AI ASSISTED CANCELLING |The Case of Madison Square Garden

Where is Leticia James on this?

The Madison Square Garden Company in New York doesn’t mind the criticism of racist algorithms (they really are racist) as long as it can CANCEL people the company doesn’t want to be their patrons or any people directly associated (family, business etc.) with them too. 

Facial recognition technology has been a hot topic recently, with many people raising concerns about its accuracy and ethical implications. One of the most significant criticisms of facial recognition technology is that it is inherently racist and discriminatory.

One of the primary reasons for this is that facial recognition algorithms are often trained on partial data. Data is usually collected and sold by many private and government entities, and the information that their database may have can be outdated in substance, so it’s not just about facial recognition. 

Attorney Barbara Hart told Rolling Stone in December about being taken away by security guards with her husband in October prior to a concert at Madison Square Garden. The couple was celebrating their wedding anniversary that day.

Security personnel reportedly told her that automatic facial recognition had identified her. In doing so, the employees had mentioned a picture of her on her employer’s website, she said. Because she is employed by the law firm Grant & Eisenhofer, she had been ordered to leave the building.

The reason for this is an ongoing legal dispute between MSG and some investors, who are represented by Hart’s employer, among others. 

Does this mean that PRIVATE entities and or companies FUNDED by taxpayers can EXCLUDE people simply for being employed by a company MSG does not like?

MSG confirmed what happened in a December statement to Rolling Stone. It said the group had issued a policy barring anyone involved in ongoing litigation against the company from entering its venues. Controversial CEO James Dolan also confirmed to Fox 5 TV that facial recognition would also be used against law firm employees.

“This is retaliatory behavior of powerful people against others, and that should be concerning to us,” Hart had warned Rolling Stone. The case demonstrates the misuse of technology, he said.

CANCEL CULTURE with the USE of AI

 The training data used to develop these algorithms often lacks diversity, meaning the technology is not designed to recognize people of different races and ethnicities equally. This results in higher rates of false positives and negatives for individuals who are not white, leading to potential discrimination and civil rights violations.

For example, studies have shown that facial recognition algorithms are more likely to misidentify people of color, particularly African Americans, than white individuals. This has serious consequences, as it can lead to false arrests, racial profiling, and other forms of discrimination.

Another issue with facial recognition technology is that it is often used in law enforcement, where it can be used to identify suspects and monitor individuals in real time. This raises serious concerns about privacy and civil liberties, as it can be used to target marginalized communities and individuals who are already at a higher risk of police brutality and discrimination.

In conclusion, facial recognition technology is inherently racist and discriminatory and poses a significant threat to civil rights and liberties. Until these issues are addressed and resolved, it is crucial that we take a critical look at the technology and the impact it is having on marginalized communities. It is our responsibility to ensure that these technologies are used in a manner that is fair and protects the rights and freedoms of all individuals.

The Madison Square Garden Company notified at least two law firms involved in litigation in late June 2022 that their employees would no longer be allowed access to various venues, including Madison Square Garden, Radio City Music Hall, and the Beacon Theatre until the legal disputes have been resolved.

In their letters to the law firms, the company cited “professional conduct rules” as the reason for the entry restriction, aimed at preventing contact between plaintiffs’ attorneys and MSG employees. MSG stated, “While we understand this policy may be disappointing to some, we must take into consideration that litigation creates an adversarial environment.” A company spokesperson also noted that they have the right and responsibility to protect themselves during the legal process.

State Senator Liz Krueger recently spoke out against Madison Square Garden’s (MSG) use of facial recognition technology, calling it an “unacceptable invasion of privacy” and a means to intimidate and harass those seeking legal action against the company. The senator suggested that the city and state should re-evaluate all permits, licenses, and benefits granted to MSG.

Evan Greer, the director of Fight for the Future, also spoke out against the use of facial recognition technology, stating that it puts individuals at risk of unjust detainment, harassment, conviction, or even deportation.

Despite criticism, MSG has stated that it has no plans to discontinue its use of automatic facial recognition, and CEO Dolan has even announced plans to expand and double its use at their venues. Dolan justified the increased surveillance by saying that people are always being watched by cameras in public.

FACIAL RECOGNITION IS RACIST – IT REALLY IS 

The use of facial recognition technology has faced numerous challenges and opposition from various organizations. In January 2020, over 40 organizations signed a letter addressed to the US government, calling for a moratorium on facial recognition systems until a thorough review could be conducted. Despite the lack of response from the government, several cities and states have imposed regional moratoriums on the use of facial recognition technology.

In June 2020, IBM took a strong stance against the technology by announcing that it would no longer offer facial recognition services. The company stated that it would not condone any uses of the technology that violated basic human rights, freedoms, and principles of trust and transparency. This included mass surveillance, racial profiling, and other purposes inconsistent with IBM’s values.

The use of facial recognition technology has become widespread, with applications ranging from unlocking smartphones to being employed in law enforcement surveillance, passenger screening at airports, and decision-making in employment and housing. Despite its popularity, the use of facial recognition has faced criticism and bans in several cities, including Boston and San Francisco, due to concerns over accuracy and privacy. It has been estimated that almost half of American adults have their photos in a facial recognition network used by law enforcement, which operates with a lack of legislative oversight and has been found to have significant racial bias, particularly against Black Americans.

Studies have revealed that face recognition algorithms have high classification accuracy, but this is not universal across all demographic groups. Research has shown that the poorest accuracy is consistently found in subjects who are female, Black, and aged 18-30. The “Gender Shades” project, for example, found that all three algorithms tested had the highest error rates on darker-skinned females, with error rates up to 34% higher than for lighter-skinned males. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) confirmed these findings and found that face recognition technologies across 189 algorithms were least accurate on women of color.

In response to these findings, companies such as IBM and Microsoft have taken steps to reduce bias in their technologies, including modifying testing cohorts and improving data collection on specific demographics. However, Amazon’s Rekognition, which has been marketed to law enforcement, has also been found to have racial bias against darker-skinned women, as confirmed by an ACLU assessment. Companies providing these services have a responsibility to ensure that their technologies are equitable and that their applications do not perpetuate existing inequalities.

WELCOME TO GATTACA AND 23rd Century CANCEL CULTURE.

Like my work, you can tip me or support me via TIP ME  or HERE or support me on Subscribestar! Follow me on Rumble and Locals! I am 100% people-funded.