Face Off: The Controversial Rise of Facial Recognition at Stadiums Amid Privacy Concerns

To go back to this article, head to My Profile, and then look for the saved stories section.

Stadiums Adopt Facial Recognition, Sparking Concerns Among Privacy Proponents

As the Mets prepared to take on the Orioles at Citi Field in Queens, New York, on a Wednesday, throngs of fans queued up eagerly. However, near the ticket counters, a small group of demonstrators distributed leaflets. Their presence was in response to a new initiative by Major League Baseball, a trend growing in the realm of professional sports: the implementation of facial recognition technology on spectators.

Proponents of facial recognition technology, including the firms that develop these systems and their clientele, contend that this innovation streamlines entry processes at sports venues, thereby conserving time and reducing operational costs. Conversely, critics raise concerns over the inherent security vulnerabilities of these surveillance mechanisms, their potential to simplify law enforcement's access to spectator data, and the risk of "mission creep" – a scenario in which the use of such surveillance technologies expands or becomes mandatory.

Major League Baseball's Go-Ahead Entry initiative allows fans who opt in to use a dedicated security line, which is typically faster than standard lines. By downloading the MLB Ballpark app, uploading a self-portrait, and then verifying their identity through a facial recognition scan at a special camera station located at the stadium's entry point, participants can streamline their entrance process.

Six Major League Baseball teams are taking part in the Go-Ahead Entry initiative, namely the Philadelphia Phillies, Cincinnati Reds, Houston Astros, Kansas City Royals, San Francisco Giants, and Washington Nationals.

Several Major League Baseball teams, such as the Mets, employ facial recognition technology to facilitate quick entrance. Since 2021, the Mets have partnered with a facial recognition firm called Wicket for their Mets Entry Express service. Likewise, the Cleveland Guardians have implemented a system from Clear, a different technology provider, at their home ground, Progressive Field, starting in 2019.

In an email to WIRED, Jeff Boehm, the Chief Operating Officer of Wicket, expressed the company's commitment to the ethical application of biometric technology to enhance event experiences, emphasizing their strong focus on data security and privacy.

Boehm notes, "Like numerous emerging technologies, there's a lot of incorrect information circulating about its application. Contrary to certain assertions, Wicket is always entirely voluntary (with the option to withdraw consent at any moment), and we never conduct facial scans without obtaining user permission. Furthermore, we do not distribute or sell the data to external entities."

Both the Mets and MLB did not immediately reply to WIRED's inquiries for a statement.

The NFL has recently implemented Wicket's facial recognition technology to facilitate swift entry. According to Brian McCarthy, an NFL representative, through a post on X, this initiative is, for the time being, exclusively for "team/game-day staff, suppliers, and press members" and does not extend to spectators. Nonetheless, both the Cleveland Browns and the Tennessee Titans have introduced facial recognition systems that their supporters can utilize. There was some misunderstanding on social media platforms like Facebook and X, with several individuals mistakenly believing that facial recognition would be mandatory at the stadiums for all 32 teams in the NFL.

On Wednesday at Citi Field, the Mets Entry Express Line saw minimal usage, with roughly five individuals passing through every five minutes. There was no queue to speak of. In contrast, the primary security lines were longer but still only required about five minutes to navigate through.

Demonstrators gathered at Citi Field were affiliated with some of the 11 groups that endorsed an open letter criticizing the deployment of facial recognition technology in stadiums. Among these groups were Fight for the Future, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, and Amnesty International. The letter highlighted the significant privacy and safety risks posed by facial recognition technology, labeling it as entirely unnecessary. During the event on Wednesday, protesters distributed leaflets to bystanders, boldly stating their opposition to facial recognition at sports events with the message, “WE CALL FOUL ON FACIAL RECOGNITION AT SPORTING EVENTS.” This demonstration was not the first of its kind; last year, activists from Fight for the Future also organized a protest at Citizens Bank Park, the Philadelphia Phillies' stadium, to voice their resistance to the technology's implementation.

Albert Fox Cahn, who leads the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), a New York advocacy group that endorsed the letter, played a key role in coordinating the protest on Wednesday. Speaking to WIRED, he expressed significant worry about technologies such as Go-Ahead Entry, especially their possible use by police forces in ways that are not visible to the general public.

Cahn points out the unfortunate reality that private facial recognition technologies are always at risk of becoming tools for law enforcement, needing only a single phone call or judicial command to make the shift. He also notes that there are alternative methods to expedite queues without resorting to facial recognition, including the implementation of tickets equipped with RFID or Bluetooth capabilities for tap-based entry.

Facial recognition technology has been deployed in various locations to prevent entry of individuals deemed to be competitors. In 2022, Radio City Music Hall, which is under the ownership of MSG Entertainment, utilized this technology to prevent a lawyer, who was involved in a legal dispute with MSG Entertainment through her firm, from entering the venue to watch the Christmas Spectacular event with her daughter. Additionally, other attorneys who were denied access to properties owned by MSG Entertainment, such as Madison Square Garden, pursued legal action against the company for its application of facial recognition. However, their lawsuit was dismissed in May.

David Siffert, serving as the legal head for Stop, shared his experience from Wednesday's demonstration with WIRED, mentioning that the crowd outside Citi Field was largely open to hearing their point of view. "The majority were unaware of the situation," he notes. According to Siffert, there were no instances of hostility or explicit opposition. The most challenging moment involved a misunderstanding.

"Siffert mentions that a few individuals were initially irritated, under the impression that we were promoting the system. However, once we clarified our intention to advocate for the system's prohibition, their enthusiasm surged, and they eagerly took a brochure."

Correction issued on August 21, 2024, at 4:05 pm EDT for the misnaming of Cleveland's baseball team and the stadium where they play.

Revised on August 21, 2024, at 4:40 pm EDT, including a statement from Wicket.

Suggested For You…

Direct to your email: A selection of our top stories, curated daily just for you.

A faulty update from CrowdStrike led to a global computer outage

The Major Narrative: When could the Atlantic Ocean possibly fracture?

Introducing the age of excessive online consumption

Additional content from WIRED

Evaluations and Manuals

© 2024 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Purchases made through our website may generate a commission for WIRED via our Affiliate Partnerships with retail outlets. Content from this site is prohibited from being copied, shared, broadcast, stored, or used in any form without explicit written consent from Condé Nast. Advertisement Choices

Choose a global website