Wegmans Defends Use of Facial Recognition Technology at NYC Stores, Citing 'Elevated Risk'
The supermarket chain has come under scrutiny after signage at some locations was found to indicate that facial recognition technology is being used for security purposes. Wegmans spokesperson Deana Percassi defended the practice, stating that the company only deploys facial recognition in stores deemed "elevated risk." This means that cameras with facial recognition capabilities are used to identify individuals who have been previously flagged for misconduct.
According to Percassi, persons of interest are determined by the company's asset protection team and law enforcement, based on incidents occurring on the property or in criminal/missing persons cases. The technology is used on a case-by-case basis, and images and videos are retained only as long as they are needed for security purposes.
Wegmans maintains that it does not collect retinal scans or voiceprints, which sets it apart from other retailers that have employed facial recognition technology. The company's goal, according to Percassi, is "to keep our stores safe and secure."
However, some critics argue that the use of facial recognition technology poses a serious threat to civil liberties. Monroe County Legislator Rachel Barnhart has written to Wegmans' CEO, Colleen Wegman, expressing concerns about the potential misuse of biometric data.
Barnhart notes that biometric data is uniquely sensitive and cannot be changed if misused or improperly shared. She believes that transparency is essential for trust, particularly in a beloved community institution like Wegmans.
Councilmember Shahana Hanif has sponsored legislation to ban the collection of biometric data by stores entirely, citing concerns about civil liberties. While Wegmans claims to comply with local requirements and posts signage to notify customers about the technology, some argue that this is insufficient.
As the use of facial recognition technology continues to raise questions about privacy and security, retailers must be held accountable for their practices.
The supermarket chain has come under scrutiny after signage at some locations was found to indicate that facial recognition technology is being used for security purposes. Wegmans spokesperson Deana Percassi defended the practice, stating that the company only deploys facial recognition in stores deemed "elevated risk." This means that cameras with facial recognition capabilities are used to identify individuals who have been previously flagged for misconduct.
According to Percassi, persons of interest are determined by the company's asset protection team and law enforcement, based on incidents occurring on the property or in criminal/missing persons cases. The technology is used on a case-by-case basis, and images and videos are retained only as long as they are needed for security purposes.
Wegmans maintains that it does not collect retinal scans or voiceprints, which sets it apart from other retailers that have employed facial recognition technology. The company's goal, according to Percassi, is "to keep our stores safe and secure."
However, some critics argue that the use of facial recognition technology poses a serious threat to civil liberties. Monroe County Legislator Rachel Barnhart has written to Wegmans' CEO, Colleen Wegman, expressing concerns about the potential misuse of biometric data.
Barnhart notes that biometric data is uniquely sensitive and cannot be changed if misused or improperly shared. She believes that transparency is essential for trust, particularly in a beloved community institution like Wegmans.
Councilmember Shahana Hanif has sponsored legislation to ban the collection of biometric data by stores entirely, citing concerns about civil liberties. While Wegmans claims to comply with local requirements and posts signage to notify customers about the technology, some argue that this is insufficient.
As the use of facial recognition technology continues to raise questions about privacy and security, retailers must be held accountable for their practices.
I'm not sure why people are making such a big deal about Wegmans using facial recognition tech 
. They say it's only used in "elevated risk" stores and that they don't collect retinal scans or voiceprints 
. But, I guess the thing is, even if it's not being misused, does that really mean it's okay to invade people's personal space just for security reasons? 
It feels like a slippery slope to me... 
. Like, what happens when the cameras get hacked or something? 
And don't even get me started on how they store all those images... it's like, forever or something 
. I think it'd be better if they just did regular old security checks instead of resorting to this tech. Plus, what about people who are just innocently shopping for groceries and don't wanna be scanned? 
It seems like a lot of risk just for the sake of being "safe"...
. I mean, what's the harm in being transparent about it, you know? They're already posting signs, which is a good start... 
But what if some people just ignore those signs or don't even see them? That's when things can get messy.
And what about data storage and sharing? How much of this biometric info is actually being kept, and for how long?
. It's all about balance – keeping stores safe doesn't have to mean sacrificing our personal freedoms 
.
.
"
Facial recognition tech in grocery stores? Like, isn't that a little invasive? I mean, yeah, it's supposed to keep us safe but what if we just accidentally walk into the wrong store? 
. seems to me like wegmans is trying 2 keep up with the times, but also be transparent about what they're doing 
. but if u r gonna use tech like that, gotta make sure its used right, not just for fun 
. any way, its all good, just gotta have a convo about it, get some clarity 
.
But seriously, I get where they're coming from - safety and security are important. However, the way they're handling this is kinda sketchy. They claim to only use it on "elevated risk" situations, but how do we know what that even means? And what about when those "persons of interest" get flagged? Do they really just let the company's asset protection team and law enforcement make these decisions without any oversight?
? It's all a bit too "The Matrix"-ish for my taste 
. And can we please just have some transparency and clear guidelines from these retailers instead of relying on vague signage that might not even tell us what's going on? 
It just feels like a slippery slope.
Can't we just have open and honest conversations about this stuff instead of jumping to conclusions or trying to pass laws? 
.
. Bring on the tech!
. If it gets misused or shared without permission, that's some serious trouble 
. Plus, with all the other retailers already usin' facial recognition, I think it's kinda fishy when Wegmans says they're doin' it only in "elevated risk" stores 
.
. I mean, they say it's only used in "elevated risk" situations, but how do they even define that? 
. I mean, I get it, they wanna keep their stores safe, but do we really need to sacrifice our personal freedom for that? Like, what's next? They'll start using facial recognition on our self-checkout lines or something 
. I do wish there was more transparency about how the data is being used, though. It's like, we get it, you're trying to keep us safe, but can we trust that it's being done right? 