making sure a handful of laptops were not stolen or lost.
What did you learn about the motives of the school district officials, the lawyers and the families involved?
When I'm making a documentary I'm never thinking in terms of quote-unquote good guys and bad guys. Everyone in this story thought they were doing what was best for the students involved. But in the end, I think there was this balance of protecting students ' privacy and protecting the image of the school district. When a mistake is made, there is a reluctance to admit and take responsibility and accept blame. Once you do that, you are admitting to what happened and then there's all these legal ramifications.
Multiple people are like, you know, these kids need therapists, they need somebody to check on them and to be like, 'Hey, your privacy was violated, are you doing OK?' and that did not happen.
I can't say why that didn't happen but to me it seems likely that part of not offering people help is that the minute you say this person needs a therapist because of what we did, you're admitting to a pretty major violation.
The documentary doesn't focus just on the Robbins case. It offers a deep dive into education policy debates around racial inequities, school integration, gender equality and LGBTQ+ rights. What did you find were the implications of surveillance for these populations?
We talked to Elizabeth Laird at the Center for Democracy and Technology and one of the things she said she sees all the time is that when surveillance is ubiquitous and regularly used in education, vulnerable populations end up feeling the brunt of the negative repercussions.
In this case, back in 2010, people discovered that a disproportionate amount of the students that were surveilled were African American. There was a sense that if this technology was being misused to discipline students or to check up on students then the chances are it was going to be misused for somebody that was a student of color.
Related
When we started talking to students of color who had their images taken, we started to understand, 'Oh, there is this whole context to what they're experiencing.' Somebody said you can't understand the laptop issue without understanding all these other battles that were happening at the time. There was a history of an achievement gap there and African-American parents felt like if you wanted to get an equal education for your kids, you had to fight for it. In this context, there was a real lack of trust of the school district by African-American parents.
Keron Williams and his mother really wanted to tell his story. It was a story of somebody suspecting him of stealing a bracelet and him being brought into the principal's office. He says his laptop webcam was activated a couple days later after they searched his pockets and found nothing but a Boy Scouts handkerchief.
There's racial profiling but also this idea of the misuse of technology meant to keep laptops from being stolen. If something like this is misused, vulnerable populations are going to feel the brunt of it more.
Related
That brings me to one of the other stories we talked about, which was more recent.
In 2020, with the pandemic, school-issued devices and remote learning became the norm. We talked to two students who started high school online, went to classes on Zoom, and they were using their school-issued laptops for everything.
The way they communicated instead of seeing their friends at lunch was through a Google Hangouts chat. What they didn't realize was their school was using monitoring software that essentially scooped up everything they wrote while logged into their school account, including private chats. They were brought to the principal's office and were confronted with what they wrote.
The context of it is that the school decided it was bullying. What we reveal is that they were using the word 'gay' because they were. The term they used was 'we're a pretty gay friend group. Gay was a descriptor to us.'
One of these kids had to come out in the principal's office with his father there. Luckily his parents were pretty great about it, but that's a really awful position to put a kid in and, you know, again, a vulnerable population bearing the brunt of overzealous surveillance.
The goal of this surveillance is to protect kids, it's to make sure kids aren't hurting themselves, hurting other students. There's obviously a mental health crisis going on in terms of high school-aged kids, but there really has to be a discussion about whether these tactics are making the mental health crisis better or worse.
You're talking about the tools that schools nationally have increasingly used to collect and analyze reams of information about students in the name of keeping them safe. This includes tools like Gaggle and GoGuardian. Given the growth in these tools, do any guardrails need to be put in place?
First of all, it's so important that students know what is being used to surveil any device they're using. The fact that kids hadn't heard of Gaggle is really a problem.
But if they know about it, that doesn't solve all the problems because what you're asking high schoolers especially to do is to find their own voice, understand how to freely express themselves, to be vulnerable. In some of my best creative writing courses my teachers were saying, 'Look, if it scares you to write this, you're probably going in the right direction.'
The minute a kid realizes, 'Well, everything that I'm writing in a creative writing class — a poem, a personal essay — is going through this software, maybe going to my principal, maybe going to law enforcement,' they're going to express themselves differently. That's just a really dangerous road to go down.
Related
Students and parents have to be aware, but also I just think it should be less powerful. I don't think we should be able to say there are no ways in which you can use our technology, which is kind of unavoidable if you're a high school student, without being constantly surveilled.
In Minnesota, the story we cover, they changed the law to outlaw surveillance software. That's a pretty huge step, and I think that'll happen more and more as people become more aware of this stuff.
There are just places where we should not be allowing this.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
3 days ago
- USA Today
'One Night in Idaho' docuseries: Why the friends first to crime scene are speaking out
On July 2, a stony Bryan Kohberger took a plea deal, admitting he entered the off-campus home of University of Idaho students on November 13, 2022 and put an abrupt end to their lives. His inexpressive demeanor was a far cry from the grinning thumbs up selfie Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson said the former criminology student posed for just hours after fatally stabbing roommates Kaylee Goncalves, 21; Madison "Maddie" Mogen, 21; Xana Kernodle, 20 and her boyfriend, Ethan Chapin, 20, who'd stayed the night. Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funke, who also lived at the six-bedroom home on Moscow, Idaho's King Road, survived the attack. The plea marked an abrupt end to the shocking and still unexplained murders of the four students, who are the subject of three new projects, including 'The Idaho Student Murders,' a Peacock documentary that debuted July 3; Amazon Prime's four-part docuseries "One Night in Idaho: The College Murders" that began streaming July 11; and 'The Idaho Four,' a book out July 14, by Vicky Ward and James Patterson, an executive producer on 'One Night in Idaho.' In changing his not-guilty plea for the four counts of first-degree murder, Kohberger, 30, escaped capital punishment. This conclusion satisfies some of the victims' families while enraging others. For Hunter Johnson, who appears in 'One Night in Idaho' and discovered Kernodle and Chapin on that fateful day, the admission brings little relief. Timeline: University of Idaho murder case and the arrest of Bryan Kohberger 'Even if Kohberger did get the death penalty, that's honestly not even justice enough,' Johnson, a friend of the victims, tells USA TODAY, 'because (the families) still don't get to have their daughter. They don't get to have their son.' The irreversible nature of the murders, Johnson says, means justice can never actually be served. Kohberger's sentencing is scheduled for July 23. As part of the plea deal, the prosecution seeks maximum penalty for the charges, including 10 years for the burglary charge and four consecutive life sentences. Kohberger has waived his right to appeal. 'We are appreciative,' Emily Alandt, Johnson's girlfriend and close confidant of Kernodle, adds in an interview. She's happy she and Johnson, their friends and the victims' families have been spared a trial, previously scheduled for August. 'That's important to us, and that's the good part that has come out of this.' Although they once avoided interviews out of respect for the families and their own privacy, Alandt and Johnson are speaking out for the first time in "One Night in Idaho" at the request of Ethan Chapin's mom, Stacy, Alandt says. They want their friends to be thought of as more than how they met their end. 'Xana is extremely goofy and giddy all the time,' says Alandt, who remembers Goncalves as 'selfless and always smiling,' Johnson remembers Ethan Chapin's sense of humor. 'Ethan was very quirky in the sense that he could make you laugh and very witty all the time,' Johnson says. He describes Mogen as 'super caring and outgoing. 'They all had a light about them,' Johnson says, 'and we just try to carry on that light for them now.' The docuseries provides a more complete picture of the four through their social media posts and interviews with friends and family. Mogen's mom and stepdad participated; so did the parents of Chapin, a triplet, and his siblings. 'I never let Maddie cry, like never,' Karen Laramie recalls heartbreakingly in the docuseries. 'I'm not going to let you have a moment of sadness.' Maizie Chapin shares the final text her brother sent her after attending a sorority formal together on his last night alive. Maizie says Ethan texted, ''I love you,' which was also weird because we don't say that to each other.' Law enforcement officers and the two surviving roommates could not be interviewed due to gag orders, according to filmmakers. At around 11:45 a.m. on November 13, according to the docuseries, Mortensen asked Alandt to come check out their house as she'd witnessed something strange. According to an affidavit, Mortensen heard crying and saw a man dressed in black clothes and a mask walk past her. Johnson, Alandt and Alandt's housemate Josie Lauteren arrived at the King Road house to find Mortensen and her roommate Bethany Funke outside the home. Johnson was the first to see the bodies of Kernodle and Chapin and hurried Alandt and Lauteren out of the house and told them to call 911. Kohberger, according to Thompson, the prosecutor, had entered the home through the kitchen's sliding glass door, killed Mogen and Goncalves on the third floor, and then Kernodle and Chapin on the second floor. Though Kohberger's motive and connection to his victims are still unknown, Thompson said Kohberger's cell phone pinged at a tower near the residence approximately 23 times from July 9 to November 7, 2022 between 10 p.m. to 4 a.m. People magazine reported that Kohberger followed his female victims on Instagram, but they did not reciprocate. People also reported that an investigator said Kohberger 'allegedly messaged one of the three female victims repeatedly two weeks before the slayings.' Police connected Kohberger to the crime thanks to DNA discovered on the knife sheath left near Mogen's body. 'The why was a thought for a long time,' Alandt says, 'when we didn't know who the killer was … until I saw his face on the internet and had never seen him a day in my life before or ever even heard the name.' 'He's irrelevant,' she adds, 'and his story is irrelevant, is what I think.' The couple emphasize that Mortensen and Funke have also been traumatized, and should not be viewed by internet sleuths as suspects. Some believe and have shared theories on social media that the two survivors are somehow involved with the killings. 'They are just as much victims in this as the other four were,' Johnson says. 'People who are harassing them should stop because they still get harassed to this day, even though he's pleaded guilty.' 'Delete your hateful comments,' Alandt urges. 'Leave them alone.'
New York Post
3 days ago
- New York Post
How to watch Bryan Kohberger doc ‘One Night In Idaho: The College Murders' for free
New York Post may be compensated and/or receive an affiliate commission if you click or buy through our links. Featured pricing is subject to change. Just over a week after Idaho college murders suspect Bryan Kohberger accepted a shocking plea deal to avoid the death penalty, a new documentary series about the crime is debuting. 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' will premiere on July 11, exclusively on Prime Video. All four episodes will drop at once. On November 13, 2022, four University of Idaho students — Madison Mogen, 21, Ethan Chapin, 20, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, and Xana Kernodle, 20 — were killed in their off-campus home in the middle of the night. Bryan Kohberger was arrested in connection to the murders on December 30, 2022. Advertisement Now, nearly three years later, Kohberger pled guilty to the murders on July 2, leaving burning questions unanswered and the families of the victims furious after the court claimed they were trying to spare the families of the gory details. The new docuseries centers on the families and friends of the victims, featuring exclusive interviews with Stacey and Jim Chapin (parents of Ethan), and Karen and Scott Laramie (parents of Mogen). When does 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' come out? 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' debuts on Prime Video tomorrow, July 11. All four episodes will drop at 3 a.m. ET. How to watch 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' for free Advertisement If you aren't a Prime Video subscriber yet, you can get started with a 30-day Amazon Prime free trial, including Prime perks like the Prime Video streaming service, free two-day shipping, exclusive deals during Amazon Prime Day (right now!), and more. After the free trial, Amazon Prime costs $14.99/month or $139/year. All 18- to 24-year-olds, regardless of student status, are eligible for a discounted Prime for Young Adults membership as well with age verification. After six months at $0, you'll pay 50% off the standard Prime monthly price of $14.99/month — just $7.49/month — for up to six years and get all the perks. 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' trailer Why Trust Post Wanted by the New York Post This article was written by Angela Tricarico, Commerce Writer/Reporter for Post Wanted Shopping and New York Post's streaming property, Decider. Angela keeps readers up to date with cord-cutter-friendly deals, and information on how to watch your favorite sports teams, TV shows, and movies on every streaming service. Not only does Angela test and compare the streaming services she writes about to ensure readers are getting the best prices, but she's also a superfan specializing in the intersection of shopping, tech, sports, and pop culture. Prior to joining Decider and The New York Post in 2023, she wrote about streaming and consumer tech at Insider Reviews
Tom's Guide
7 days ago
- Tom's Guide
More than 1,200 fake Amazon sites pop up ahead of Prime Day — avoid getting scammed
In the first few weeks of June, security researchers at Check Point managed to find more than 1,230 new domains attempting to impersonate Amazon ahead of the company's Prime Day event this week. This increase is common before major events or holidays; according to reporting from Cybernews, the sites found by the researchers were 'sketchy at best and outright malicious at worst.' Many used the term 'Amazon Prime' specifically in an obvious attempt to trick victims into clicking through and logging in by mistake. The Check Point researchers also warned that the threat actors behind this campaign are sending out very convincing phishing emails in an attempt to dupe users. These emails claim to be from Amazon's customer service team with subject lines like 'Refund error' or 'Account issue' but are designed to steal your login credentials. Given the email and login page both look quite legitimate and contain a message designed to instill a sense of urgency, unsuspecting users will often click through the embedded link that says 'Update your address' or sign in to fix the account issue. However, instead of updating their information what they've done is hand over their personal details to online threat actors. They will then try to use this stolen user data for unauthorized purchases, to commit identity theft or for other malicious activities. As with any phishing campaign, you should be vigilant about anything that arrives unexpected in your inbox and wants you to click on it. Especially if there's a sense of urgency implied, even if that urgency looks and seems legitimate. However, you should also hover over URLs to see where they're redirecting to, and if it ends in .top or .online or somewhere else with hyphens or extra numbers or anything else iffy or weird, don't go there. Just enter in the URL to the browser manually. Obviously if it doesn't have an https and the padlock icon don't enter in your personal information but those can be faked too. Two other security measures that can help are two factor or multi factor authentication, and a password manager. The multi-factor authentication will create another step for hackers and threat actors to have to conquer to take over your accounts, and the password manager helps you create strong, unique passwords and keeps track of them in a way that's harder to crack. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Remember: Anything that seems to good to be true online, probably is. And anything that seems super urgent or immediate, probably isn't. Also, paying with a credit card is safer than a debit card since you can file a claim, and paying with virtual cards, payment apps, or anything that an has an extra layer of protection is also a good idea. Never wire cash or use a direct bank transfer when paying for things online. Lastly, some of the best antivirus programs will also have additional features that can help protect you while you shop online like a VPN and browser warnings when you visit a shady website.
