Why scrutiny of facial recognition needs to extend beyond policing

Facial recognition technology (FRT) is fast becoming part of everyday life in the UK.

In recent months, much of the media attention around FRT has focused on the police, as forces up and down the country roll out both retrospective and live facial recognition (LFR).

As deployment increases, so too does scrutiny.

Concerns around the accuracy, privacy and efficacy, alongside debates over proportionality and whether widespread use is creating a “surveillance society”, all deserve serious consideration.

But while so much of the conversation around FRT focuses on police use, we risk overlooking the growing use of facial recognition by private organizations.

Public attitudes change depending on who is behind the camera Public attitudes towards facial recognition are rarely determined by the technology alone.

Where it is used, why it is deployed, and, crucially, who is operating it can all influence public levels of support.

There is an important distinction between FRT being used by the police to identify a wanted suspect – often for violent or sexual offences – and it being deployed by a retailer to identify someone suspected of previously shoplifting.

Questions around accuracy, privacy, and the handling of biometric data are valid in both cases, but the purpose and context are very different.

This disparity is reflected in public attitudes.

Earlier this year, Face Int commissioned an independent survey of 2,000 UK adults which found that almost three quarters (73%) support police use of FRT, compared with 54% who support its use in retail environments.

This does not mean that police use should evade scrutiny, nor does it necessarily mean that people oppose private sector deployment.

What it does show is that public acceptance of facial recognition cannot be separated from the circumstances in which it is used, or from the organization operating it.

When police use LFR, its presence is typically made clear through marked vehicles and signage, often accompanied by advance announcements about when and where it will operate, and how data will be processed.