Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties
Local governments review contracts after errors, misuse and damage to licence-plate readers
AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made
Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties
Photograph: KRDO (embedded from source)
What this story says
- Flock Safety cameras, used by police to read licence plates, have been damaged in El Paso County, Colorado, and other areas.
- Several counties are reviewing contracts after reports of privacy violations, including misidentified plates and unauthorised tracking by officers.
- Flock is reducing data retention from 30 days to 7 and requiring stricter rules for law enforcement access.
- Right-rated outlets linked opposition to the cameras to abortion activists; no left-rated outlet ran the story.
Who covered it
Percentages are shares of the 6 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 1 of the 7 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured .
Trust
62/100
Craft
58/100
Hype
41/100
7 sources · methodology
Thin on the left so far
None of the 6 outlets with a published leaning rating that ran this story are rated left.
This story is still being watched, so it is a count and not yet a finding. Coverage keeps arriving for hours after an event, and a side that has published nothing this morning may publish by tonight. If it is still true when we stop checking, we will say so plainly.
Flock Safety cameras, which read and store licence-plate data for law enforcement, have faced growing opposition across the US. Several counties are reviewing their contracts with the company after reports of privacy breaches, including misidentified plates and unauthorised use by police officers. KRDO reported that in one case, a zero was mistaken for the letter O, resulting in a wrongful ticket.
In El Paso County, Colorado, three Flock cameras operated by the sheriff’s department were damaged, along with four others used by the Fountain Police Department. KRDO also reported that a former police officer used the system to track his ex-girlfriend, sending her messages that included her location. Flock Safety told KRDO it is tightening regulations for law enforcement access and reducing the time licence-plate data is stored from 30 days to 7.
Mayors in Fargo and West Fargo, North Dakota, have acknowledged public concerns about the cameras. Inforum reported that West Fargo Mayor Eric Gjerdevig said the cameras are one of the most common issues residents raise with him, while Fargo Mayor Josh Boschee said he has privacy concerns but trusts local police.
What the coverage left out
No left-rated outlet ran the story. None of the right-rated digests mentioned the cost of the cameras, the number of counties reviewing contracts, or the specific cases of misidentified plates and unauthorised tracking reported by KRDO. The centre-rated reports did not address the link between opposition to the cameras and abortion activists.
Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 7 times, most recently on 15 Aug 2026, 02:45, and will add the sides that appear.
How each side covered it
Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.
Left
0 rated outlets
No outlet rated left has run this story so far. We are still checking, and will say plainly if that does not change.
Centre
2 rated outlets
- The two centre-rated reports focused on local government responses and specific privacy breaches. KRDO’s full report led on the damage to cameras in El Paso County and the cases of misidentified plates and unauthorised tracking. It quoted Flock Safety’s statement on new regulations and shorter data retention. Inforum’s digest noted that mayors in Fargo and West Fargo have heard concerns from residents, with West Fargo’s mayor calling it one of the most common issues raised.
Right
4 rated outlets
- All four right-rated digests linked opposition to Flock cameras to abortion activists. ussanews.com, LifeNews.com and The Daily Signal each carried identical wording: “Who are among those opposing Flock cameras? Abortion activists in...” The National Desk framed the story as a question to readers, asking whether they considered the cameras a threat to privacy. None of the digests mentioned the damage to cameras, the misidentified plates, or Flock’s changes to data retention rules.
Read it at the source
7 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.
Left
0No outlet in this group ran the story.
Centre
2Right
4- Why Do Flock Cameras Need to Be About Abortion? (opens ussanews.com in a new tab)
ussanews.com — is ussanews.com biased? Our profile of this outletOpinion
- Abortion Activists Oppose Flock Cameras. Here’s Why (opens LifeNews.com in a new tab)
LifeNews.com — is LifeNews.com biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Why Do Flock Cameras Need to Be About Abortion> (opens The Daily Signal in a new tab)
The Daily Signal — is The Daily Signal biased? Our profile of this outletOpinion
- VOTE: Do you think Flock cameras are a threat to your privacy? (opens The National Desk in a new tab)
The National Desk — is The National Desk biased? Our profile of this outletOpinion
Not rated
1Questions about this coverage
- How did the left and right cover Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties?
- Of the 6 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 0% are rated left, 33% are rated centre, 67% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it, which was 7. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
- Is Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties left or right?
- Too few of the outlets on this story carry a published leaning rating to say. 6 of them do, and this site does not characterise a field under 12: at that size one newsroom filing moves the share by ten points. The percentages above are the count as it stands.
- Is the coverage of Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties biased?
- Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties is one event reported by 7 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
- Which side is not reporting Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties?
- When we first saw this story, outlets rated left had barely covered it. Coverage accretes for hours after an event, so that is where to look rather than a verdict — the split above is the current count, and it is the one to read.
- Which outlets covered Flock Cameras Face Privacy Backlash Across US Counties?
- 7 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
- What privacy concerns have been raised about Flock cameras?
- Reports describe cases where Flock cameras misidentified licence plates, leading to wrongful tickets, and where police officers used the system to track individuals without authorisation. KRDO reported a former officer used it to monitor his ex-girlfriend. Several counties are reviewing contracts due to these privacy breaches.
- How is Flock Safety responding to the backlash?
- Flock Safety told KRDO it is tightening regulations for law enforcement access to its system and reducing the time licence-plate data is stored from 30 days to 7. The company did not specify what the new rules would require, but said they would apply before officers could search for suspects.
- Which outlets linked opposition to Flock cameras to abortion activists?
- Three right-rated outlets, ussanews.com, LifeNews.com and The Daily Signal, each carried identical wording linking opposition to the cameras to abortion activists. None of the centre-rated reports or the unrated letter to the editor mentioned this connection.
How did this read?
About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.
More in Politics
All Politics →
6 min readTexas cancels $300,000 Islamic ablution stations at DFW Airport after Abbott intervenesRead story
4 min readTrump leaves Long Island speech to console mother of Bronx boy killed by stray bulletRead story
4 min readFederal judge allows Trump administration to end TPS for Somali immigrantsRead story