Media Must Cover Flock's Policy Changes with Skepticism

Facing a nationwide revolt — a Facebook group called DeFlock America surpassing 600,000 members, more than 70 municipalities canceling contracts, and citizens physically tearing cameras from poles — Flock Safety has announced new policy changes it is framing as a privacy olive branch. The media should not take the bait. Flock has insisted it does nothing wrong and that it does not support unauthorized use of its products — while simultaneously acknowledging that local and state law enforcement can freely share its data with federal immigration authorities. That loophole is not a footnote. It is the business model. Any policy changes that leave that pipeline intact are not privacy reforms — they are public relations.

Flock is a $7.5 billion surveillance company whose entire value proposition rests on building the largest network of warrantless vehicle-tracking infrastructure in American history. Computer scientist Jen Golbeck has described it plainly as "data colonialism" — tech companies and government agencies replacing the right to move freely with the right to track every move you make in your vehicle. The company's CEO has called privacy opponents "terrorists." These are not the instincts of a company that has genuinely reconsidered its relationship with civil liberties. They are the instincts of a company trying to survive a political moment long enough to keep expanding. 

We call on the media to cover Flock's announced policy changes not as a corporate redemption story, but with the scrutiny they deserve — asking specifically whether ICE and other federal agencies retain access to the data, whether the changes are legally binding, and whether a company built on mass surveillance can meaningfully reform itself without dismantling the surveillance itself. The public deserves reporting that matches the scale of what is actually at stake.