Concerns Over Privacy Linger as Commissioner Calls for Caution

A group of New Zealand’s largest retailers has come out in support of using facial recognition technology (FRT) in their stores, despite ongoing concerns over privacy. The retailers, including Briscoes, Bunnings, and The Warehouse, have signed a statement backing the use of FRT to protect workers and customers, but critics argue that the technology raises significant privacy risks.

The trial, conducted by Foodstuffs, found that FRT can misidentify up to 900 shoppers per year, and the Privacy Commissioner, Michael Webster, has warned that rolling out FRT at scale would mean that large numbers of people would be misidentified. Webster has called for the algorithm accuracy to be raised from 90% to 92.5% and for training to be done on New Zealanders’ faces, by consent, to cut down the risk of bias and inaccuracy.

Retail NZ’s Carolyn Young said that FRT would enable stores to identify individuals who have been trespassed and are likely to reoffend, but critics argue that this is a form of surveillance. Young claimed that FRT does not enable ongoing monitoring, but rather takes a photo of individuals as they enter the store and deletes it if they are not on a watchlist.

However, experts argue that the claim that FRT only takes a single photo is misleading. In reality, FRT systems can continuously scan and match faces, creating a database of individuals who have entered the store. This raises concerns about the potential for mass surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties.

The retailers have acknowledged the Privacy Commissioner’s oversight, but critics argue that the lack of independent oversight is a major concern. Australia’s privacy regulator has signaled that it will be proactive in regulating biometric information, and a recent report found that more than a quarter of Australians feel that facial recognition technology is one of the biggest privacy risks faced today.

The use of FRT is not unique to New Zealand, with many countries already implementing the technology in various settings. In the UK, for example, FRT is being used in airports and shopping centers, while in the US, it has been used in various law enforcement settings. However, the issue remains a contentious one, and the New Zealand government will need to weigh the benefits of FRT against the potential risks to privacy.

As the debate continues, many are left wondering what the future holds for FRT in New Zealand. Will the benefits of increased safety and security outweigh the risks to individual privacy, or will concerns about mass surveillance and civil liberties prevail? Only time will tell.

Key Concerns

Accuracy and Bias: FRT systems can be prone to errors, particularly in diverse populations. This raises concerns about the potential for bias and misidentification.

Mass Surveillance: FRT systems can create databases of individuals who have entered a store, raising concerns about the potential for mass surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties.

Lack of Oversight: The lack of independent oversight is a major concern, as it raises questions about who is accountable for the use of FRT and how it is being used.

Consent: The use of FRT raises questions about consent, particularly in situations where individuals are not aware that their faces are being scanned.

What’s Next

The debate over FRT in New Zealand is ongoing, and it remains to be seen what the future holds. However, one thing is certain: the use of FRT raises significant concerns about privacy, civil liberties, and the potential for mass surveillance. As the technology continues to evolve, it is essential that these concerns are addressed and that the benefits of FRT are carefully weighed against the potential risks.