

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Governments of 49 of the world's most populous countries harmed children's rights by endorsing online learning products during Covid-19 school closures without adequately protecting children's privacy, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The report was released simultaneously with publications by media organizations around the world that had early access to the Human Rights Watch findings and engaged in an independent collaborative investigation.
"'How Dare They Peep into My Private Life?': Children's Rights Violations by Governments that Endorsed Online Learning during the Covid-19 Pandemic," is grounded in technical and policy analysis conducted by Human Rights Watch on 164 education technology (EdTech) products endorsed by 49 countries. It includes an examination of 290 companies found to have collected, processed, or received children's data since March 2021, and calls on governments to adopt modern child data protection laws to protect children online.
"Children should be safe in school, whether that's in person or online," said Hye Jung Han, children's rights and technology researcher and advocate at Human Rights Watch. "By failing to ensure that their recommended online learning products protected children and their data, governments flung open the door for companies to surveil children online, outside school hours, and deep into their private lives."
Of the 164 EdTech products reviewed, 146 (89 percent) appeared to engage in data practices that risked or infringed on children's rights. These products monitored or had the capacity to monitor children, in most cases secretly and without the consent of children or their parents, in many cases harvesting personal data such as who they are, where they are, what they do in the classroom, who their family and friends are, and what kind of device their families could afford for them to use.
Most online learning platforms examined installed tracking technologies that trailed children outside of their virtual classrooms and across the internet, over time. Some invisibly tagged and fingerprinted children in ways that were impossible to avoid or erase - even if children, their parents, and teachers had been aware and had the desire to do so - without destroying the device.
Most online learning platforms sent or granted access to children's data to advertising technology (AdTech) companies. In doing so, some EdTech products targeted children with behavioral advertising. By using children's data - extracted from educational settings - to target them with personalized content and advertisements that follow them across the internet, these companies not only distorted children's online experiences, but also risked influencing their opinions and beliefs at a time in their lives when they are at high risk of manipulative interference. Many more EdTech products sent children's data to AdTech companies that specialize in behavioral advertising or whose algorithms determine what children see online.
With the exception of Morocco, all governments reviewed in this report endorsed at least one EdTech product that risked or undermined children's rights. Most EdTech products were offered to governments at no direct financial cost. By endorsing and enabling the wide adoption of EdTech products, governments offloaded the true costs of providing online education onto children, who were unknowingly forced to pay for their learning with their rights to privacy and access to information, and potentially their freedom of thought.
Few governments checked whether the EdTech they rapidly endorsed or procured for schools were safe for children to use. As a result, children whose families could afford to access the internet, or who made hard sacrifices to do so, were exposed to the privacy practices of the EdTech products they were told or required to use during Covid-19 school closures.
Many governments put at risk or violated children's rights directly. Of the 42 governments that provided online education to children by building and offering their own EdTech products for use during the pandemic, 39 governments made products that handled children's personal data in ways that risked or infringed on their rights. Some governments made it compulsory for students and teachers to use their EdTech product, subjecting them to the risks of misuse or exploitation of their data, and making it impossible for children to protect themselves by opting for alternatives to access their education.
Children, parents, and teachers were largely kept in the dark about these data surveillance practices. Human Rights Watch found that the data surveillance took place in virtual classrooms and educational settings where children could not reasonably object to such surveillance. Most EdTech companies did not allow students to decline to be tracked; most of this monitoring happened secretly, without the child's knowledge or consent. In most instances, it was impossible for children to opt out of such surveillance and data collection without opting out of compulsory education and giving up on formal learning during the pandemic.
Human Rights Watch conducted its technical analysis of the products between March and August 2021, and subsequently verified its findings as detailed in the report. Each analysis essentially took a snapshot of the prevalence and frequency of tracking technologies embedded in each product on a given date in that window. That prevalence and frequency may fluctuate over time based on multiple factors, meaning that an analysis conducted on later dates might observe variations in the behavior of the products.
It is not possible for Human Rights Watch to reach definitive conclusions as to the companies' motivations in engaging in these actions, beyond reporting on what it observed in the data and the companies' and governments' own statements. Human Rights Watch shared its findings with the 95 EdTech companies, 196 AdTech companies, and 49 governments covered in this report, giving them the opportunity to respond and provide comments and clarifications. In all, 48 EdTech companies, 78 AdTech companies, and 10 governments responded as of May 24, 12 p.m. EDT. Several EdTech companies denied collecting children's data. Some companies denied that their products were intended for children's use. AdTech companies denied knowledge that the data was being sent to them, indicating that in any case it was their clients' responsibility not to send them children's data. These and other comments are reflected and addressed in the report, as relevant.
As more children spend increasing amounts of their childhood online, their reliance on the connected world and digital services that enable their education will likely continue long after the end of the pandemic. Governments should pass and enforce modern child data protection laws that provide safeguards around the collection, processing, and use of children's data. Companies should immediately stop collecting, processing, and sharing children's data in ways that risk or infringe on their rights.
Human Rights Watch has launched a global campaign, #StudentsNotProducts, which brings together parents, teachers, children, and allies to support this call and demand protections for children online.
"Children shouldn't be compelled to give up their privacy and other rights in order to learn," Han said. "Governments should urgently adopt and enforce modern child data protection laws to stop the surveillance of children by actors who don't have children's best interests at heart."
International Media Consortium
EdTech Exposed is an independent collaborative investigation that had early access to Human Rights Watch's report, data, and technical evidence on apparent violations of children's rights by governments that endorsed education technologies during the Covid-19 pandemic. The consortium provided weeks of independent reporting by more than 25 investigative journalists from 13 media organizations in 16 countries. It was coordinated by The Signals Network, an international nonprofit organization that supports whistleblowers and helps coordinate international media investigations that speak out against corporate misconduct and human rights abuses. Human Rights Watch provided financial support to Signals to establish the consortium, but the consortium is independent from and operates independently from Human Rights Watch.
The media organizations involved include ABC (Australia), Chosun Ilbo (Republic of Korea), El Mundo (Spain), Folha de Sao Paulo (Brazil), The Globe and Mail (Canada), Kyodo News (Japan), McClatchy/Miami Herald/Sacramento Bee/Fort Worth Star-Telegram (USA), Mediapart (France), Narasi TV (Indonesia), OCCRP (Cameroon, Kenya, Nigeria, SouthAfrica, and Zambia), The Daily Telegraph (UK), The Wire (India), and The Washington Post (USA).
In the coming weeks, Human Rights Watch will release its data and technical evidence, to invite experts, journalists, policymakers, and readers to recreate, test, and engage with its findings and research methods.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
'Who cares about Israel’s genocide, apartheid, and aggression?" asked one human rights expert.
The US State Department is hiding behind the war against Iran that was started by US President Donald Trump last week to justify an emergency order to ship more than 20,000 bombs—estimated at a value of $660 million—to Israel, skirting a pending approval process for the sale by Congress.
In a statement issued quietly on Friday night, the State Department said 12,000 BLU-110A/B general purpose, 1,000-pound bombs had been determined for approval, noting that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has "provided detailed justification that an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale to the Government of Israel of the above defense articles and defense services is in the national security interests of the United States, thereby waiving the Congressional review requirements under Section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act."
Not included in the statement, according to the New York Times, were additional parts of the sale that "include 10,000 bombs of 500 pounds each and 5,000 small-diameter bombs."
"This is an emergency of the Trump administration's own creation." —Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.)
According to the Times:
The State Department did not mention these details in the announcement, but two current US officials and a former, Josh Paul, who worked on weapons transfers at the State Department, said they were part of the emergency sale. The current officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive arms transactions.
This is the first time that the second Trump administration has formally declared an emergency, allowed under the Arms Export Control Act, to bypass Congress to sell arms to Israel. The administration has bypassed the informal approval process in Congress three times to sell arms or send weapons aid to Israel, but previously has not declared an emergency.
The push for the "emergency" arms sale comes as Israel pummels Lebanon with airstrikes, forcing an estimate 500,000 people or more in southern regions outside of Beirut to flee their homes. It also coincides with Israeli forces hitting targets in Iran alongside the US in what experts say is a wholly illegal attack on that country.
Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D-N.Y.), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, denounced the move by the Rubio in a Friday statement.
“Today's invocation of the Arms Export Control Act's emergency authority to bypass congressional review for two munitions cases to Israel exposes a stark contradiction at the heart of this administration's case for war," said Meeks. "The Trump administration has repeatedly insisted it was fully prepared for this war. Rushing to invoke emergency authority to circumvent Congress tells a different story. This is an emergency of the Trump administration's own creation."
Others also questioned the emergency sale, especially given Israel's record of genocide in Gaza over the last two years and its pivotal role in pushing the Trump administration toward a war of choice with Iran.
Meeks, in his statement, argued that key questions about Trump's war in Iran remain unanswered.
"What is the endgame? What preparations have been made to protect American citizens in the region? And how much will this war cost the American people?" asked Meeks. "The administration has provided no credible answers. The American people deserve answers, and Congress must demand them.”
"Trump loves putting his name on things, but this should be the only building for which he is remembered by history."
The bombing of a primary school by US-Israeli coalition forces in southern Iranian town of Minab that killed an estimated 160 or more civilians—mostly children—on February 28 should be investigated as a possible war crime, Human Rights Watch said on Saturday.
After reviewing satellite footage from before and after the strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh school—as well as reviewing video taken in the wake of the bombing and other materials—the international human rights group said the available evidence indicates "that the attack was carried out by highly accurate, guided munitions, rather than errant weapons whose guidance or propulsion systems failed or were otherwise disrupted and randomly struck the area."
The attack on the school would be among the deadliest war crimes against civilians by US forces in years. Occurring on the first day of bombings of what President Donald Trump and US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dubbed Operation Epic Fury, the slaughter of schoolchildren—though the US has denied responsibility thus far—coincides with Hegseth repeatedly bragging that the US military would no longer follow "stupid rules of engagement" in the execution of its operations.
"The school was in use, and children were in attendance on the day of the attack," the group said. "Human Rights Watch found no evidence that would indicate that the school was being used for military purposes, though researchers were not able to speak to witnesses of the strikes, families of those killed, or other informed sources."
President Trump should hold Secretary Hegseth and everyone else responsible for killing Iranian children accountable, and bring this illegal, unnecessary war of choice to an end.”
According to HRW:
The United States should immediately assess its responsibility for this strike and make the findings public. If the US military carried out the strike, it should conduct a full investigation into the operational and policy failures that led it to strike a school, fully account for the civilian harm caused, hold those responsible accountable including through prosecution, and commit to changes that would ensure such failures will not be repeated in future operations.
Analyses of the bombing by various news outlets have provided strong evidence that US forces were the most likely culprits of the attack. HRW was told by an Israeli military spokesperson that it was “not aware of any [Israeli military] strikes in the area.” Hegseth said during a Wednesday press conference that the Pentagon was investigating the matter, but offered no further indication of concern in the matter.
During that same press briefing, as HRW notes in its analysis of the attack, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine, said that US forces from the USS Abraham Lincoln strike group were providing “pressure” in preceding days along the “southeastern side" of the Iranian coast as he pointed to an area of a map showing coalition bombings that included Minab.
“A prompt and thorough investigation is needed into this attack, including if those responsible should have known that a school was there and that it would be full of children and their teachers before midday,” said Sophia Jones, open source researcher with the Digital Investigations Lab at Human Rights Watch. “Those responsible for an unlawful attack should be held to account, including prosecutions of anyone responsible for war crimes.”
“Allies of the US and Israel should insist on accountability for the Shajareh Tayyebeh school attack and for an end to attacks on civilian infrastructure in all of their operations across the region, before more civilians, including children, are unlawfully killed,” she added.
Human Rights Watch is not the only one demanding an independent investigation.
"This mass killing of children is unconscionable. It bears the hallmarks of a war crime," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Friday after a New York Times investigation found that US forces were likely behind the strike. "Trump and Hegseth must answer for the US's role and they must be held accountable. People deserve the full truth. There must be an immediate and transparent investigation."
On Friday, as Common Dreams reported, another school in Iran was struck by US-Israel bombings, bringing the total number of schools hit to four in the first six days of the unprovoked military attack.
"The American people do not want their tax dollars spent on killing children in Iran, just as they did not want their tax dollars spent on killing children in Gaza," said the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in a statement. "The latest U.S.-Israel attacks on schools in Iran are blatant war crimes. So was the original slaughter of 180 schoolgirls that the Pentagon refuses to take responsibility for."
“Every child murdered or injured in these indiscriminate US-Israel bombing attacks is a sign that the Pentagon under Pete Hegseth is mimicking the tactics of the cowardly and genocidal Israeli military, which has mastered the art of bombing men, women, and children from afar," the group added. "The American people expect better from our armed forces. President Trump should hold Secretary Hegseth and everyone else responsible for killing Iranian children accountable, and bring this illegal, unnecessary war of choice to an end.”
While the war continues and Trump on Saturday said the people of Iran should expect bombing and destruction to increase not decrease over the weekend, voices for peace continued to demand a swift end to the violence and said the US president should forever be held responsible for unleashing such unnecessary bloodshed—including the specific devastation unleashed on the school in Minab.
"Trump loves putting his name on things, but this should be the only building for which he is remembered by history," said Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, referencing the school where the massacre took place.
"The American people do not want more war in the Middle East. No boots on the ground. No more war."
A report late Friday that US President Donald Trump is more bullish in private about putting American soldiers on the ground in Iran than he has been publicly stirred immediate condemnation among lawmakers opposed to the illegal military attack, now entering its second week of destructive and deadly operations.
"This is madness," declared Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) in response to NBC News reporting, which cited unnamed sources familiar with the conversations, that stated Trump "has privately expressed serious interest in deploying US troops on the ground inside of Iran."
While the White House pushed back on the contents of the reporting, Trump himself has said that he does not hold reservations about deploying ground troops if he deems it necessary.
“I don’t have the yips with respect to boots on the ground," Trump told the New York Post on Monday. "Like every president says, ‘There will be no boots on the ground.’ I don’t say it. I say, ‘probably don’t need them,’ [or] ‘if they were necessary.’”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also reacted to the new reporting.
" Donald Trump is hellbent on escalating his reckless war and is now considering putting US boots on the ground in Iran," said Schumer in an online statement. "The American people do not want more war in the Middle East. No boots on the ground. No more war."
Early morning on Saturday, Trump issued a fresh threat to the people of Iran, declaring in a social media post: "Today Iran will be hit very hard!"
In the same post, the US president falsely claimed that Iran had "surrendered" to neighboring countries in the region following a series of missile attacks over recent days by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps units on select targets in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and others.
What Trump was referring to was a video message issued by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian earlier in the day in which he apologized for the strikes—carried out by IRGC commanders operating independently in the wake of the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a US-Israeli strike earlier this week—and said that no further such attacks would take place “unless those countries launch an attack on us."
In his remarks, Pezeshkian rejected Trump's insistence on Friday for an "unconditional surrender" by Iran. “That we surrender unconditionally is a dream that they must take with themselves to the grave," he said. "What we adhere to are international laws and humanitarian framework."
Pezeshkian called for diplomacy to bring the war of aggression by the US and Israel to an end. "We aim to work hand‑in‑hand with our dear brothers and neighbors in the region to establish lasting peace and stability, and we hope this goal will be achieved,” he said.
However, if hostilities launched from factions in neighboring countries resumed, Pezeshkian warned, "all military bases and interests of criminal America and the fake Zionist regime on land, at sea, and in the air across the region will be considered primary targets and will come under the powerful and crushing strikes of the mighty armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
In remarks on Thursday, after Trump previously refused to rule out boots on the ground, Iranian Foreign Minister Foreign Minister Abbas Araghch told NBC News that the country's armed forces are prepared.
“We are waiting for them,” Araghchi said. “Because we are confident that we can confront them, and that would be a big disaster for them.”
Foreign policy experts warn that Trump has created an untenable situation for himself by demanding the "unconditional surrender" as well as stating that he must personally be involved in the choosing the next leader of Iran—an overt call for regime change in a nation of 90 million people.
"No country surrenders from airpower alone," said Ryan Costello, policy director for the National Iranian American Council, a Washington DC-based think tank, on Friday. "Trump has created a trap for himself: either he backs down on his unattainable goal to dictate Iran, or he climbs up the escalation ladder, considering even more disastrous steps like boots on the ground."