SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Caitlin Seeley George, caitlin@fightforthefuture.org
More than 20 civil and human rights organizations are expanding the fight against facial recognition and calling for a ban not only on government and law enforcement use of the technology, but also private and corporate use.
The letter, which highlights recent abuses by corporations including Uber Eats, Amazon, and Apple, states that this technology threatens to suppress workers' rights to organize, makes frontline workers susceptible to harassment and exploitation, puts personal biometric data in danger, and exacerbates existing biases.
The letter says that "In a world where private companies are already collecting our data, analyzing it, and using it to manipulate us to make a profit, we can't afford to naively believe that private entities can be trusted with our biometric information. A technology that is inherently unjust, that has the potential to exponentially expand and automate discrimination and human rights violations, and that contributes to an ever growing and inescapable surveillance state is too dangerous to exist."
While the call to ban law enforcement and government use of facial recognition has grown, and lawmakers have banned this use in many cities (and introduced a federal bill), Portland, OR is the only city to ban private use of facial recognition thus far. The organizations point to the Portland legislation as a template for other lawmakers to address the concerns with private and corporate use of the technology, and call on "local, state, and federal elected officials, as well as corporate leaders, to ban the use of facial recognition surveillance by private entities."
"There is zero reason to believe that corporations can use this technology responsibly, especially at a time when these companies are already collecting our data and using it to manipulate us for profit," said Caitlin Seeley George (she/her), Director of Campaigns and Operations at Fight for the Future. "This technology is inherently discriminatory and dangerous, no amount of regulation can address that. In order to protect people in workplaces, stores, restaurants, hospitals, transit and beyond, we must ban it."
"Opt-in consent based regulatory frameworks will not address these harms," added Evan Greer (she/her), Deputy Director at Fight for the Future. "If employees have to agree to being under constant facial recognition surveillance in order to have a job, that's not meaningful consent. If a patient has to agree to have their biometric information collected in order to receive care at a hospital, that's not really consent. Even more innocuous uses, like getting your face scanned to buy a burrito come with significant risks. The vast majority of people have no idea what the dangers of this technology are, and putting the onus on them fails to recognize power imbalances."
"Facial recognition technology poses serious threats to personal freedom. Letting this tool of authoritarian control spread throughout the private sector has serious implications for worker organizing rights and heightens the risk of catastrophic biometric data breaches," said Tracy Rosenberg, Advocacy Director at Oakland Privacy. "You can't replace your face, The troubled record of facial recognition technology in identifying darker skinned people and youth poses severe dangers for people too often criminalized. Facial recognition technology should be put back in the bottle. We don't need it and the dangers can't be regulated away."
"Facial recognition being prone to racial bias is not its only problem. If it were 100% accurate, it would be horrifying. If you're tracked wherever you go, your movements are laid bare for any company or government to exploit. Facial recognition deployments strip away your whole right to be let alone, in the name of more efficient advertising and policing. It's not worth it," said Alex Marthews, National Chair of Restore The Fourth.
"Corporate facial recognition fuels racist policing of Black, brown, and immigrant communities," said Aly Panjwani, Policy & Advocacy Manager at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. "Facial recognition is biased, broken, and dangerous to the livelihood of working-class people. This technology exists to monitor, exploit, and incarcerate and must be banned."
"The companies that develop and sell facial recognition technology need to recognize and confront its inherent dangers - and they need to stop it now," said Michael Connor, Executive Director of Open MIC, a nonprofit which has organized corporate shareholders to oppose the spread of facial recognition. Connor noted that a shareholder proposal at Amazon highlighting the human rights risks of the company's facial recognition product won more than 40 percent of the independent shareholder vote at Amazon's 2020 annual meeting, with yet another vote scheduled at this year's upcoming 2021 annual meeting. "Investors increasingly understand the dangers of facial recognition," Connor said. "Managements and boards of directors should take note."
"Facial recognition is one of the most dangerous forms of surveillance ever invented. We know that its use--both by private and government entities--puts Black and brown communities already targeted by state violence at an even higher risk of arrest and incarceration. And we know that it's already being used to target & silence protesters, deport migrant families, and control and surveil workers by their employers at Amazon warehouses and beyond. It's clear to us that the dangers this technology poses can't be "reformed" or "regulated" and we cannot trust tech companies--who are making enormous profits off of this tech--with the surveillance tools they already have. We must ban corporate & private use of facial recognition and fight for a surveillance-free future for all of us," added Laura Barrios, Campaign Manager, MPower Change.
"Corporate use of facial recognition will serve as an end-run around bans on government use of the technology and is a profound danger to the public in its own right. Face surveillance is too powerful for any entity to use because it enables widespread and surreptitious tracking of individuals on the back of cheap and omnipresent devices, cameras. The harms of facial recognition, both when it errs and when it is accurate, fall predominantly upon people of color, low-income individuals, and migrants. The use of this technology threatens to turn everyone into a suspect. FRT also permits unprecedented surveillance of workers, both on the job and off the clock. The only responsible step is for corporations to stop using facial recognition," said Jeramie Scott, Senior Counsel and Director of the Surveillance Project at the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
"Let's face it, the new gold standard for corporate power is private data, and owning your face is about as personal as it gets. Furthermore, corporations using facial recognition technology further exacerbates the criminalization of Black and Brown people," said Matt Nelson, Executive Director of Presente.org, the nation's largest Latinx digital organizing group. "Profiting from a surveillance state is an unethical, dangerous racket and has no place in a future democracy that works for all of us."
The release of this letter comes after a handful of recent cases that highlight the growing problem of facial recognition being used by corporations: the hack of more than 150,000 Verkada security cameras that include facial recognition software and are used in offices, gyms, hospitals, jails, schools, police stations, and more; Disney's announcement that it will be testing facial recognition at the entrance to the Magic Kingdom, and the incidences with Uber Eats, Apple, and Amazon previously mentioned.
Organizations signed onto the letter include Action Center on Race and The Economy (ACRE), American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Cryptoharlem, Daily Kos, Data for Black Lives, Demand Progress, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), Fight for the Future, Greenpeace USA, Massachusetts Jobs with Justice, MediaJustice, MPower Change, Muslim Justice League, Oakland Privacy, Open MIC (Open Media & Information Companies Initiative), Presente.org, Privacy PDX, Public Citizen, RAICES, Restore the Fourth, RootsAction.org, Secure Justice, S.T.O.P. (Surveillance Technology Oversight Project), and United We Dream.
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026One advocate called the bill an "important step forward in reducing historic, extreme, and democracy-destabilizing levels of economic inequality in America."
In a move cheered by economic justice advocates, US Sen. Ed Markey on Tuesday introduced the Senate version of the bicameral Equal Tax Act, a bill that would "create equal tax rates for all forms of income for individuals with incomes over $1 million."
"The wealthiest individuals in our society use loopholes and tax dodging schemes to avoid paying their fair share," Markey (D-Mass.) said in an introduction to the bill. "They get away with it because our tax code rewards wealth over work—giving breaks to those that trade stocks over those that punch clocks."
The legislation—which was first introduced in the House of Representatives last year by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.)—seeks to make the tax code more fair by making billionaires and multimillionaires pay income tax on passive investments, as if they earned their money through labor, by raising the top marginal rate from the current 20% to 37%.
Right now, billionaires can pay less in taxes on their stock trades than teachers or nurses that educate our children and care for us in emergencies. My Equal Tax Act would stop rewarding wealth more than work by making the ultra-wealthy pay taxes like millions of working people.
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey (@markey.senate.gov) March 17, 2026 at 2:54 PM
Specifically, the Equal Tax Act would:
"Teachers, nurses, and millions of working people are the ones who keep our country running, but our tax code rewards wealth over work,” said Markey. “The Equal Tax Act brings fairness to our tax code by requiring millionaires and billionaires to pay taxes on investment income the same way working people pay taxes on income from their labor."
Ramirez noted how plutocrats like President Donald Trump and tech titans Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg "have extorted tax benefits from the American people."
"For far too long, they have exploited an unfair tax system that makes the rich richer at the expense of working families," the congresswoman added. "It is time we ensure that the ultrawealthy pay their fair share. I am excited to work with Sen. Markey in the bicameral introduction of the Equal Tax Act to build a fairer tax system that ensures working families have everything they need to thrive."
Morris Pearl, chair of the fair taxation advocacy group Patriotic Millionaires, said in a statement, “For decades, we have been playing a game of economic Jenga where we pull from the bottom and the middle, load it all on top, and then wonder why the whole thing is about to fall down."
"We end up with an unfair system that allows for oligarchic wealth to concentrate in the hands of a few individuals," Pearl continued. "That’s because right now in America, our tax code makes people who have jobs and work for a living pay far higher tax rates than people who make money from investments or inheritances."
"The money that investors like me make passively from our wealth should not be taxed any less than the money millions of Americans make through their sweat," he asserted. "By closing major loopholes, the Equal Tax Act would ensure that the ultrarich pay income taxes just like all Americans who work for a living and have taxes deducted from their paychecks every week."
"The Patriotic Millionaires are thrilled to see Sen. Markey take this important step forward in reducing historic, extreme, and democracy-destabilizing levels of economic inequality in America," Pearl added.
"Management refuses to agree to a new contract with essential work protections and fair wages," said the workers' negotiating team.
Unionized workers with CBS News' streaming channel began a bicoastal one-day walkout Tuesday morning after unsuccessful negotiations for a "fair and just" contract under Bari Weiss, who has faced intense criticism on a range of topics since taking over as editor-in-chief.
CBS News is part of the media behemoth Paramount Skydance, which was formed in a controversial merger last August. Two months later, the company acquired Weiss' The Free Press, and CEO David Ellison appointed her to also lead all of CBS News, despite her lack of television experience.
The latest contract for the streaming channel, CBS News 24/7, expired last week, after which the workers delivered a strike pledge. Tuesday's 24-hour walkout—with rallies at CBS News Broadcast Center in New York City and at KPIX-TV CBS News Bay Area in San Francisco, California—kicked off at 6:00 am Eastern time.
"CBS News 24/7 journalists are walking off the job on both coasts today because management refuses to agree to a new contract with essential work protections and fair wages," the bargaining committee and contract action team said in a statement from Writers Guild of America East (WGAE).
"Despite multiple days of good-faith negotiations and a strike pledge signed by 95% of our members to emphasize the seriousness of our demands, management continues to offer us worse terms than in our last contracts," the team said. "We chose this field to cover the news, but we believe this work stoppage is necessary to achieve a fair contract. We eagerly await an acceptable contract offer from Paramount—which just shelled out tens of billions of dollars to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery."
Deadline explained that "the newsroom has undergone rounds of layoffs and buyouts, and more are expected. There also are fears of further downsizing when Paramount completes its deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery, given that will leave the company with two global news outlets, CBS News and CNN."
Beth Godvik, WGAE vice president of broadcast/cable/streaming news, called out Paramount for striking a $110 billion deal with Warner Bros. Discovery while it "still hasn't guaranteed fair wages and basic job protections for the workers who make their streaming news operation run."
"Our members are walking out today to show management they stand united in their demand for a fair contract—and the WGAE is with them every step of the way," said Godvik.
As The Wrap noted:
The battle puts Weiss, an opinion journalist who had no TV news experience before she became CBS News' editor-in-chief last October, in the position of negotiating with a union under her purview for the first time. The union dispute comes as the network has already been rocked by star departures and scrutiny over its coverage.
The Free Press, the anti-woke outlet Weiss cofounded and still leads, is not unionized, while CBS News has four main bargaining units, including the Writers Guild of America-backed CBS News 24/7, which launched in 2014 and rebroadcasts CBS News shows like "60 Minutes" and "CBS Mornings" along with original shows like "The Takeout with Major Garrett."
A CBS News spokesperson told The Guardian that "we continue to negotiate in good faith and hope to reach a fair resolution quickly."
Meanwhile, multiple members of Congress expressed support for the work stoppage on social media.
"If Paramount can shell out billions of dollars to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, then they can pay their unionized CBS staff a fair wage," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). "I stand with the CBS staff who walked out today as they fight these corporate giants for essential protections and fair contracts."
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) declared that "American workers deserve fair pay and basic protections—full stop. I stand with the 60 CBS News 24/7 journalists walking off the job today in New York and San Francisco. Paramount is finalizing a $110 BILLION deal but can't give its own workers a fair contract?"
These robots, known as "quadrupeds," are being used to patrol the sprawling energy-sucking complexes, which are increasingly being met with protest around the country.
As Americans grow fed up with the rapid encroachment of artificial intelligence data centers into their communities, tech companies are embracing a novel solution to protect their energy-sucking behemoths from danger: Even more robots... robot dogs, to be exact.
According to a report from Business Insider on Monday:
As companies pour billions into sprawling industrial campuses for cloud and AI computing, some data center operators are experimenting with four-legged bots—about the size of large dogs—that can patrol fences, inspect equipment, and flag any issues before they turn into costly outages.
These robots, known as "quadrupeds," are being used to patrol the complexes, which can sometimes reach the size of multiple football fields.
According to Fortune, tech companies are already pouring nearly $700 billion into building data centers across the US and are now spending hundreds of thousands of dollars more to enlist mechanical canines as security forces.
One model from Boston Dynamics, known as "Spot," can cost anywhere from $175,000 to $300,000. And while the technology may seem futuristic, Spot and other quadrupeds like it have already been enlisted in law enforcement and public safety for years.
Another company—Ghost Robotics—advertises its quadrupeds for "reconnaissance, intelligence, and surveillance use by the military."
With more than 5,000 data centers now in the US and 800-1,000 new ones in the process of being built, Michael Subhan, the chief growth officer for Ghost Robotics, told Business Insider he expects boom times are ahead for his industry.
As data centers expand their reach at breakneck speed, there may be more interlopers for the programmable pooches to sniff out.
Due to skyrocketing energy costs and water shortages in places where large data centers have been built, the sites of proposed projects from Illinois to Minnesota to South Carolina have drawn crowds of dozens and even hundreds of demonstrators in recent weeks.