Should the Government be Banned from Facial Recognition Technology?
Short on time?
We consolidate every article and add some fun visuals for our email subscribers. Click below to get this article delivered to your inbox and get signed up for fresh content every week!
KEY SOURCES
Brookings Institution
Pew Research Center
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Image and Vision Computing
Bureau of Justice Statistics
U.S. Government Accountability Office
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Associated Press
Face First
American Bar Association
WHY THIS QUESTION MATTERS:
In May 2019, San Francisco made headlines when it became the first U.S. city to ban police use of facial recognition technology. The technology analyzes human faces and matches them to an existing database to verify an individual's identity. Over the last decade, the facial recognition technology has become increasingly accessible for government entities, businesses, and private citizens alike. But as the technology has grown, so too have concerns of its use or misuse.
Supporters of San Francisco’s ban argue that the government’s use of facial recognition has the potential to infringe on individual civil liberties. On the other hand, critics of the ban argue that the government’s use of facial recognition makes communities safer and should be permitted to help law enforcement reduce crime.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY:
The first manual facial recognition tools were created in the 1960s. At that time, individuals could use a RAND tablet to input horizontal and vertical coordinates on a grid to coordinate locations of various facial features in pictures. Since then, technology has advanced tremendously and has become much more accessible.
Beginning in 2017, anyone who purchases an iPhone X has the option to unlock their phone or make a payment by simply holding the device in front of their face and allowing the technology to recognize them. Meanwhile, law enforcement agencies are relying more heavily on facial recognition to solve crimes and quickly track down leads.
The market for facial recognition software is growing by 20% each year and is expected to be worth $9 billion by 2022. According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), between 2014 and 2018 facial recognition software got 20 times better at searching a database to find a matching photograph.
FACIAL RECOGNITION AND PRIVACY CONCERNS:
However, the prolific use of this technology has begun to raise concern amongst privacy advocates who are worried the technology has the power to encroach on individual civil liberties. There are a couple of key concerns here — first, there are concerns over the government’s ability to track citizens whereabouts whether or not they’ve committed a crime, etc. Second, there are no federal regulations for how these massive personal biometric databases are collected or stored. And third, there are concerns about how the data will be stored to ensure there are no breaches.
As the world of tech continues to accelerate, some argue that these new facial recognition technologies should be better regulated while others argue that they should be outright banned for government use.
What do you think?
The Common Thread
Supporters and opponents of the ban both say they are concerned with protecting individual safety and liberties.
FIND YOUR Thread
Supporters of San Francisco’s ban argue that the government’s use of facial recognition has the potential to infringe on individual civil liberties. Critics of the ban argue that the government’s use of facial recognition makes communities safer and should be permitted to help law enforcement reduce crime.
Yes, the government use of facial recognition technology should be banned.
Reason 01
Government misuse of technology would infringe on civil liberties.
Inappropriate use of facial recognition may create a surveillance state, creating a “chilling effect” on a free, democratic society where rights to gather, protest, and move about public areas freely may be impacted. (Brookings Institution)
China currently uses facial recognition as a tracking system to monitor the actions of Muslim minority groups and arrest jaywalkers. (Brookings Institution)
21 states already provide the FBI with access to state collected drivers license and identification photos — meaning faces of individuals that have never committed a crime are already a part of the database. (Government Accountability Office)
The FBI and other government agencies using facial recognition technologies are not transparent about how the data is used. (Government Accountability Office)
Reason 02
There are severe consequences for the technology misidentifying individuals in the criminal justice system — an algorithm recommending prison sentences is different than the one that recommends Tinder dates.
Facial recognition technology is more effective at identifying white men (0.8% error rate) than dark-skinned women (34.7% error rate). Rights groups worry that this bias may disproportionately impact minorities being misidentified in the criminal justice system. (MIT)
While these disparities in identifying minorities decreases at the 99% confidence threshold, police departments do not currently have any required minimum thresholds. (Brookings Institution)
Reason 03
If the government maintains massive databases of citizens facial recognition, how can we ensure the data will be safe?
As of 2016, 10% of citizens 16 or older has been a victim of identity theft. And this percentage is expected to rise. (Bureau of Justice Statistics)
Stealing credit card information or a social security number is one thing — what are the consequences of theft of facial features? (Brookings Institution)
No, the government use of facial recognition technology should be regulated, not banned.
Reason 01
Facial recognition makes communities safer.
Facial recognition technology makes our government and policing system more efficient. The technology has already been used to arrest FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives. (Government Accountability Office)
New York has identified over 10,000 people who had committed identity fraud using facial recognition technology. (American Bar Association)
The technology is so effective that there are plans to implement this type of screening in over 97% of airports. (Department of Homeland Security)
59% of Americans believe that it's acceptable for law enforcement to use facial recognition due to the safety benefits of assessing threats in public spaces. (Pew Research)
Reason 02
Facial recognition technology corrects human biases.
As of 2014, computers have proven to be more effective at identifying human faces than other humans. (Science Direct)
We currently rely on human witnesses in criminal justice. However, disguises, such as a new hairstyle, reduce individual’s ability to match faces by around 30%. Would justice be better served by algorithms? (Science Daily)
Reason 03
Rather than ban, we should ensure government use of facial recognition is properly regulated.
Legislation could prohibit some of the more controversial governmental uses, such as real-time tracking/identification and instead use it as an investigative tool and only include individuals with a criminal record in the database. (CATO Institute)
Rather than prevent our governing agencies from deploying the most advanced technologies, we should create rules and transparency to ensure the tools are being used properly. (CATO Institute)
Subscribe to our weekly email to cast your vote on a fresh topic every week.