Auckland University Social Media Monitoring

The University of Auckland was found to have monitored students' social media activity extensively, creating an 82-page document that tracked online posts from various platforms such as Facebook, Reddit, and TikTok over several months. This document included personal and anonymous posts about topics like body image, mental health, relationships, and sexual matters, with some entries linking directly to students' profiles. While the university claimed that this monitoring aimed to understand students' sentiments and provide better support, the breadth and depth of the surveillance, including commentary on private matters, raised concerns about ethical boundaries.

From a moral perspective, this action breaches the trust between students and the institution. By monitoring personal and sensitive conversations, even if they were made on public forums, the university overstepped, violating students' sense of privacy and autonomy. The inclusion of posts about deeply personal issues that are not directly related to academic or institutional matters exacerbates this breach of trust.

Legally, this could constitute a breach of privacy under both New Zealand’s Privacy Act 2020 and potentially international privacy standards like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe if international students were involved. The Privacy Act emphasizes the need for informed consent, transparency, and ensuring that any personal data collected serves a legitimate purpose. Although the posts were publicly accessible, the systematic tracking and documentation of personal student activity without explicit consent may breach these legal requirements.

Ethically, the university’s behavior aligns with the criticism of surveillance overreach. Monitoring public sentiments is valid, but creating a comprehensive dossier that includes personal issues unrelated to the academic environment suggests disproportionate and unnecessary surveillance. Furthermore, the practice of using anonymous accounts to post in student forums, potentially manipulating conversations, adds an element of deception to the university’s conduct.

This monitoring has raised questions about student rights to digital privacy, and whether universities have crossed ethical lines by engaging in such surveillance, especially without proper disclosure or consent.

Sources: RNZ, The Spinoff.

Here is the specific information from the articles supporting each of the points made, along with the related links:

Moral Breach: Violation of Trust and Privacy

The University monitored highly personal and sensitive student conversations, which may not have been appropriate for institutional oversight. This monitoring included posts about body image, mental health, and sexual matters.

Quote:

• "The files include posts made about body issues, relationship breakups and masturbation."
• "Many other entries, particularly from the anonymous 'UoA: meaningful confessions' page, are highly personal posts about romantic relationships, break ups, mental health, physical matters and sexuality, with no clear link to the university."

Source: RNZ​(

Legal Breach: Potential Violation of Privacy Laws

The university’s tracking of students’ social media activity may breach New Zealand’s Privacy Act 2020 by collecting personal data without explicit consent, even if the posts were public. Under the Privacy Act, organizations must ensure data collection is done transparently and with a clear, legitimate purpose.

Quote:

• "The document is 30,000 words and has more than 1000 entries linking to public social media posts."
• "Craccum co-editor and article author Dan Meech said he was 'weirded out by the depth' of the monitoring."

Source: RNZ​(

Relevant legal reference:

• New Zealand Privacy Act 2020

Ethical Breach: Deception and Manipulation of Student Conversations

The university may have used anonymous accounts to post information and stimulate discussion, which could mislead students into thinking these discussions were organic rather than influenced by the institution.

Quote:

• "The documents also suggest a university employee may have anonymously posted on student media sites more than once to stimulate discussion and provide information."
• "Started a Reddit post on being pre-med... Craccum tracked the Reddit account... posting university information anonymously."

Source: The Spinoff​(

Relevant ethical framework reference:

• UN Human Rights Charter, Article 12, which highlights the right to privacy from arbitrary interference, including digital privacy.

General Ethical Overreach: Unnecessary Surveillance

The surveillance extended far beyond academic matters, tracking irrelevant or trivial discussions, such as posts about the price of muffins, memes, and personal online activity unrelated to academic or campus life.

Quote:

• "I just found it a bit bizarre that the university was monitoring erotica stories and students talking to other students about... the price of muffins."
• "Memes about Dawn Freshwater, Ashley Bloomfield, Stuart McCutcheon, Covid-19, the university, and more appear linked within the document."

Source: RNZ​(

Supplementary Information:

• University of Auckland Student Enrolment Agreement outlines privacy and consent policies, but details are not accessible publicly without specific requests.
• University of Auckland’s Privacy Policy: This internal policy may offer insights into how the university handles data privacy and surveillance, and whether this monitoring adhered to internal regulations. Refer to: UoA Privacy Policy.

These combined sources substantiate the various legal, ethical, and moral concerns arising from the university’s conduct in monitoring students' social media activity.