NYA Staff
Going to a concert or basketball game normally involves buying a ticket, passing through security and finding your seat. If you go to Madison Square Garden your face may be scanned and matched against a database.
A recent WIRED report describes a rally outside Madison Square Garden where privacy advocates, musicians and New York City Council member Shahana Hanif called for legislation restricting the use of facial-recognition technology at public venues.
Hanif has introduced a proposal called the “Ban the Scan” bill, which would prohibit public venues from using biometric recognition technology. The measure has attracted support from more than half of the City Council, according to WIRED.
The controversy centers largely on Madison Square Garden and its owner, James Dolan. WIRED has previously reported that the venue has used facial recognition to identify people considered problematic to the organization. The reporting describes instances in which security personnel monitored individuals’ movements inside the arena and maintained watch lists involving people who had disputes with Dolan or his businesses.
WIRED has also reported on an MSG database containing risk assessments on hundreds of celebrities and VIPs. According to the publication, some profiles include highly personal information, including race and sexual orientation. MSG has disputed the reporting and subsequently sued WIRED for defamation.
MSG’s defense is that people have always recognized one another by their faces; the technology simply does it electronically.
The difference here, however, is scale.
A security guard recognizing someone who walks through a door is one thing. A computer system that can identify thousands of people, record their movements and compare them against extensive databases is something very different.
The question isn’t whether facial recognition can make places safer. It clearly has legitimate security applications. The bigger question is who gets to decide when it is used, what information is collected, how long it is retained and what happens to the data afterward.
New York’s proposed legislation reflects a much larger debate that cities around the country will eventually have to confront: When you enter a public place, how much privacy should you be expected to surrender simply because technology makes surveillance possible?
Neil Young will not be appearing in venues using the surveillance technology.