Corporations like Google & Facebook made headlines when they promised to support their employees’ reproductive choices in the wake of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision. But their data mining practices and cooperation with law enforcement endanger those who are already
technology
The digital divide in the United States is not an accident. It is the product of deliberate decisions by ISPs that have consistently prioritizing profit over people. A multidistrict litigation effort seeks to hold social media behemoths accountable for
Lucy Litt’s new article on The [F]law uncovers how law enforcement’s data collection and surveillance tools are often inaccurate, yet they are constantly expanding. The more “sophisticated” such tools become, the harder it will be to challenge biases that underlie
If you’re reading this, you’re being tracked. By the time you read this sentence, that trace of your activity has been auctioned and sold within milliseconds. Where that data goes, and how its used is out of your hands. In
The digital divide in the United States is not an accident. It is the product of deliberate decisions by ISPs that have consistently prioritizing profit over people. Read Amy Robinson‘s revealing article: “The Digital Divide Is No Accident.” Related
Connie Cheng’s powerful new article on The [F]law examines how electronic ankle monitoring, like other alternatives to detention, is billed as more humane. But a closer look reveals that corporations are still in control and immigrants are still not free.
Shao Chan’s excellent new article on The [F]law examines how Uber and Lyft are racing to the bottom to redefine work. Read the article here. Related article on The [F]law: Julio Colby, Brave New Work: The Resurgence of Organized Labor
Adriel Williams’s powerful new article on The [F]law looks at how prison telecommunications company Securus tears families apart with its astronomically high fees and costs. One million incarcerated people must use Securus products to call and email their families, but
Anna Bowers’s compelling and revealing new article on The [F]law looks at a controversial police technology company that deploys money, influence, and secrecy to benefit its bottom line at the expense of communities that it claims to make “safer.” What