Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Request:
The details we require are:
Q1. Do you use a social listening platform?
Q2. If so, what tools do you use?
Q3. How much do you spend annually on a social listening tool?
Q4. Which month & year does your contract with your supplier end?
Q5. Do you use a media monitoring platform?
Q6. If so, what tools do you use?
Q7. How much do you spend annually on a media monitoring tool?
Q8. Which month & year does your contract with your supplier end?
Q9. Who is the budget holder for these contracts?
Response:
Extent and Result of Searches to Locate Information
To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police. I can confirm that the information you have requested is held by North Yorkshire Police.
Decision
I have today decided to disclose the located information to you.
Q1. No
Q2, Q3, Q4. N/A
Q5. Yes
Q9. ICT
I am exempting any information to Q6, Q7 & Q8 pursuant to s24(1) – National Security and s31(1) – Law Enforcement.
Evidence of Harm
Any disclosure under FOI is a release to the public at large. Whilst not questioning the motivation behind this specific request, disclosing details of the provider of social media monitoring tools used by the force would cause operational harm and affect the ability to fulfil the core function of law enforcement in the future. Providing details of such providers would allow members of the public to identify the resources and tactics used in the gathering of intelligence for operational law enforcement purposes. It would enable individuals and organisations that are intent on causing disruption to identify strengths and weaknesses at force level, and more so nationally, which could be exploited causing harm to members of the public. This would be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.
Providing details about the particular software used by police to gather information, including intelligence, from social media would allow those with malicious intent to target cyber-attacks on those producers, causing disruption or service denial to police forces and thereby preventing intelligence acquisition and undermining law enforcement.
The threat from terrorism cannot be ignored. It is generally recognised that the international security landscape is increasingly complex and unpredictable. Since 2006, the UK Government has published the threat level based upon current intelligence, and that threat is currently judged as “SUBSTANTIAL”, meaning that an attack on the UK is likely. It is well established that police forces use tactics and technology to gain intelligence in order to counteract criminal behaviour, and it has been previously documented in the media that many terrorist incidents have been thwarted due to intelligence gained by these means.
Providing details of social media monitoring/intelligence gathering tools or platforms used by the force would limit operational capabilities as criminals/terrorists would gain a greater understanding of the police’s capabilities, enabling offenders to take steps to counter them. It may also suggest the limitations of police capabilities in this area, which may further encourage criminal/terrorist activity by exposing potential vulnerabilities.
This detrimental effect is increased if the request is made to several different law enforcement bodies. In addition to the local criminal fraternity now being better informed, those intent on disrupting policing functions throughout the UK will be able to ‘map’ where the use of certain products are and are not deployed. This can be useful information to those committing (or those intent on committing or planning) crime.
Any information identifying the focus of policing activity could be used to the advantage of terrorists or criminal organisations. Information that undermines the operational integrity of these activities will adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on both National Security and Law Enforcement.
Public Interest Test
Factors favouring disclosure Section 24 - The information only relates to national security and provision of it would not actually harm it. The public are entitled to know what public funds are spent on and what measures are in place. Providing the details of social media monitoring tools used would lead to a better informed public.
Factors favouring non-disclosure 24 – Providing the information would render policing and security measures less effective. This would lead to the compromise of ongoing or future operations to protect the security or infra-structure of the UK and increase the risk of harm to the public.
Factors favouring disclosure Section 31 – Providing details of the social media monitoring tools used would provide an insight into the Police Service. This would enable the public to have a better understanding of the effectiveness of the police and about how the police gather intelligence. It would greatly assist in the quality and accuracy of public debate, which could otherwise be steeped in rumour and speculation. Where public funds are being spent, there is a public interest in accountability and justifying the use of public money.
Factors favouring non-disclosure Section 31 – Providing details of the social media monitoring tools used would have the effect of compromising law enforcement tactics. It has been recorded that FOIA releases are monitored by criminals and terrorists and so to provide specific information concerning intelligence gathering tools would lead to law enforcement being undermined. The Police Service is reliant upon all manner of tools and techniques and the public release of details about these tools would prejudice the ability of the Police Service to perform the functions it exists to provide.
Disclosure of specific tools and software would compromise the forces’ ability to protect the public. Disclosing the police forces’ capabilities would provide persons intent on disrupting their work, with information that would assist them to do so. The safety of the public is of paramount importance to policing purposes, and any increase in crime would place the public at risk of harm
Balance Test
The security of the country is of paramount importance and the police will not divulge details of specific tools and software if to do so would place the safety of an individual at risk, undermine National Security or compromise law enforcement.
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing technologies and providing assurance that the force are appropriately and effectively managing the threat posed by various groups or individuals, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police systems and all areas of operations carried out by police forces throughout the UK.
As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. The use of technology can be a sensitive issue that would reveal police tactics and therefore it is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for providing information is not made out.
Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data. It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.