Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

36 hours left in this Mid-Year Campaign. This is our hour of need.
If you value independent journalism, please support Common Dreams.

Join the small group of generous readers who donate, keeping Common Dreams free for millions of people each year. Without your help, we won’t survive.

Privacy advocates quit a process to craft safeguards for use of facial recognition technology to protest the influence of tech industry lobbyists. (Photo: nolifebeforecoffee/flickr/cc)

Privacy Advocates Quit Facial Recognition Panel to Protest Tech Lobby Chokehold

"At a base minimum, people should be able to walk down a public street without fear that companies they've never heard of are tracking their every movement," advocates state in letter

Nadia Prupis

Nine privacy advocates on Monday resigned in protest from a year-long attempt to develop a code of conduct for the use of facial recognition technology, citing a failure to agree on "basic, specific" safeguards with industry lobbyists.

"At a base minimum, people should be able to walk down a public street without fear that companies they've never heard of are tracking their every movement—and identifying them by name—using facial recognition technology," the privacy advocates wrote in a joint statement (pdf). "Unfortunately, we were unable to obtain agreement even with that basic, specific premise."

The U.S. Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) brought together a panel of security experts and lobbyists in February 2014 to develop a voluntary code of conduct "that specifies how the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights applies to facial recognition technology in the commercial context."

But over the course of 16 months, the nine privacy advocates—who include representatives from the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Consumer Federation of America, among other groups—came to believe that the NTIA process was unlikely to "yield a set of privacy rules that offers adequate protections for the use of facial recognition technology."

Stop!

We Interrupt This Article with an Urgent Message!

Common Dreams is a not-for-profit news service. All of our content is free to you - no subscriptions; no ads. We are funded by donations from our readers. This media model only works if enough readers pitch in. We have millions of readers every month and, it seems, too many take our survival for granted. It isn't. Our critical Mid-Year fundraiser is going very slow - only 598 readers have contributed a total of $23,000 so far. We must raise $27,000 more before we can end this fundraising campaign and get back to focusing on what we do best.
If you support Common Dreams and you want us to survive, we need you.
Please make a tax-deductible gift to our Mid-Year Fundraiser now!

"In recent NTIA meetings...industry stakeholders were unable to agree on any concrete scenario where companies should employ facial recognition only with a consumer's permission," their statement reads. "The position that companies never need to ask permission to use biometric identification is at odds with consumer expectations, current industry practices, as well as existing state law."

Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of the Center for Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law School and one of the nine privacy advocates, said in a statement that the mass resignation "should be a wake-up call to Americans: Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington's ability to protect consumer privacy."

Read more at The Intercept.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Just ONE DAY left in our crucial Mid-Year Campaign and we might not make it without your help.
Who funds our independent journalism? Readers like you who believe in our mission: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. No corporate advertisers. No billionaire founder. Our non-partisan, nonprofit media model has only one source of revenue: The people who read and value this work and our mission. That's it.
And the model is simple: If everyone just gives whatever amount they can afford and think is reasonable—$3, $9, $29, or more—we can continue. If not enough do, we go dark.

All the small gifts add up to something otherwise impossible. Please join us today. Donate to Common Dreams. This is crunch time. We need you now.

'Indefensible': Outrage as New Reporting Shines Light on Biden Deal With McConnell

The president has reportedly agreed to nominate an anti-abortion Republican to a lifetime judgeship. In exchange, McConnell has vowed to stop blocking two Biden picks for term-limited U.S. attorney posts.

Jake Johnson ·


Assange Makes Final Appeal Against US Extradition

"If Julian Assange is not free, neither are we," said a protester at a Friday demonstration against the WikiLeaks founder's impending transfer. "None of us is free."

Brett Wilkins ·


'Payoff for 40 Years of Dark Money': Supreme Court Delivers for Corporate America

"It was the conservative court's larger agenda to gut the regulatory state and decimate executive powers to protect Americans' health and safety," warned one expert.

Jake Johnson ·


NARAL Pro-Choice Endorses Fetterman—Who Vows to End Senate Filibuster to Protect Abortion Rights

"We know we can count on him to boldly fight for abortion rights and access," said the head of one of the nation's largest reproductive rights advocacy groups.

Jon Queally ·


Texas Panel Denounced Over Attempt to Rebrand Slavery as 'Involuntary Relocation'

One progressive group called the proposal "a blatant attempt to whitewash history to fit a racist worldview."

Brett Wilkins ·

Common Dreams Logo