Surveillance Tech Companies Compose Self-Promoting Press Releases for Cops That Media Lazily Regurgitates
by Matthew T. Clarke
There is nothing new about corporations that produce technology designed to enable law enforcement surveillance (snoop tech) composing press releases for law enforcement that promote both the brand and the equipment. There is also nothing new about media quoting at length from the snoop-tech-provided releases as if it were some kind of independent investigation. What is new is the level of self-promotion and extent of media regurgitation that essentially gifting the snoop tech companies loads of free advertising coupled with an apparent law enforcement endorsement of their products that was actually written in-house.
Despite being notoriously control-obsessed, law enforcement happily hands over the reins to snoopy tech corporations when it means they get to play with new spy toys. An example is Harris Corporation, manufacturer of the Stingray device that mimics a cell tower, intercepting any cellphone calls made in the area. For years, Harris has tightly controlled exactly what law enforcement is allowed to say about its technology. Often with FBI support, Harris strongarmed law enforcement agencies into signing nondisclosure agreements as a condition of providing access to its Stingray technology. Police press officers would then run their press releases by Harris for approval prior to release.
Meanwhile, mainstream journalism has degenerated to the point where many journalists merely reprint police press releases and interview only police public relations officials and police union representatives when police become involved in a controversy such as accusations of police misconduct or the adoption of controversial military or surveillance technology. Thus, it was only a short journey to the current situation where newspapers publish (and radio and television news quote) full-page police press releases that read like advertisements for snoop tech companies.
“Who is being served when journalists add a couple of sentences to name brand heavy posts that unabashedly celebrate the products and the cops that claim these tech marvels pretty much pay for themselves?” That is the question asked by the Electronic Frontier Foundation in its article, “The Rise of the Police Advertiser.” The answer, of course, is that the snoop tech corporations are served, not the public.
In August 2023, the Tulsa Police Department held a press conference touting its new automated license plate readers (“ALPRs”). Claiming it was the “policing equivalent of turning on the light for the first time,” the release did not mention that the technology was controversial and denigrated by many as an invasion of privacy. The press picked up on the uncritical release, aping it practically verbatim.
An Ontario, California, press release gushed that ALPRs are “a vital resource,” a phrase echoed in media reports. Local news on KSFY in Madison, South Dakota, repeated the police claim that the $30,000 the city paid to install was paid off in two days. Apparently, a police media relations officer decided that two ALPR hits in two days was reason enough to break out a press release template provided by Flock Safety, the ALPRs’ manufacturer. The press release mentioned Flock Safety six times. Other media lazily swallowed the press release whole and regurgitated it, crediting it as original journalism by KFSY. But it came from Flock.
“Flock Safety has distributed a Public Information Officer Toolkit providing resources and templates for public information officers.” The templates allow police to just fill in the blanks with the appropriate dates and crime details to create an instant press release that includes effusive praise for Flock. Police go along with the media manipulation, hoping to stay in the manufacturer’s good graces and receive freebies and/or discounts. Understaffed news desks do it to save time so as to focus on “important” stories, as if stories about law enforcement adoption of ever-more invasive and persistent surveillance technology aren’t of utmost importance.
Keep in mind that the so-called news stories you read singing the praises of the latest snoop tech may have actually been written by the manufacturer.
Source: techdirt.com
As a digital subscriber to Criminal Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
