As Western society becomes increasingly digitally dependent and many older adults actively engage in the online world, understanding the experiences of those who largely do not use digital technology in their daily lives is crucial. Individual interviews were conducted (pre-pandemic) with 23 older adults who, based on self-identification, did not regularly use digital technology, exploring how their experiences as limited digital technology users may have impacted their daily lives. An iterative collaborative qualitative analysis demonstrated three main themes: internet concerns, frustrations with digital technology, and conflicting motivators to use digital technology. Findings suggest that addressing digital concerns and providing effective digital skill learning opportunities may encourage some older adults to become more digitally engaged. However, as people, including older adults, can be uninterested in using these technologies, organizations and institutions should work to offer ways to support people of all ages who are not engaged online.

This paper rereads the tort of intrusion upon seclusion, as it was adopted by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Jones v Tsige, to include a fuller account of online privacy. It proposes that the Court’s stress on informational privacy forfeits a more dynamic and “spatialized” conception of privacy harm. This paper develops a relational account of spatial privacy using the work of Iris Marion Young, Virginia Woolf, and Jennifer Nedelsky based on three features—embodied habits, narrative, and experimentation—to supplement the informational reading of privacy in Jones. While Jones is not a case about young people, this paper nonetheless takes the Court’s emphasis on digital technology as an invitation to reflect on young people’s privacy. Using different accounts of young people’s online experience, it proposes that while privacy is certainly transformed by the online world, its basic spatial features have not changed as dramatically as the Court in Jones suggests.

In this article I explore judicial interpretations of the relationship between digital technology and non-consensual intimate image distribution (NCIID) (i.e., “revenge porn”). Drawing on my analysis of forty-nine Canadian cases of NCIID, I show that judicial interpretations of digital technology have important influences on how NCIID is understood and responded to in the law. I find that the majority of judges perceive digital technology as making NCIID easier to commit—with the simple “click of a mouse”—and as increasing the amount of harm caused by this act—as digital nude/sexual photos are seen as lasting “forever” and thus as resulting in ongoing and immeasurable harm to victims. These perceptions have substantive impacts on legal rationales and sentencing decisions, with the affordances of digital technology regularly being treated as justifying harsher sentences to denounce and deter this act.