LibertyKid
Platinum Member
- May 26, 2021
- 1,523
- 962
- 938
Here is an article that presents a premise in the title, but the actual article gives no "Racist" examples:
‘Wholly ineffective and pretty obviously racist’: Inside New Orleans’ struggle with facial-recognition policing
In the article it states:
"In the 15 facial recognition requests that actually went through, records show that nine of them failed to make a match. And among the six matches, three of them turned out to be wrong.
Only one of those 15 requests was for a white suspect.
The first and only arrest based on facial-recognition technology occurred in September, 11 months after the New Orleans City Council lifted the ban."
Only 15 requests? That's the sample size being used to determine that something is racist?
Also from the same article:
City councilor Eugene Green, who introduced the measure to lift the facial recognition ban in 2022 and was one of four council members to vote for it, said he still supports law enforcement's use of facial recognition for the foreseeable future.
“If we have it for 10 years and it only solves one crime, but there’s no abuse, then that’s a victory for the citizens of New Orleans,” said Green, who is Black and represents a majority Black district.
Councilman, who is Black and supports facial recognition is cited, but not used as an argument against the premise of the article. Also in the article, it states that the majority of all member support racial recognition.
Give the entire article a read, and you will soon realize that the author wrote an editorial that clearly doesn't support the premise of the click bait title.
‘Wholly ineffective and pretty obviously racist’: Inside New Orleans’ struggle with facial-recognition policing
‘Wholly ineffective and pretty obviously racist’: Inside New Orleans’ struggle with facial-recognition policing
Records obtained and analyzed by POLITICO reveal the practice failed to identify suspects a majority of the time and is disproportionately used against Black people.
www.yahoo.com
In the article it states:‘Wholly ineffective and pretty obviously racist’: Inside New Orleans’ struggle with facial-recognition policing
Records obtained and analyzed by POLITICO reveal the practice failed to identify suspects a majority of the time and is disproportionately used against Black people.
"In the 15 facial recognition requests that actually went through, records show that nine of them failed to make a match. And among the six matches, three of them turned out to be wrong.
Only one of those 15 requests was for a white suspect.
The first and only arrest based on facial-recognition technology occurred in September, 11 months after the New Orleans City Council lifted the ban."
Only 15 requests? That's the sample size being used to determine that something is racist?
Also from the same article:
City councilor Eugene Green, who introduced the measure to lift the facial recognition ban in 2022 and was one of four council members to vote for it, said he still supports law enforcement's use of facial recognition for the foreseeable future.
“If we have it for 10 years and it only solves one crime, but there’s no abuse, then that’s a victory for the citizens of New Orleans,” said Green, who is Black and represents a majority Black district.
Councilman, who is Black and supports facial recognition is cited, but not used as an argument against the premise of the article. Also in the article, it states that the majority of all member support racial recognition.
Give the entire article a read, and you will soon realize that the author wrote an editorial that clearly doesn't support the premise of the click bait title.
