See “How the N.Y.P.D. Is Using Post-9/11 Tools on Everyday New Yorkers”, by Ali Watkins, a news article turned political commentary turned advocacy.

The article describes the post 9/11 surveillance, facial recognition and other technologies being converted from anti terrorist surveillance to anti crime surveillance. Much similar to England, France, and oh ya, the rest of the world.

She comments New Yorkers are now subject to near constant surveillance – a burder that falls more heavily on people of color.

WHAT??? Are she suggesting the cameras can distinguish race or creed and turn themselves off when a white person walks by?

It is this type of journalism, or lack there of, that turns people off to the NY Times. Rather than being the paper of record it should be, it is viewed as a liberal woke propaganda daily.

She goes on further to cite Amnesty International’s comment that a person protesting on the public streets from Washington Square Park down to Sixth Avenue would be viewed / recorded on the NYPD’s cameras for about 80% of the time they were marching. Let’s examine that. If you ARE IN PUBLIC you DON’T HAVE PRIVACY. As such, I am missing what the complaint is here. Is she suggesting the cameras on in place to spy on people? To what end? To me, the cameras are much like radar. They are deterrents. If you know someone is watching, you are less likely to smash windows and steal merchandise, etc. Am I missing something?

She ends her piece with this quote, “But without the proper checks and balances, anything that’s good can also be used for bad reasons.”

You mean sort of like news reporting and journalism.

Indeed.