Civil Liberties Privacy

Katic: Kids don’t care about privacy anymore, right?

Edward Snowden’s disclosure of massive NSA spying programs has reignited a debate about privacy and surveillance in the digital age. Speaking to the Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald, Snowden said that his one fear about the leaks was simply that nobody would care:

…he told me he had only one fear. It was that the disclosures he was making, momentous though they were, would fail to trigger a worldwide debate because the public had already been taught to accept that they have no right to privacy in the digital age.

This idea, that nobody cares about privacy anymore, has become prevailing wisdom. Our online over-sharing is being used to justify secret surveillance programs, and corporate data-mining and selling of personal information.

But there is absolutely no proof to this prevailing wisdom. From a Berkeley study, the first large quantitative analysis on the subject:

In this telephonic (wireline and wireless) survey of internet using Americans (N=1000), we found that large percentages of young adults (those 18-24 years) are in harmony with older Americans regarding concerns about online privacy, norms, and policy suggestions. In several cases, there are no statistically significant differences between young adults and older age categories on these topics. Where there were differences, over half of the young adult-respondents did answer in the direction of older adults.

In fact, according to a TIME poll, it is the 18-34 year olds — supposedly those who care the least about their privacy — that show the strongest support for Edward Snowden.

Why, then, do we continue to see teenagers and young adults post compromising photos on Facebook? For one thing, there might be a selection bias at work. You and your friends are clicking and ‘liking’ sensational photos and status updates at a higher rate than photos and status updates of your less sensational friends. Then, Facebook algorithm pushes the over-sharers to the top of your news feed. This gives you the illusion that over-sharing is more common than it is.

Moreover, it is extremely likely that your friends do not actually understand Facebook’s privacy policies. It could be that your friends are comfortable sharing because they feel as if they have total control over the information they are sharing. According to NPR’s Shankar Vedantam, it is when we have that feeling of control that we are most likely to share personal information. However, most Facebook users think they have more control of their information than they actually do. When the Berkeley researchers administered a short test about online privacy policies, young adults performed dismally.

Could you pass this test?

Could you pass this test?

“As Table 15 indicates, the savvy that many attribute to younger individuals about the online environment doesn’t appear to translate to privacy knowledge. The entire population of adult Americans exhibits a high level of online-privacy illiteracy; 75 percent answered only two or fewer questions correctly, with 30 percent getting none right. But the youngest adults perform the worst on these measures: 88 percent answered only two or fewer correctly, and 42 percent could answer none correctly” (emphasis mine).

Perhaps for a few exhibitionist outliers, I don’t think we’d see the kind of sharing we do if everyone knew the real privacy policies.

The argument that nobody cares about privacy is a dangerous myth, and it ought to be put to rest. Young adults, like their parents, are indeed worried about their privacy. But this isn’t really about your bar albums, Skype calls with grandma, or Instagram shots of breakfast; this is about those at the radical margins–those who challenge government misdeeds, uncover corporate corruption, and imagine new ways to think, live, and govern. Without privacy protections against a sprawling surveillance state and its omniscient clients (Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc), we have no hope for a free press, meaningful dissident movements, and other sorts of challenges to state power that are necessary in order to have a vibrant democracy and an accountable government.

Gordon Katic (@gord_katic) has been student coordinator for the Terry Project for over two years, and in that time started BARtalk, and the Terry Project Podcast on CiTR 101.9FM. A former Ubyssey columnist, and now a student at the UBC Graduate School of Journalism, Gordon is trying to use journalism to tell important stories about global issues.

DTES Housing Podcast Research: DTES homelessness

Katic: DTES Neighbourhood Council Doesn’t Support PiDGiN Picket

Here’s a bit of breaking news on the PiDGiN controversy:

The DNC shares many of the goals of the anti-gentrification protesters, but feels that the specific actions in front of 350 Carrall St. have served their purpose. The DNC therefor disagrees with the continuation of this action, and calls on the protesters to move on.

The DNC is the Downtown Eastside Neighbourhood Council, a large elected group of DTES residents. From their website:

We are a representative group of Downtown Eastside residents who advocate for the needs, interests, and aspirations of our neighbourhood.

How does this change the politics of the PiDGiN picket? With the community council denouncing the picket, should the protestors feel obliged to leave?

Community support for the protest is mixed. In three days of covering the protest, we saw the spectrum: residents who shouted at the protesters, residents who cheered them on, residents who were ambivalent, and residents who accused them of being privileged, university-educated kids who live in Mount Pleasant and know nothing about the neighbourhood.

The PiDGiN protestors should take this very seriously. If they continue their picket in the belief that the community and its council is mistaken (e.g. ‘they don’t know what’s in their own best interest’), then they run the risk of creating serious resentment — resentment between the community and the protestors that purport to support them.

At the same time, does the DNC actually speak for the community? What motivated their decision? Is this a short-term political calculus that could be detrimental in the long-run?

Gordon Katic (@gord_katic) has been student coordinator for the Terry Project for over two years, and in that time started BARtalk, and the Terry Project Podcast on CiTR 101.9FM. A former Ubyssey columnist, and now a student at the UBC Graduate School of Journalism, Gordon is trying to use journalism to tell important stories about global issues.

>archive DTES Podcast Research: DTES mental health

Fenn: Different Kinds of Ghosts

This morning I found this strange video about Riverview Hospital in Coquitlam. Riverview, which opened in 1913, was originally called “The Hospital of the Mind,” and treated men who suffered from various forms of insanity. The hospital closed last year.

Glen Ferguson of the Canadian Paranormal Society posted the video in February. I found it while doing some research on the deinstutionalization of thousands of people from British Columbia’s mental health institutes in the 1980′s, which—according to this study by UBC Medical Journal—has had some pretty devastating consequences for Vancouver’s mentally ill. In the video, Glen reads a methodical and (frankly) pretty boring history of BC’s first “Hospital of the Mind,” over long exterior shots of the hospital. At one point, he appears in frame wearing a CPS jacket. In spite of the implication, Glen never mentions anything explicitly ghostly, although the tape hiss on his microphone is a little spooky.

If you’ve read Velma Demerson’s Incorrigible, looked into the history of Ewen Cameron, or for that matter, followed the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, its not hard to see why Greg and I are looking for ghosts in Canada’s past—albeit, different kinds of ghosts. While researching an episode of the Terry Project about a fancy restaurant in one of Canada’s poorest neighborhoods, Gordon Katic and I have been struck with a single confounding question: how did the Downtown Eastside (DTES) become so impoverished and desperate in the first place? Some locals and experts have told us that the DTES began to deteriorate in the 1980′s when the province transferred a huge number of its mentally ill people from institutions like Riverview back into their communities. This short history of the Downtown Eastside written by the Strathcona Business Improvement Association, for instance, writes:

The situation in the neighborhood began to seriously deteriorate during the 1980′s, resulting in part from the deinstitutionalization of patients from mental health facilities in British Columbia. The lack of proper support services for these newly released patients led many to the Downtown Eastside’s affordable rental housing units. This influx was compounded as a number of shelters and some housing for these ex-patients were built in the neighborhood at the same time. Lacking proper supports, many were unable to cope in community settings and stabilize their lives. They became easy targets for predators, especially those in the drug trade.

I wonder if the roots of places like Pigeon Park actually lie in places like Riverview?

If, like me, you are interested in this mystery you should do three things: (1) subscribe to the Terry Project on iTunes; (2) follow me (@Samadeus) on twitter (also follow Gordon Katic); and (3) check out my website: www.samfenn.com. Thanks!

>archive Housing Podcast Research Podcast Research: DTES

Katic: Another Interesting Day in the DTES

Sam Fenn and I have spent much of the last week looking at development (or gentrification, depending on where you stand) in Vancouver’s downtown east side. Today, there was a large rally of 200-250. CBC did cover the protest, but made little mention of its actual demands. Nevertheless, its worthwhile to watch their video (partly because there’s actually a shot of me, around 1:42:00).

Going to that rally today, I expected to see mostly middle-class university kids who have their own ideological agenda, but that couldn’t have been farther from the truth. The vast majority were community members (mostly Aboriginal), who want suitable housing and reasonable jobs. They called for a “social justice zone.” If you are anything like me, you probably like the sound of that, but have no idea what it actually means. The demands are quite specific, and rather ambitious. From the CCAP, (click the link to read more details):

1. NO CONDOS BEFORE LOW-INCOME PEOPLE’S HOMES

2. REVERSE THE LOSS OF HOMES & SHOPS FOR LOW-INCOME RESIDENTS

3. ENSURE JOBS FOR LOW-INCOME RESIDENTS

4. PROTECT RESIDENTS’ SAFETY

5. END DISCRIMINATION SO EVERYONE CAN ACCESS THE SERVICES THEY NEED

The demonstration was not jovial and exciting, like your usual environmental rally. The overwhelming majority of the speakers were angry and desperate, and expressed feeling deeply neglected and abused by everyone involved in the transformation of their community. Of the formal consultation process, protestors seemed to have little hope, citing the rapid growth in condo developments during the two-year ordeal. Of the police, there were several stories of brutality (one speaker said that the cops were beating him, and when he asked why, they said “because you’re Indian”), and there were other stories of residents being harassed by petty fines. Of PiDGiN and other up-scale commercial developments, the crowd said “they are trying to divide our community.” And at the protest’s first stop, BC Housing, speakers labelled them “negligent slum lords,” claiming that people have died because of poor conditions at squalid social housing developments and government-subsidized SROs.

Gordon Katic - Instagram

read more »

Housing Podcast Research: DTES homelessness

Fenn: Brandon’s Bucket and the People’s Pickle

This weekend, Gordon Katic and I spoke with Brandon Grossutti, the owner of the controversial PiDGiN restaurant, about his alleged theft of a papier-mâché pickle.

The pickle was constructed by a group of college-aged leftists who find Grossutti’s high-brow restaurant a distasteful addition to Pigeon Park, one of the last places where Vancouver’s poor and homeless people feel welcome. Specifically, the papier-mâché mascot was designed to satirize PiDGiN’s 6$ bowl of pickles, a price that most of the residents of the Downtown Eastside (DTES) could never afford. Brandon told us that since the protests the price has been lowered to 5$.

PiDGiN is by no means the only new, bourgeois institution in the DTES , but it is the most conspicuously and symbolically highbrow. Its menu includes dishes like “octopus, stinging nettle, baked potato mousse, seaweed.” The decor is modern and cool. There is a golden meat cleaver encased behind the bar. It’s stylish, by all accounts delicious and, with an average price of around 15$ a plate, it is aimed right at the young gentrifying class that has started to move into the microlofts and condos that have been replacing Single Residency Occupancy hotels (SROs) into the Downtown East Side since 2008.

Brandon and his wife have a newborn baby. He told us that he scrimped and saved to start the restaurant, which, nevertheless must have cost a small fortune. Brandon made this small fortune as a venture capitalist, something that has prompted the protesters to call him a “dillionarie.” At least while we are around, Brandon is gregarious, talkative and likable. We almost never see him inside of his restaurant. Instead he paces around in Pigeon Park talking to the locals and the cops. He seems to be on good terms with almost everyone besides for the protesters. Brandon is also consistently friendly with Gordon and I. When we started interviewing the protesters, he would wink or make a peace sign to us from across the street. He’s offered us free food. He laughs easily and tosses around terms like “white privilege” like he is a sociology major. But it’s also clear that Brandon is furious. When the protesters show up, he leans against a pole and glares at the 11 or 12 anti-social young people holding provocative signs in front of his restaurant. When Grossutti talks to us about the the protesters, their agenda and their priorities, he swears and bangs on one of PiDGiN’s custom-made tables.

Brandon admitted to us that when he saw the pickle mascot unattended in his doorway he swiped it. Trying to retrieve the pickle, protester Kim Hearty grabbed a bucket full of something from PiDGiN’s back door (we’ve been told glucose, pork fat or dirty water). She tried to orchestrate a hostage exchange: Brandon’s bucket for the people’s pickle. This is where the stories diverge. Hearty claimed Grossutti pushed her. Grossutti claims he merely yanked his bucket back. In either case, Hearty was charged with theft, assault and mischief and is now restrained from being anywhere close to PiDGiN. In spite of complaints by the protesters, Brandon has not been issued a warning. The pickle also hasn’t been returned to the anti-gentrification activists.

So, it isn’t a stretch to say that things have become a little petty at PiDGiN.

The pettiness is particularly stark because it’s set against a sort of tableaux of human suffering and institutionalized neglect. The truth is, it only takes a couple days hanging out in Pigeon Park to see just how untenable British Columbia’s prohibitionist and neoliberal policies are for the residents here. The situation is visibly dire. We are told over and over that the SROs are full of rats and vermin. Sexual abuse and violence are shockingly common here. Meanwhile in the park itself, people lie half-conscious on the grass, overwhelmed from the double pyschopharmacological punch of Listerine and crack-cocaine. The cops occasionally pass through and dump people’s alcohol and confiscate their drugs, but there isn’t much else for them to do. The homeless and poor people who hang out in Pigeon Park, disproportionately indigenous, are constantly telling us that they are starving. Their relationship with all of the white, middle-class people who have invaded their space—the yuppie’s dining at PiDGiN, the dissidents protesting it and us—is complicated and fraught. The actual residents of the DTES, whose voices have not played much of a role in the reporting that takes place here, seem pretty split on the restaurant. Some approach the protesters to tell them to “fuck off” and “leave Brandon alone.” Others stop by to sign their petitions and ask for a buck.

It’s clear that the media presence in the park has had a real impact too. When we asked a man name Caspar what he thought of PiDGiN he told us “we hate it.” When we asked him why, he told us he wanted 2.50$ in order to give us our soundbite. Who knows if he really hates the rich people who have come into his space or if he just thinks that Gordon and I would be willing to pay for a sexier, bellicose statement.

Sam is the host of the Terry Project Podcast, a graduate student in UBC’s history department and a freelance writer. You can read more of Sam’s writing at his website: samfenn.com. In September, the Terry Project will air two 30-minute radio documentaries about gentrification, social mix and homelessness in the Downtown East Side. It will feature Brandon Grossutti, the protesters and lots of social policy experts. More updates coming soon! To follow this story as it happens, follow Sam (@Samadeus) and follow Gordon (@gord_katic) on twitter.

Housing Podcast Research Podcast Research: DTES homelessness

Katic: Social Housing in the DTES

With the spate of anti-gentrification protest in the Downtown East Side, all eyes are once again on Vancouver’s housing problem. Proponents of development call for a “social mix,” meaning people of different income levels ought to live in the community. A “social mix” would enliven a community, and serve to lift it out of poverty, they argue. However, that doesn’t seem to be happening. In the Downtown Eastside Newspaper — a moving, and tremendously empowering read — Jean Swanson shows how condo developments have driven up rents and closed down affording single-night hotel rooms:

“The lesson of Woodward’s is that gentrification and social mix are disasters for low-income housing, shops and community. In order to stop rent increases and low-income housing losses we need to stop condos and boutique shop developments.”

DTES Newspaper / CCAP

For a coming Terry Project Podcast, I am doing more research on the concept of “social mix” and development of the Downtown East Side. I don’t yet know if it is much of a strategy, but proponents cite successes in other communities. One thing is clear: residents aren’t pleased with the idea:

“Social Mix” is a buzz phrase that is used to justify pushing out low-income people from the neighbourhood they feel comfortable in.  If it’s so important to have social mix why don’t we have more social housing, food banks and safe injection sites in Kerrisdale?  Living next to condos or fancy restaurants does not help people with addiction or health issues get better.

Underlining all these issues is the government’s market-driven approach to housing affordability. A shocking 2010 CCPA report found that the net gain in social housing units over a 4 year span, from 2006/07-2010/11, was only 280. Updated figures show sizeable improvements (about 418 new units per year), but the underlining philosophy remains the same. The vast majority of housing support provided by the provincial government is in the form of rent assistance in the private market, which could actually increase rent and homelessness. Again, from the CCPA:

One of the other challenges with rental assistance programs, as noted in housing and research literature, is that an increase in rent can negate the benefits realized under the program, especially if the income and rent ceilings are not adjusted to take this into account. Indeed, it is entirely possible that in markets with a low vacancy rate, rental assistance programs such as SAFER and RAP may even encourage rent increases.

Research published by Don Drummond of TD Economics observed that “in an environment of tight supply, the benefits [of shelter allowances] generally flow upward to the landlord in the short-to-medium term as low income tenants use the subsidy to compete for a fixed supply of rental units.” Drummond also notes that there is the potential for adverse outcomes for those not eligible for assistance with those receiving the assistance having additional resources they can use to compete for a fixed supply of rental units “leaving unsubsidized households — frequently the working poor — relatively worse off.”

UPDATE –

Andy Longhurst directed me to a compelling article by Loretta Lees in the journal Urban Studies, which offered a very critical look at “social mixing.” Lees surveys the literature and finds no convincing evidence that social mixing does much good:

“There is a poor evidence base for the widespread policy assumption that gentrification will help increase the social mix, foster social mixing and thereby increase the social capital and social cohesion of inner- city communities.”

Interesting, social mixing is historically a left liberal idea, originating from the UK. But Lees argues that, rather than creating new and cohesive communities, it does nothing but create “tectonic juxtapositions of polarised socioeconomic groups.”

I recommend the article, and highly recommend Andy’s radio program, The City, which offers a critical look at urban affairs. The May 8th edition features the UN special rapporteur on adaquate housing, who discusses the right to housing and its history.

Gordon Katic (@gord_katic) has been student coordinator for the Terry Project for over two years, and in that time started BARtalk, and the Terry Project Podcast on CiTR 101.9FM. A former Ubyssey columnist, and now a student at the UBC Graduate School of Journalism, Gordon is trying to use journalism to tell important stories about global issues.

Podcast

The Terry Project Podcast #23: End of the Road


Gordon is thinking about buying a motorcycle. But what if he has an accident? Gordon prepares for the worst, by speaking with lawyers, bioethicists, physicians, a priest, and even his mom. We explore different end of life issues, including euthanasia.

iTunesSmartphone AppCiTR 101.9FM: Every Other Wednesday, 1PM | Mixcloud

The Terry Project Podcast #23: The End of the Road by The Terry Project Podcast on Mixcloud

Hosted by: Gordon Katic. (Sam Fenn is away)
Produced by: Gordon Katic, Sam Fenn, Jordan Fernandez, and Chirag Mahajan
Production Assistance from Matt Meuse, Sam MacKinnon
Research Assistants: Kamil Somaratne, Marion Benkaiouche, Miguel Testa, Julian Law, Stephanie Kelly, Al Shaibani, Alisa Koebel, and Rebekah Parker,
Marketing Coordinators: Jessica Tam and Kevin Lam
Graphic Designer: Sam MacKinnon
Special thanks: Dr. John Sehmer

Guests:
Alex Schadenberg, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Mark Handelman, Whaley Estate Litigation
Grace Pastine, BC Civil Liberties Association
Wanda Morris, Dying with Dignity
Blair Henry, Joint Centre for Bioethics, U of T.
Father Rob Allore, St. Mark’s College, UBC.
Dr. Romayne Gallagher, Providence Health Care.
Dr. Gregory Robinson, Dying with Dignity.
Hugh S. McLellan, McLellan Herbert Barristers & Solicitors
and Gordon’s mom, Zora Katic.