This article was primarily reported using public records requests. We are making it available to all readers as a public service. FOIA reporting can be expensive, please consider subscribing to 404 Media to support this work. Or send us a one time donation via our tip jar here.
Pete Hegseth’s Department of Defense sent the White House an 11-page memo about the steps it has taken to comply with Donald Trump’s anti-trans executive order, according to a copy of the memo obtained by 404 Media using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Among dozens of other actions, the Pentagon said that it not only changed the signs on bathroom doors to “reflect biological sex” but that it will continue to “monitor intimate spaces to ensure ongoing compliance” and that it will “continuously evaluate and update intimate spaces as necessary.”
The military also ordered a “review hold on questionable content” at Stars and Stripes, the military’s newspaper, which is supposed to be editorially independent from the Pentagon and which is not supposed to be censored by the Department of Defense.
Trump’s “Defending Women” executive order, which was an across-the-board war on trans and nonbinary people inside the federal government, required federal agencies to delete websites and resources referencing trans and nonbinary people, eliminate diversity and inclusion programs, kill grants and funding for gender inclusivity programs and research, eliminate gender inclusive bathrooms, and take on a host of other anti-trans policies. As part of the executive order, agencies were required to file a memo with the White House outlining the steps they had taken to comply with the order. So far, 404 Media has seen the memos for 11 different agencies. The vast majority of these memos are one or two pages long, and are very generic; Hegseth’s memo is 11 pages long and includes three different exhibits that takes the entire document to 19 pages long.
The Pentagon’s memo is far more extensive than any other that we’ve seen so far, and includes details about employees that the Pentagon put on administrative leave because it believed that their jobs were “promoting or inculcating gender ideology.” The Pentagon said it identified 69 people who it believed had jobs that fit this description and put them on leave, but then determined that, actually, their jobs were not primarily about “promoting or inculcating gender ideology” and returned 67 of them to their jobs.
The Pentagon said it also stopped all social media posts from all of its accounts for 10 days “at all levels of the department” in order to “prepare for reorientation of content on platforms.” It also says “Stars and Stripes put a review hold on questionable content.” Stars and Stripes was founded during the Civil War in 1861. It has long been largely editorially independent and, in 2020, when the Trump administration threatened to shut it down, its top editor said it is “part of a free press—free of censorship, free of command interference, free of prior restraint or prior review.” A “review hold” to ensure that content complies with an executive order from the President is a form of prior restraint and review. It is unclear what the results of that review hold were or whether Stars and Stripes was working on anything that the Pentagon would have wanted held.
Stars and Stripes did not respond to a request for comment.
When asked by 404 Media, the Pentagon did not deny it put a review hold on Stars and Stripes.
“We support the First Amendment, and we encourage all media outlets to be fair and honest in their reporting on this administration and the Department,” Department of Defense press secretary Kinglsey Wilson told 404 Media.
The memo also has an extensive section about steps it took to change bathroom, locker room, and “intimate spaces” policies, which included changing signage and reviewing bathrooms to “ensure designation by biological sex.” The memo notes that it will “monitor intimate spaces to ensure ongoing compliance” and that it will “implement periodic reporting to continuously evaluate and update intimate spaces as necessary.”
“In line with President Trump's Executive Order Defending Women, the Department of Defense is taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity,” Wilson said.
The Pentagon also noted that Hegseth issued his own, separate order to the Department of Defense about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Most notable, of course, is that Trump and Hegseth have banned trans people from serving in the military, which is affecting at least 15,000 service members and has been the subject of numerous lawsuits.
Este artículo se publicó originalmente en inglés en mayo de 2025. Lo hemos traducido al español y lo ponemos a disposición del público de forma gratuita debido al interés público en el material.
This article was originally published in English in May 2025. We have translated it into Spanish and are making it free to access due to the public interest in the material. You can read more about this project here.
Datos revisados por 404 Media revelan que el ICE está usando una herramienta diseñada principalmente para pequeños municipios con el objetivo declarado de combatir robos de autos o encontrar personas desaparecidas. Policías locales de todo el país están realizando búsquedas en el sistema de cámaras lectoras de patentes con inteligencia artificial de Flock con motivos relacionados a “inmigración” y en apoyo a investigaciones federales. Esto otorga a ICE una vía indirecta para acceder a una tecnología a la que oficialmente no tiene acceso mediante contrato.
Este compendio masivo de datos de búsquedas fue obtenido por investigadores que pidieron anonimato para evitar represalias y compartido con 404 Media. Los registros muestran más de 4000 búsquedas realizadas por policías estatales y locales a pedido del gobierno federal, como “favor informal” a agencias federales o directamente con fines de control migratorio, según lo que los mismos departamentos de policía y comisarías informaron. Aunque Flock no tiene contrato directo con el ICE, la agencia logra obtener información de las cámaras mediante solicitudes a las policías locales. Los datos fueron obtenidos a través de una solicitud de registros públicos al Departamento de Policía de Danville, Illinois, y muestran registros de búsqueda en el sistema Flock por parte de departamentos de policía de todo el país.
Cada vez que la policía realiza una búsqueda en el sistema Flock, debe ingresar una “razón”. En los registros de búsqueda de las cámaras de Danville, agentes de distintos estados escribieron motivos como “inmigración”, “ICE”, “ICE+ERO” (la división de Ejecución y Deportación del ICE), “inmigración ilegal”, “ORDEN DE ICE”, entre otros. Aunque hay registros de búsquedas que mencionan a ICE durante las administraciones de Biden y Trump, todos los casos en que se indicó explícitamente “inmigración” como motivo ocurrieron tras la llegada de Trump al poder.
“Distintos sistemas policiales tienen distintos propósitos y deberían existir discusiones públicas sobre qué funciones queremos permitir a cada agencia,” dijo a 404 Media Jay Stanley, analista sénior de políticas en el Proyecto de Privacidad, Tecnología y Libertad de Expresión de la ACLU. “Imagino que hay muchas personas que aceptan que su policía local use lectores de patentes para atrapar a un ladrón de bancos, pero que se horrorizarían al saber que las cámaras de su comunidad están alimentando una infraestructura de vigilancia nacional para el ICE. Si permitimos este tipo de accesos informales, entonces se puede decir que el ICE tiene autorización para conectarse a cualquier sistema sin límites ni supervisión pública.”
A SCREENSHOT OF THE DATA.
Flock afirma que “más de 5000 comunidades de EE.UU confían en sus cámaras con lectores de patentes automatizados” (en inglés). Estas cámaras graban constantemente las placas, el color y la marca de los vehículos que pasan por delante. La policía puede buscar dónde estuvo un auto (y por ende una persona) en un momento determinado o trazar sus movimientos a lo largo del tiempo. Flock también está desarrollando una nueva herramienta llamada Nova que combina los datos de patentes con buscadores de personas, bases de datos comerciales y filtraciones de datos para “pasar de una patente a una identidad”, según reveló anteriormente 404 Media (en inglés). Por lo general, estas búsquedas se realizan sin orden judicial, algo que una demanda en curso considera inconstitucional (en inglés).
Los departamentos de policía no solo pueden buscar en sus propias cámaras Flock, sino también en redes de otros estados o a nivel nacional. Según una guía de uso de Flock, las búsquedas a nivel nacional permiten que “todas las agencias policiales del país” que hayan activado esa opción puedan acceder a las cámaras de otros usuarios.
Esa misma guía indica que se puede “ejecutar una auditoría de red para ver quién ha buscado en las cámaras de tu sistema desde cualquier agencia que use Flock”. Los investigadores obtuvieron esta auditoría del sistema Flock del Departamento de Policía de Danville a través de una solicitud de registros públicos. Debido a que Flock permite compartir registros entre departamentos del país, la auditoría muestra todas las veces que otras agencias buscaron en el sistema de Danville.
Los datos revelan lo masiva que se ha vuelto la red nacional de cámaras de Flock. Por ejemplo, cuando el Departamento de Policía de Dallas hizo varias búsquedas bajo el término “ICE+ERO” el 6 de marzo, no solo consultaba sus propias cámaras: según los datos, tenía acceso a 6674 redes distintas de cámaras, que en conjunto sumaban 77 771 dispositivos. (La policía de Dallas se negó a emitir comentarios al respecto).
Otras agencias que buscaron en las cámaras de Danville incluyen a la Policía de Chicago y departamentos de Florida, Arkansas, Luisiana, Carolina del Sur, Virginia, Arizona y Texas. También figuran entre los datos la Patrulla de Caminos de Florida y de Missouri. La auditoría cubre desde el 1 de junio del 2024 hasta el 5 de mayo del 2025 y contiene millones de búsquedas totales. Los investigadores filtraron aquellas que incluían palabras clave relacionadas con la inmigración en el campo etiquetado “razón” de las búsquedas y obtuvieron más de 4000 registros.
“No puedo hablar por toda la empresa, pero yo no sabía que los departamentos de policía locales estaban usando las herramientas de Flock para colaborar con el ICE. Me decepciona, aunque no me sorprende,” dijo a 404 Media una fuente interna de Flock que pidió el anonimato por no tener autorización para hablar con la prensa. “Es muy importante que la gente entienda cómo se usa esta tecnología, porque la pagan con sus impuestos, y al final son los gobiernos estatales y locales quienes deben definir los límites de su uso justo.”
IMAGE FROM FLOCK'S MEDIA KIT.
Dicho todo esto, los datos tienen ciertas limitaciones. Muchas entradas indican al HSI como razón de búsqueda, y este tiene un mandato más amplio que solo el control de la inmigración. Esto significa que las policías están cooperando con una división del ICE, pero no necesariamente están usando el sistema Flock para deportaciones. Algunas agencias afirmaron que, a pesar del motivo ingresado, las búsquedas no se realizaron con fines migratorios, incluso si la razón ingresada para la búsqueda en Flock indicaba directamente “inmigración”.
En uno de los casos, un portavoz de la Patrulla de Caminos de Missouri dijo que, aunque se registró “inmigración” como motivo, la búsqueda estaba relacionada con una parada de tráfico que presentaba indicios de un posible caso de trata de personas. Añadió: “Estamos en proceso de recibir capacitación y crear políticas aplicables” para temas migratorios. Otras agencias que ingresaron “inmigración” como motivo no respondieron a las consultas de 404 Media.
La administración Trump ha invitado a las policías locales, que normalmente no tienen atribuciones migratorias, a unirse al programa 287(g) (en inglés), el cual permite al ICE “delegar” sus funciones de control migratorio. Una orden ejecutiva de enero (en inglés) instruyó al DHS y al ICE autorizar a agentes estatales y locales “para que desempeñen funciones de oficiales migratorios en la investigación, aprehensión o detención de extranjeros en EE.UU.”.
Es especialmente significativo que estos datos provengan de un departamento de policía en Illinois, uno de los pocos estados que prohíbe explícitamente el uso de datos de cámaras lectoras con fines migratorios (en inglés). Las policías de Illinois implicadas aseguraron que sus búsquedas estaban relacionadas con investigaciones criminales o que no estaban destinadas específicamente a la aplicación de leyes migratorias.
“Los datos provistos no indican que el Departamento de Policía de Danville esté buscando información en Flock ni actuando en nombre de otras agencias policiales municipales, locales o del condado, ni en nombre del ICE, en temas migratorios,” dijo el jefe Chris Yates a 404 Media. “Como lo exige el Estado de Illinois, garantizamos que no usamos datos de cámaras lectoras de patentes para perseguir a infractores de leyes relacionadas con el estatus migratorio.” Sin embargo, Yates no respondió por qué la auditoría muestra búsquedas con motivos migratorios hechas por agencias de todo el país.
“En resumen, lo que se está alegando no está ocurriendo en realidad,” agregó el alcalde de Danville, Rickey Williams Jr.
A SCREENSHOT OF THE DATA.
Pero los datos de Danville muestran claramente que esas búsquedas realizadas por otros departamentos de policía sí están ocurriendo, y 404 Media verificó varios registros con los propios departamentos que las realizaron. Algunas agencias explicaron que actuaron como parte de investigaciones específicas, otras dijeron que eran colaboraciones informales con el gobierno federal. Lo que queda claro es que el ICE y el HSI están accediendo indirectamente a una herramienta a la que no deberían tener acceso.
Andrew Perley, subjefe de policía del pueblo de Glencoe, Illinois, dijo que una búsqueda específica “no estaba relacionada con una investigación sobre estatus migratorio: era una solicitud informal del HSI sobre un delito no migratorio”. Ryan Glew, de la policía de Evanston, explicó que su búsqueda se hizo para “asistir al HSI en la captura de un sujeto buscado, quien formaba parte de una banda de robos a tiendas a nivel nacional por millones de dólares” y que “las consultas no estaban relacionadas con inmigración.”
Otras policías de Illinois afirmaron que las búsquedas eran para “asistir” a agencias federales, o que las hizo uno de sus “oficiales de fuerzas especiales”, es decir, policías locales integrados en unidades federales. Mike Yott, jefe de policía de Palos Heights, dijo que su departamento no aplica leyes migratorias debido a las leyes estatales, pero que no sabe con certeza por qué un oficial de su equipo que colaboraba con la DEA hizo una búsqueda catalogada con la razón de “violación migratoria”.
“Con la información limitada del informe, es posible que la redacción sea imprecisa y el uso de Flock esté vinculado con una investigación sobre narcóticos o una orden de arresto de un fugitivo, que a veces involucra personas con estatus migratorios diversos,” dijo Yott.
El hecho de que la policía casi nunca necesite una orden judicial para realizar búsquedas en Flock implica escasa supervisión, lo que facilita que colaboren con el gobierno federal sin dejar huella formal.
A SCREENSHOT OF THE DATA.
“A las policías les encantan los lectores de patentes porque hay muy pocas restricciones. No sienten que necesiten una orden judicial. A menudo no hay ninguna regulación sobre lo que pueden buscar,” le comentó a 404 Media Dave Maass, investigador de tecnología fronteriza en la Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Tal vez sea cierto que algunas búsquedas eran sobre personas con órdenes de arresto o implicadas en crímenes, o podrían estar buscando a un terrorista. Pero ese es el punto: no lo sabemos.”
En un comunicado, Flock dijo: “Estamos comprometidos con que cada comunidad pueda usar esta tecnología de forma alineada con sus valores, y permitimos que los gobiernos democráticamente electos definan qué significa eso para su localidad. Cada cliente de Flock es dueño y controlador total de los datos recolectados y decide con quién compartirlos. Las herramientas son totalmente auditables y guardan los registros de uso de forma indefinida para que haya total transparencia para mandos y autoridades municipales.” La empresa agrega que sus herramientas han permitido que los cuerpos policiales ubiquen a más de 1000 personas extraviadas.
“Trabajamos con gobiernos locales para promover buenas prácticas sobre el uso de lectores de patentes, incluyendo auditorías regulares y políticas claras. Para que dos agencias puedan compartir datos, Flock requiere que ambas partes estén de acuerdo con ello. Siempre les recomendamos a las agencias que tengan una política sólida de uso de cámaras lectoras de patentes, que realicen auditorías de forma continua y sean cuidadosos al elegir compartir datos con otra agencia”, concluyó el comunicado.
Edwin Yohnka, director de comunicaciones de ACLU Illinois, fue contundente en un correo electrónico enviado a 404 Media: “Lo más frustrante de esto es que Flock se presentó en muchas comunidades de Illinois como una herramienta clave contra el crimen violento y el uso de armas. Pero lo que realmente están creando es un sistema nacional de datos. Da igual si estás en Bloomington, Springfield o Danville: cuando conectas estas redes, terminas alimentando un sistema de vigilancia a nivel país. Ver esta lista de agencias de todo el país buscando en cámaras de Illinois es realmente preocupante.”
El DHS no respondió a las múltiples solicitudes de comentarios enviadas por 404 Media.
Este artículo se publicó originalmente en inglés en julio de 2025. Lo hemos traducido al español y lo ponemos a disposición del público de forma gratuita debido al interés público en el material.
This article was originally published in English in July 2025. We have translated it into Spanish and are making it free to access due to the public interest in the material. You can read more about this project here.
Los manifiestos de vuelo de tres deportaciones judicialmente controvertidas desde Texas hacia El Salvador contienen decenas de nombres que no aparecen en la lista previamente publicada por el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS, por sus siglas en inglés) de personas deportadas en esos vuelos, según ha podido constatar 404 Media. Estos nombres adicionales nunca han sido reconocidos públicamente por el gobierno estadounidense, y expertos en inmigración que siguen de cerca la campaña de deportaciones de Trump aseguran que no tienen idea de dónde pueden estar estas personas ni qué ha sido de ellas. Ahora, 404 Media publica sus nombres.
El 15 de marzo, la administración Trump deportó a más de 200 personas en tres aviones con destino a una megacárcel en El Salvador. Aunque un juez bloqueó las deportaciones, los vuelos aterrizaron de todos modos ese mismo día en el país. Este hecho marcó un punto de inflexión en la política de deportaciones masivas de la administración y fue un anticipo de lo que vendría a nivel nacional: ausencia de debido proceso, desobediencia a fallos judiciales y deportaciones basadas en los pretextos más débiles. Poco después de estos vuelos, CBS News publicó una “lista interna del gobierno” con los nombres de algunas personas que fueron trasladadas al CECOT, la infame megacárcel salvadoreña.
Pero en mayo, un hacker atacó a GlobalX, la aerolínea encargada de esos vuelos, y compartió los datos con 404 Media. Además de los nombres incluidos en la lista publicada por CBS News, los manifiestos de vuelo de GlobalX contienen decenas de nombres de personas que, supuestamente, iban a bordo de los vuelos pero cuya existencia o paradero no han sido reconocidos oficialmente ni reportados anteriormente en la prensa.
“Tenemos esta lista de personas que el gobierno estadounidense no ha reconocido de ninguna manera oficial, y no tenemos forma de saber si están en el CECOT o en otro lugar o si recibieron algún tipo de debido proceso”, comentó a 404 Media Michelle Brané, directora ejecutiva de Together and Free, una organización que trabaja con familias de personas deportadas. “Creo que esto demuestra aún más la falta de humanidad y la ausencia de debido proceso, y es otra evidencia de que el gobierno estadounidense está desapareciendo gente. Estas personas fueron detenidas y nadie sabe dónde están, ni bajo qué circunstancias… En casi todos los casos, no hay registro alguno. No existen expedientes judiciales, nada”.
“[El gobierno de los Estados Unidos] no ha revelado información alguna, pero supuestamente han sido enviados a una cárcel o algún lugar en un avión… y desde entonces no se ha sabido nada de ellos”, agregó. “No hemos oído nada de sus familias, y es posible que ni ellos lo sepan”.
Brané también señaló que no está claro si todas estas personas realmente estaban en los vuelos o por qué aparecen en los manifiestos. Si efectivamente abordaron, se desconoce dónde se encuentran actualmente. Esa incertidumbre, sumada a la negativa del gobierno de proporcionar información, representa un problema grave, afirmó.
Aunque las historias de algunas personas deportadas en esos vuelos han recibido gran atención —como la de Kilmar Abrego García—, las autoridades estadounidenses se han negado a revelar la lista completa de pasajeros.
Mientras el paradero y las circunstancias de la mayoría de estas personas siguen siendo desconocidos, la organización de Brané utilizó datos de fuentes públicas para tratar de averiguar quiénes son. En algunos casos, Together and Free logró identificar ciertos detalles sobre personas específicas de los manifiestos. Por ejemplo, una de ellas, arrestada por la policía local en Texas a fines de diciembre por posesión de drogas, figura como “extranjero ilegal” en los registros de detención. Otra persona fue detenida en Nashville en febrero por conducir sin licencia. Sin embargo, respecto a muchas otras no hay datos públicos de fácil acceso que expliquen quiénes son o por qué figuran en los manifiestos.
Algunas de las personas que aparecen en los manifiestos y no figuran en la lista de CBS News ya habían sido identificadas porque sus familias iniciaron demandas o los buscaban activamente en redes sociales. Entre ellas se encuentran Abrego García y Ricardo Prada Vásquez, cuya familia denunció que había “desaparecido” porque no aparecía en ningún listado oficial publicado. Tras un reportaje del New York Times sobre su desaparición, la administración Trump afirmó que estaba en el CECOT, y 404 Media encontró su nombre en los manifiestos del 15 de marzo.
En Venezuela, la familia de otro hombre identificado en los manifiestos pero no en la lista de CBS News, Keider Alexander Flores Navas, ha estado protestando por su desaparición y exigiendo respuestas. En un video de TikTok publicado en marzo, su madre, Ana Navas, cuenta que dejaron de tener noticias de Keider poco antes del 15 de marzo. Posteriormente, supo que estaba detenido por el gobierno federal. Luego vio una foto suya en el CECOT, entre otros prisioneros: “Lo que más me preocupó fue que no estaba en ninguna lista. Pero esta foto es de El Salvador. Muchas madres aquí han reconocido a sus hijos [en las fotos oficiales del CECOT]. Sé que ese es mi hijo”, dice, mientras la cámara enfoca la imagen de Keider en la foto.
En otro video de TikTok, publicado en junio, la madre de Brandon Sigaran-Cruz, de 21 años, explica que su hijo estuvo “desaparecido por tres meses” sin que tuvieran noticias sobre su paradero. Sigaran-Cruz aparece en el manifiesto de vuelo, pero no en la lista de CBS News.
El gobierno de Estados Unidos ya había reconocido que, junto con más de 200 ciudadanos venezolanos, deportó a 23 salvadoreños a El Salvador en esos tres vuelos del 15 de marzo. No existe una lista formal con los nombres de esos salvadoreños y ninguno figura en el listado de CBS News, que solo incluía venezolanos.
La Oficina de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas también presentó peticiones judiciales afirmando que está investigando las “desapariciones involuntarias” de al menos cuatro venezolanos deportados a El Salvador en esos vuelos. “Ni el gobierno de El Salvador ni el de Estados Unidos han publicado información oficial sobre la lista de personas deportadas ni su lugar actual de detención”, dijo la ONU en un “Informe sobre Desapariciones Forzadas o Involuntarias” presentado ante la corte.
“Todavía hay muy poca claridad sobre el destino y el paradero de los venezolanos enviados a El Salvador, pues, hasta la fecha, no se han publicado listas oficiales de los detenidos deportados. Es fundamental que las autoridades proporcionen más información, incluido la entrega de datos a los familiares y sus abogados sobre la situación específica y el paradero de sus seres queridos”, señaló Elizabeth Throssell, portavoz de la Oficina de Derechos Humanos de la ONU, en un correo electrónico enviado a 404 Media. “La oficina de derechos humanos de la ONU ha estado en contacto con familiares de más de 100 venezolanos que se cree fueron deportados a El Salvador”.
Durante varias semanas, 404 Media solicitó al Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) que informara si tenía alguna preocupación legítima de seguridad respecto a la publicación de estos nombres, o si podía aportar algún dato sobre estas personas. La agencia nunca respondió, a pesar de haber atendido solicitudes de otros artículos de 404 Media. GlobalX tampoco respondió a la solicitud de comentarios.
“Es fundamental saber quiénes iban en esos vuelos del 15 de marzo”, dijo Lee Gelernt, abogado de la Unión Estadounidense por las Libertades Civiles (ACLU) y principal representante del caso. “Estas personas fueron enviadas a una prisión tipo gulag sin ningún debido proceso, posiblemente por el resto de sus vidas, y el gobierno no ha proporcionado información significativa sobre ellas, mucho menos pruebas. En un momento como este, la transparencia es esencial”.
En los últimos meses, el gobierno de Estados Unidos ha afirmado que es el gobierno salvadoreño quien tiene jurisdicción sobre las personas detenidas en el CECOT, mientras que El Salvador respondió ante la ONU que “la jurisdicción y la responsabilidad legal sobre estas personas recae exclusivamente en las autoridades competentes extranjeras [de Estados Unidos]”. Esto ha creado una situación en que las personas están detenidas en una prisión extranjera y ninguno de los gobiernos asume su responsabilidad legal. Algo similar ocurre en Florida, en el campamento “Alligator Alcatraz” (“Alcatraz con caimanes”), donde personas detenidas por el gobierno federal están siendo retenidas en una instalación administrada por el estado, y los expertos aseguran que no está claro quién está a cargo. Brané señaló que, con el enorme aumento de fondos para ICE que contempla la nueva ley de Trump, es probable que veamos más centros de detención, más deportaciones, más vuelos como estos y más personas desaparecidas de forma no oficial.
“Si consideramos que el ICE está tratando a las personas de esta forma con el poco de autonomía adicional que les dieron, da terror pensar lo que implicará este aumento presupuestario”, dijo Brané. “Esto es solo una muestra de lo que veremos a una escala mucho mayor”.
Se puede leer la lista completa a continuación. 404 Media quitó los nombres de las personas que figuran en los manifiestos como “guardias” (el medio confirmó que al menos uno de esos nombres coincide con alguien que se presenta en redes sociales como agente de transporte de detenidos). Según informes, ocho mujeres deportadas a El Salvador fueron posteriormente retornadas a Estados Unidos. 404 Media no publica los nombres de mujeres que se sabe han sido regresadas. El manifiesto también incluye los nombres de varios salvadoreños cuyas deportaciones fueron mencionadas en un comunicado de prensa de la Casa Blanca, en procesos judiciales y en reportes de prensa. No se han incluido esos nombres de personas que la administración ya reconoció oficialmente como deportadas.
Este artículo se publicó originalmente en inglés en abril de 2025. Lo hemos traducido al español y lo ponemos a disposición del público de forma gratuita debido al interés público en el material.
This article was originally published in English in April 2025. We have translated it into Spanish and are making it free to access due to the public interest in the material. You can read more about this project here.
Una base de datos del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE), cuya estructura ha sido parcialmente revisada por 404 Media, permite al gobierno federal buscar y filtrar personas mediante cientos de categorías sumamente específicas. Para expertos en vigilancia, esta herramienta podría estar ayudando al ICE a identificar, detener y deportar a personas que han cometido infracciones menores o que simplemente coinciden con ciertos perfiles. Pero advierten que el gran problema es que ni siquiera sabemos con claridad cómo están siendo seleccionadas o marcadas estas personas.
La base de datos es llamada Investigative Case Management (ICM) y, según una evaluación de impacto en privacidad publicada en 2021 (en inglés), “funciona como la herramienta principal de gestión de casos para las investigaciones del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (HSI) del ICE”.
404 Media tuvo acceso a una versión reciente de la base de datos, que permite realizar filtros según cientos de parámetros, incluidos estatus migratorio y tipo de ingreso (“refugiado”, “tarjeta de cruce fronterizo”, “extranjero no inmigrante no admitido”, “estatus de protección temporal”, “extranjero en tránsito sin visa”, “extranjero indocumentado”); características físicas (incluidos cicatrices, marcas, tatuajes); afiliación criminal; ubicación; datos de lectores de patentes; país de origen; color de pelo y ojos; etnicidad; número de seguro social; lugar de nacimiento; empleo; estado de la licencia de conducir; historial de bancarrota, y cientos de otras categorías.
Una fuente con conocimiento del sistema dijo a 404 Media que el ICM “es básicamente una infinidad de tablas” de información y puede generar informes detallados, por ejemplo, sobre personas “con cierto tipo de visa, que ingresaron por un puerto específico, provenientes de un país determinado y tienen un color de cabello específico”, o cualquier combinación de estos cientos de variables.
Los agentes de ICE pueden configurar una búsqueda llamada Person Lookout Query (“Consulta activa de personas”) que les envía una alerta por correo si más tarde una persona coincide con ciertos parámetros definidos anteriormente. 404 Media revisó partes de la infraestructura del sistema, incluidos los criterios de búsqueda y ejemplos de informes generados.
Una evaluación de privacidad presentada en el 2016 (en inglés) por el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional indica que el sistema ICM se conecta con otras bases de datos del DHS y federales, como SEVIS (que contiene registros de personas que ingresaron al país con visas estudiantiles), la herramienta de búsqueda FALCON (en inglés), mapas en tiempo real asociados a herramientas de rastreo del ICE, “datos limitados de lectores de patentes operados por la agencia” y datos provenientes de otros organismos como la DEA, el FBI, la ATF y la CIA (como ya reportó The Intercept en un artículo en inglés).
AN EXCERPT FROM THE PIA WHICH EXPLAINS THAT TATTOOS ARE IN THE DATABASE
El documento también aclara que distintas divisiones de ICE usan el sistema ICM, incluidos el HSI y el equipo legal del ICE. Pero señala algo clave: que la división de Ejecución y Deportación (ERO) “utiliza el sistema ICM de manera más limitada que el HSI en su misión de identificar, arrestar y deportar a extranjeros infractores para hacer cumplir las leyes migratorias de EE.UU., conforme a las prioridades de cumplimiento vigentes”.
Comprender cómo funciona el sistema ICM se ha vuelto un tema de urgencia en las últimas semanas, ya que el ICE ha detenido, arrestado y deportado a estudiantes universitarios, turistas y residentes legales con permisos de residencia permanente, muchos sin antecedentes penales o con infracciones menores. Al menos 238 personas fueron deportadas sin debido proceso a una megacárcel en El Salvador, y una investigación de 60 Minutes (en inglés) reveló que la mayoría no tenía antecedentes ni condenas criminales previas. El ICE ha deportado a personas por criterios como “llevar ciertos tatuajes”, y en un caso específico, la administración Trump admitió haber deportado por error a alguien, pese a que se niega a traerlo de vuelta al país.
A estudiantes universitarios con visa se les ha revocado el documento por infracciones como exceso de velocidad o por protestar contra la guerra de Israel en Gaza. Esta semana, el Servicio de Impuestos Internos (IRS) anunció que comenzará a compartir su información tributaria con el ICE (artículo en inglés) para fines migratorios, lo que representa una peligrosa escalada en el intercambio de datos entre agencias del gobierno y podría significar una recarga de poder para herramientas como ICM.
Jeramie Scott, asesor sénior y director del Proyecto de Supervisión de Vigilancia del Centro de Información sobre Privacidad Electrónica (EPIC), advirtió a 404 Media: “Con la administración actual, existe la posibilidad de que traten a todos los que aparecen en esta base de datos como objetivos de detención y deportación. Esta administración no se caracteriza por la sutileza o el análisis detallado; prefiere pintar todo con la misma brocha y basarse en estereotipos.” Scott señala que la evaluación de impacto de privacidad del ICM (en inglés) admite que, al incluir tanta información, cualquier persona podría ser objeto de una investigación o marcada para ser detenida o deportada.
“Como el ICE puede crear registros sobre personas que no son objetivo de investigaciones, existe el riesgo de que esas personas sean erróneamente catalogadas o malinterpretadas como objetivos”, se menciona en el informe redactado en el 2016. “Esto puede causar problemas en los puntos de entrada al país, donde la CBP utiliza estos registros en su sistema de control. También existe el riesgo de que la información no sea precisa o completa o esté desactualizada.”
Y esto no solo afecta a inmigrantes. Según documentos obtenidos por The Intercept (en inglés), el sistema también incluye ciudadanos estadounidenses: “Los ciudadanos de EE.UU. también pueden estar sujetos a procesos penales, por lo tanto, son parte del ICM.”
Adam Schwartz, director de litigios sobre privacidad de la Electronic Frontier Foundation, comentó a 404 Media: “Se están combinando dos elementos realmente alarmantes. Por un lado, está la vigilancia tecnológica avanzada, que incluye bases de datos que rastrean todo tipo de cosas sobre las personas. Por otro, tenemos un gobierno motivado a deportar inmigrantes incluso si no representan ninguna amenaza. Parece ciertamente posible que algunas de las detenciones recientes de personas que no representan ningún peligro se hayan producido porque el ICE está utilizando este tipo de bases de datos para identificarlas.”
404 Media conversó con tres expertos, incluido Schwartz, y estos enfatizaron que es fundamental que la ciudadanía entienda cómo se está usando esta tecnología para identificar y detener personas. También es vital para quienes ya han sido detenidos o deportados, porque necesitan esa información para poder defenderse.
“Durante más de medio siglo, uno de los principios básicos de la privacidad de datos ha sido que si el gobierno recolecta información para un propósito, no debe usarla para otro sin el consentimiento de la persona”, dijo Schwartz. “Esto no es solo un capricho de los defensores de privacidad. Si no se respeta esta norma, pueden pasar cosas muy graves. En 1942, la Oficina del Censo entregó al Departamento de Defensa los domicilios de ciudadanos japoneses-estadounidenses, y con esa información se les detuvo injustamente. Si el gobierno recoge datos con un propósito, no debe compartirlos para otro distinto.”
Scott, de EPIC, fue enfático: “Importa muchísimo qué herramientas está usando ICE para detener y deportar personas. Es posible que se esté deteniendo a personas que solo ejercen actividades protegidas constitucionalmente. También es posible que se esté compartiendo información de formas que no son reguladas ni transparentes. Mucha de esta información se recolectó para un fin y ahora el ICE la está usando para arrestar o deportar personas, y el pueblo estadounidense necesita saberlo. Necesita saber si su gobierno está respetando los valores constitucionales.”
Elizabeth Laird, directora de equidad en tecnología cívica del Centro para la Democracia y la Tecnología, advirtió sobre los errores que pueden surgir cuando se cruzan datos entre agencias: “Cuando se intenta vincular registros y se comete un error —por ejemplo, que el nombre esté mal escrito o la fecha de nacimiento sea la de otra persona— puede parecer que los sistemas están hablando de la misma persona cuando en realidad no es así.”
“Y cuando manejas listas de millones de personas, es difícil imaginar que no haya una gran cantidad de ellas que están siendo marcadas erróneamente como infractores de leyes de inmigración. Ya hemos visto casos de personas deportadas por error a El Salvador, y el gobierno luego dice que no puede traerlas de vuelta.”
Laird agregó que la decisión del IRS de compartir información con el ICE es especialmente grave. Durante años, el gobierno federal les aseguró a los inmigrantes que pagar sus impuestos, sacar una licencia de conducir o acceder a la salud pública no se usaría en su contra. “Esto desincentiva a los inmigrantes indocumentados a interactuar con el gobierno, incluido el pago de impuestos. Por eso no solo hay que preguntarse si esto es legal o ético, sino también si estamos dispuestos a aceptar las consecuencias sociales de este tipo de medidas.”
Hello 404 Media readers! We're excited to announce that we're having our first ever party in Los Angeles. We have partnered with the amazing DIY hackerspace RIP.SPACE in the Arts District.
We'll start the night with a live podcast about the surveillance technologies powering ICE, with a specific focus on tools that are being used in Los Angeles. We'll then change gears and do some Q&A about 404 Media and independent journalism. I'm considering doxing my Instagram algorithm as well. After that, we'll have a reception and party with music from our friend DJ Avey.
We'll have free beer and wine, good vibes, and hopefully a good conversation. Tickets are free for subscribers, $10 for the general public (you can also subscribe for free entry here). If you're a subscriber, scroll to the end of this post for your free ticket code.
The CEO seemingly having an affair with the head of HR at his company at the Coldplay concert is a viral video for the ages, but it is also, unfortunately, emblematic of our current private surveillance and social media hellscape.
The video, which is now viral on every platform that we can possibly think of, has been covered by variousnews outlets, and is Pop Crave official, shows Andy Byron, the CEO of a company called Astronomer, with his arms around Astronomer’s head of HR, Kristen Cabot. The jumbotron cuts from one fan to this seemingly happy couple. They both simultaneously die inside; “Oh look at this happy couple,” Coldplay lead singer Chris Martin says. The woman covers her face and spins away. The man ducks out of frame. “Either they’re having an affair or they’re very shy,” Martin said. The camera pans to another company executive standing next to them, who is seemingly shaking out of discomfort.
It is hard to describe how viral this is at the moment, in a world in which so many awful things are occurring and in which nothing holds anyone’s attention for any length of time and in a world in which we are all living in our own siloed realities. “Andy Byron” is currently the most popular trending Google term in the United States, with more than double the searches of the next closest term.
There are so many levels to this embarrassment—the Coldplay of it all, the HR violation occurring on jumbotron, etc—that one could likely write a doctoral dissertation on this 15 second video.
The flight manifests for three legally contested deportation flights from Texas to El Salvador contain dozens of additional, unaccounted for passengers than a previously published Department of Homeland Security (DHS) list of people deported from the United States on those flights, 404 Media has learned. The additional people on the flight manifest have not been publicly acknowledged by the U.S. government in any way, and immigration experts who have been closely monitoring Trump’s deportation campaign say they have no idea where these people are or what happened to them. 404 Media is now publishing the names of these people.
On March 15, the Trump administration deported more than 200 people on three aircraft to a megaprison in El Salvador. A judge blocked the deportations, but hours later the flights still landed in the country. It marked one of the major turning points of the administration’s mass deportation efforts, and signaled what was to come around the country—a lack of due process, authorities ignoring judge’s rulings, and deporting people on the flimsiest of pretenses. Soon after these flights, CBS News published an “internal government list” of people it said were deported to CECOT, the notorious El Salvadorian megaprison.
But in May, a hacker targeted GlobalX, the airline that operated these flights and shared the data with 404 Media. In addition to the names of people who were on the list CBS News published, the GlobalX flight manifests contain the names of dozens of people who were supposedly on the flights but whose status and existence has not been acknowledged by the U.S. government or previously reported in the press.
“We have this list of people that the U.S. government has not formally acknowledged in any real way and we pretty much have no idea if they are in CECOT or someplace else, or whether they received due process,” Michelle Brané, executive director of Together and Free, a group that has been working with families of deported people, told 404 Media. “I think this further demonstrates the callousness and lack of due process involved and is further evidence that the US government is disappearing people. These people were detained and no one knows where they are, and we don't know the circumstances […] For almost all of these people, there’s no records whatsoever. No court records, nothing.”
💡
Do you know anything else about these people or flights? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Jason securely on Signal at jason.404 or send an email to jason@404media.co. You can Signal Joseph at joseph.404 or email joseph@404media.co.
“[The government is] not disclosing it and they’ve presumably been sent to a prison or sent somewhere by the U.S. government on a plane and have never been heard from since,” she added. “We have not heard from these people’s families, so I think perhaps even they don’t know.”
Brané added that it remains entirely unclear whether all of these people were actually on the flights or why they were on the manifests. If they were indeed on the flights, it is unknown where they currently are. That uncertainty, and the unwillingness of the U.S. government to provide any clarity about these people, is a major problem, she said.
While the stories of some of the people deported on these flights have garnered a lot of attention, such as Kilmar Abrego Garcia, U.S. authorities have refused to reveal the names of everyone on board.
While the whereabouts and circumstances of most of these people remain unknown, Brané’s organization used publicly available data to try to better understand who they are. In some cases, Together and Free was able to identify a few details about specific people on the manifest. For example, one person on the manifest appears to have been arrested by local police in Texas in late December on drug possession charges and is listed in arrest records as being an “illegal alien.” Another person was arrested in Nashville in February on charges of driving without a license. For many other people listed, there is no easily discernible public data about who they are or why they appeared on the flight manifest.
Several other people are on the flight manifests and do not appear on the CBS News list, but their identities had already become public because their families have filed lawsuits or have been looking for them on social media. These include Abrego Garcia and Ricardo Prada Vásquez, a man whose family said he was “disappeared” because he did not appear on any official, publicly published lists. After the New York Times published an article about his disappearance, the Trump administration said he was at CECOT, and 404 Media was able to find his name on the March 15 flight manifests.
In Venezuela, the family of another man who appears on the flight manifests but not on the CBS News list, Keider Alexander Flores Navas, has been protesting his disappearance and demanding answers. In a TikTok video posted in March, his mother Ana Navas explains that they suddenly stopped hearing from Keider before the March 15 flights. She said she eventually heard he was in federal detention. Then, she saw a photo of him in CECOT amongst a group of other prisoners: “The thing that worried me the most was he was not on any list. But this photo is from El Salvador. Lots of family members here recognize their sons [in official CECOT photos]. That’s my son,” she says, the camera panning to a circled image of Keider in CECOT.
In another TikTok video posted in June, the mother of 21-year-old Brandon Sigaran-Cruz explains that he had been “disappeared for three months” with no news of his whereabouts. Sigaran-Cruz also appears on the flight manifest but not the CBS News list.
The U.S. government previously acknowledged that, along with more than 200 Venezuelan citizens, it deported 23 Salvadorans to El Salvador on the three March 15 flights. There is no formal list of the Salvadorans who were on the flight, and none of them appeared on the CBS News list, which included only Venezuelan citizens.
The United Nations’ Human Rights Office has also filed court petitions saying that it is investigating the “involuntary disappearances” of at least four Venezuelans who were sent to El Salvador on these flights. “Neither the Government of El Salvador nor the Government of the United States has published official information on the list of deported persons or their current place of detention,” the United Nations said in a “Report on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances” it filed in court.
“There continues to be very little clarity as to the fate and whereabouts of the Venezuelans removed to El Salvador. To date, no official lists of the deported detainees have been published. Provision of further information by authorities is key, including providing families and their counsel with available information on the specific situation and whereabouts of their loved ones,” Elizabeth Throssell, a spokesperson for the UN Human Rights Office, told 404 Media in an email. “The UN Human Rights Office has been in contact with family members of over 100 Venezuelans believed to have been deported to El Salvador.”
404 Media asked the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) over multiple weeks if the agency had any legitimate security concerns with these names being published, or if it could tell us anything about these people. The agency never responded, despite responding to requests for comment for other 404 Media articles. GlobalX did not respond to a request for comment either.
“It is critical that we know who was on these March 15 flights,” Lee Gelernt, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the lead counsel on the ACLU’s related case, told 404 Media. “These individuals were sent to a gulag-type prison without any due process, possibly for the remainder of their lives, yet the government has provided no meaningful information about them, much less the evidence against them. Transparency at a time like this is essential.”
In recent months, the U.S. government has said that the El Salvadorian government has jurisdiction over the people detained in CECOT, while El Salvador told the United Nations that “the jurisdiction and legal responsibility for these persons lie exclusively with the competent foreign authorities [the United States],” leading to a situation where people are detained in a foreign prison but both responsible parties are not willing to claim legal responsibility for them. A similar situation has happened in Florida at the “Alligator Alcatraz” camp, where people detained by the federal government are being held in a state-run facility, and experts have said it’s not clear who is in charge. Brané said with the massive increase in ICE funding as part of Trump’s new law, we are likely to see more detention camps, more detainments, more deportation flights, and, likely, more people who aren’t publicly accounted for in any way.
“When you look at what ICE is doing now in terms of how they treat people, how they operate when they're given even a little bit of rope, it’s terrifying to think what the budget increase is going to do,” Brané said. “This is a taste of what we're going to see on a much larger scale."
You can read the list below. 404 Media has removed people listed on the flight manifests as “guards” (404 Media found at least one of these names matched someone who lists their employment online as a flight transport detention officer). Reportedly eight women deported to El Salvador were later returned. 404 Media is not publishing the names of women known to have returned to the U.S. The manifest also includes the names of several El Salvadorians mentioned as being deported in a White House Press release, court proceedings, and media reports. We have not included their names below because the administration has formally acknowledged that they were deported.
Manuel Quijada-Leon Irvin Quintanilla-Garcia Jose Ramirez-Iraheta Josue Rivera-Portillo Jorge Rodriguez Gomez Mario Jeavanni Rojas Edgar Leonel Sanchez Rosales Brandon Sigaran-Cruz Miguel Enriquez Saravia Abraham Hernandez-Mania Jean Morales-Loaiza Nelson Alfaro-Orellana Jhonnarty Pachecho-Chirinos Cristian Alpe-Tepas Jordyn Alexander Alvarez Jose Alvarez Gonzalez Wilfredo Avendano Carrizalez Jose Gregorio Buenano Cantillo Istmar Campos Mejia Jose Chanta-Ochoa Keider Alexander Flores Navas Noe Florez-Valladares Miguel Fuentes-Lopez Roberto Interiano Uceda Jose Lopez Cruz Diego Maldonado-Fuentes William Martinez-Ruano Osmer Mejias-Ruiz Iran Ochoa Suescun David Orantez Gonzalez Ariadny Araque-Cerrada Elena Cuenca Palma Maria Franco Pina Mayerkis Guariman Gonzalez Wilmary Linares-Marcano Scarlet Mendoza Perez Ofreilimar Peña Boraure Edilianny Stephany Rivero Sierralta Dioneli Sanz Aljorna Anyeli Sequera Ramirez Yanny Suarez Rodriguez Karla Villasmil-Castellano
For a while, I have said that the AI slop endgame, for social media companies, is creating a hyper personalized feed full of highly specific content about anything one could possibly imagine. Because AI slop is so easy to make and because social media algorithms are so personalized, this means that Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube can feed you anything they perceive its users to possibly want. So this means that AI slop makers are exploring ever more niche areas of content.
Case in point: Facebook AI slop about the horrific and deadly Texas flood. Topical AI content about disasters, war, current events, and news stories are at this point so commonplace that they are now sadly barely notable, and AI-powered “misinformation” about horrible events are all over every social media feed I can think of. But as we document our descent into this hellhole, I thought some AI slop surfaced on Bluesky by Christina Stephens was particularly notable:
Yesterday, Silicon Valley trade publication The Information launched TITV, a live-streaming news program. For its first episode, the company’s founder Jessica Lessin interviewed Mark Zuckerberg about his recent attempts to hire AI executives away from other companies for huge sums of money.
It is impossible to say what actually happened in the interview, however, because there were audio problems with the livestream—the Zuckerberg segment was completely silent, giving us a minute and 50 seconds of video of Zuckerberg’s face moving with no sound coming out.
In recent weeks, however, Zuckerberg has really ramped up his rhetoric about “superintelligence,” throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at AI researchers in attempts to hire them at Meta, and beginning work on massive data centers around the country to power his AI. Zuckerberg and Meta have talked endlessly about AI as a game changer, while being unable or unwilling to keep AI-generated misinformation and slop off of Meta platforms.
Meanwhile, there has been increased discussion about the possible power of using AI for journalism, which we have written about extensively. I saw the silent interview with Zuckerberg as both an opportunity to check out the awesome abilities of Meta’s AI, and to test AI tools at a task some of them are supposedly good at—reading lips. If these technologies worked as well as their creators have promised, it might be possible to provide the world with information from The Lost Mark Zuckerberg Interview.
Here is how my experiment went.
Because Zuckerberg was obviously talking about Meta AI, I thought I would try his tool first. I took video from the interview and asked Meta AI to lip read it to tell me what they were saying:
“I’d love to help! However, I’m a text-based AI and don’t have capability to visually lip read videos,” Meta AI said. It then suggested that I “find a professional lip reader or transcription service that specializes in lip reading videos” or “use automated lip reading software.”
I then tried to upload still images to see if Meta AI could parse them:
When I uploaded additional images, Meta AI was also not able to provide any information about what was being said.
I then went to ChatGPT, because Zuckerberg is reportedly offering pay packages of up to $300 million to OpenAI staffers to come work at Meta. I uploaded the 1:50 video and ChatGPT told me “the video processing took too long and timed out.” I then uploaded a 25 second clip and it told me “the system is still timing out while trying to extract frames.” I then asked it to do the first five seconds and it said “even with the shorter clip and smaller scope (first 5 seconds), the system timed out.” I then asked for it to extract one single frame, and it said “it looks like the system is currently unable to extract even a single frame from the video file.” ChatGPT then asked me to take a screenshot of Zuckerberg. I sent it this:
And ChatGPT said “the person appears to be producing a sound like ‘f’ or ‘v’ (as in ‘video’ or ‘very’),” but that “possibly ‘m’ or ‘b,’ depending on the next motion.” I then shared the 10 frames around that single screenshot, and ChatGPT said “after closely analyzing the progression of lip shapes and facial motion,” the “probable lip-read phrase” was “This is version.” I then uploaded 10 more frames and it said the “full phrase so far (high confidence): ‘This version is just.’”
I then decided to try to extract every frame from the video and upload it to ChatGPT.
I went to a website called frame-extractor.com and cut the video into 3,000 frames. After it had processed 700 of them, I tried to upload them to ChatGPT and it did not work. I then decided I would go 10 frames at a time from the beginning of the clip. Even though I sent an entirely different portion of the video and told ChatGPT we were starting from a different part of the video, it still said that the beginning of the video said “this version is.” I continued uploading frames, 10 at a time. These frames included both Lessin and Zuckerberg, not just Zuckerberg.
ChatGPT slowly began to create a surely accurate transcript of the lost audio of this interview: “This version is just that it we built,” ChatGPT said. As I added more and more frames, it refined the answer: “This version is what we’re going to do,” it said. Finally, it seemed to make a breakthrough. “Is this version of LLaMA more powerful than the one we released last year?” the ChatGPT transcript said. It was not clear about who was speaking, however. ChatGPT said "her mouth movements," but then explained that the "speaker is the man on the left" (Lessin, not Zuckerberg, was speaking in these frames).
I had uploaded 40 of a total of 3,000 frames. Zoom video is usually 30 fps, so in approximately 1.5 seconds, Lessin and/or Zuckerberg apparently said “Is this version of LLaMA more powerful than the one we released last year?” I then recorded this phrase at a normal speaking speed, and it took about four seconds. Just a data point.
Lipreadtest
0:00
/4.973333
I then got an error message from ChatGPT, and got rate-limited because I was uploading too much data. It told me that I needed to wait three hours to try again.
Finally, I did what Meta AI told me to do, and tried a bespoke AI lip reading app. I found one called ReadTheirLips.com, which is powered by Symphonic Labs. This is a tool that people have been trying to use in recent months to figure out what Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were saying to each other in silent b-roll news footage, without much success.
I paid $10 for three minutes worth of transcription and asked it to lip read using its “Multiface Detection.” After waiting 10 minutes, I got an error message that said “Transcription failed, no credits have been used, try again later.” I then asked it to focus only on Zuckerberg, and actually got some text. I separately asked it to focus on Lessin.
Here is a transcript of what the AI says they were talking about. It has not been edited for clarity and I have no idea which parts, if any, are accurate:
LESSIN: Thanks for joining us again, TV. We're happy to have you already this morning. News that you've spent even more money with your big announcement about your new supercomputers. We'll get to that, but to start, you've been in huge scale like I.
ZUCKERBERG: Happy TO BE HERE. We're GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT META'S AI STRATEGY. It's BEEN BUSY, YOU KNOW? I THINK THE MOST EXCITING THING THIS YEAR IS THAT WE'RE STARTING TO SEE EARLY GLIMPSES OF SELF-IMPROVEMENT WITH THE MODELS, WHICH MEANS THAT DEVELOPING SUPERINTELLIGENCE IS NOW.
LESSIN: You HAVE BEEN ON A PLANE OF AI HIRING, WHY AND WHY NOW?
ZUCKERBERG: Insight, and we just want to make sure that we really strengthen the effort as much as possible to go for it. Our mission with a lab is to deliver personal superintelligence to everyone in the world, so that way, you know, we can put that power in every individual's hand. I'm really excited about it.
LESSIN: I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.
ZUCKERBERG: Than ONE OF THE OTHER LABS YOU'RE DOING, AND YOU KNOW MY VIEW IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TECHNOLOGY IN OUR LIVES. IT'S GOING TO UNDERPIN HOW WE DEVELOP EVERYTHING AND THE COMPANY, AND IT'S GOING TO AFFECT SOCIETY VERY WISELY. SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET THE BEST FOCUS.
LESSIN: Did YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WERE BEHIND WHAT WAS COMING OUT OF LAW BEFORE I'M NOT ADJUSTING.
ZUCKERBERG: On THIS FROM ENTREPRENEURS TO RESEARCHERS TO ENGINEERS WORKING ON THIS HIDDEN INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THEN OF COURSE WE WANT TO BACK IT UP WITH JUST AN ABSOLUTELY MASSIVE AMOUNT OF COMPUTER RESEARCH, WHICH WE CAN SUPPORT BECAUSE WE HAVE A VERY STRONG BUSINESS MODEL THAT THROWS OFF A LOT OF CAPITAL. LET'S TALK ABOUT.
LESSIN: Like THIS SUMMER, PARTICULARLY, YOU SWITCH GEARS A LITTLE BIT.
ZUCKERBERG: I THINK THE FIELD IS ACCELERATING, YOU KNOW, WE KEEP ON TRACK FOR WHERE WE WANT TO BE, AND THE FIELD KEEPS US MOVING FORWARD.
The video ends there, and it cuts back to the studio.
Update: The Information provided 404 Media with several clips (with audio) from Lessin's interview with Zuckerberg, as well as a real transcript of the interview. Here is the real segment of what was said. As you can see, the AI captured the jist of this portion of the interview, and actually did not do too bad:
Lessin: Mark, thanks for joining TITV. We're happy to have you here. Already this morning, [there’s] news that you've spent even more money with your big announcement about your new supercomputers. We'll get to that. But to start, you took a huge stake in ScaleAI. You have been on a blitz of AI hiring. Why, and why now?
Zuckerberg: Yeah, it's been busy. You know, I think the most exciting thing this year is that we're starting to see early glimpses of self-improvement with the models, which means that developing super intelligence is now in sight, and we just want to make sure that we really strengthen the effort as much as possible to go for it. Our mission with the lab is to deliver personal super intelligence to everyone in the world, so that way we can put that power in every individual's hand. And I'm really excited about it. It's a different thing than what the other labs are doing.
And my view is that this is going to be something that is the most important technology in our lives. It's going to underpin how we develop everything at the company, and it's going to affect society very widely. So we just want to make sure that we get the best folks to work on this, from entrepreneurs to researchers to engineers working on the data and infrastructure.
And then, of course, we want to back up with just an absolutely massive amount of compute which we can support, because we have a very strong business model that throws off a lot of capital.
Lessin: Did you feel like you were behind coming out of Llama 4? It seems like this summer, in particular, you switched gears a little bit.
Zuckerberg: I think the field is accelerating, you know, we keep on having goals for where we want to be. And then the field keeps on moving faster than we expect.
On May 23, we got a very interesting email from Ghost, the service we use to make 404 Media. “Paid subscription started,” the email said, which is the subject line of all of the automated emails we get when someone subscribes to 404 Media. The interesting thing about this email was that the new subscriber had been referred to 404 Media directly from chatgpt.com, meaning the person clicked a link to 404 Media from within a ChatGPT window. It is the first and only time that ChatGPT has ever sent us a paid subscriber.
From what I can tell, ChatGPT.com has sent us 1,600 pageviews since we founded 404 Media nearly two years ago. To give you a sense of where this slots in, this is slightly fewer than the Czech news aggregator novinky.cz, the Hungarian news portal Telex.hu, the Polish news aggregator Wykop.pl, and barely more than the Russian news aggregator Dzen.ru, the paywall jumping website removepaywall.com, and a computer graphics job board called 80.lv. In that same time, Google has sent roughly 3 million visitors, or 187,400 percent more than ChatGPT.
This is really neither here nor there because we have tried to set our website up to block ChatGPT from scraping us, though it is clear this is not always working. But even for sites that don’t block ChatGPT, new research from the internet infrastructure company CloudFlare suggests that OpenAI is crawling 1,500 individual webpages for every one visitor that it is sending to a website. Google traffic has begun to dry up as both Google’s own AI snippets and AI-powered SEO spam have obliterated the business models of many media websites.
This general dynamic—plummeting traffic because of AI snippets, ChatGPT, AI slop, Twitter no workie so good no more—has been called the “traffic apocalypse” and has all but killed some smaller websites and has been blamed by executives for hundreds of layoffs at larger ones.
Despite the fact that generative AI has been a destructive force against their businesses, their industry, and the truth more broadly, media executives still see AI as a business opportunity and a shiny object that they can tell investors and their staffs that they are very bullish on. They have to say this, I guess, because everything else they have tried hasn’t worked, and pretending that they are forward thinking or have any clue what they are doing will perhaps allow a specific type of media executive to squeeze out a few more months of salary.
But pivoting to AI is not a business strategy. Telling journalists they must use AI is not a business strategy. Partnering with AI companies is a business move, but becoming reliant on revenue from tech giants who are creating a machine that duplicates the work you’ve already created is not a smart or sustainable business move, and therefore it is not a smart business strategy. It is true that AI is changing the internet and is threatening journalists and media outlets. But the only AI-related business strategy that makes any sense whatsoever is one where media companies and journalists go to great pains to show their audiences that they are human beings, and that the work they are doing is worth supporting because it is human work that is vital to their audiences. This is something GQ’s editorial director Will Welch recently told New York magazine: “The good news for any digital publisher is that the new game we all have to play is also a sustainable one: You have to build a direct relationship with your core readers,” he said.
Becoming an “AI-first” media company has become a buzzword that execs can point at to explain that their businesses can use AI to become more ‘efficient’ and thus have a chance to become more profitable. Often, but not always, this message comes from executives who are laying off large swaths of their human staff.
In May, Business Insider laid off 21 percent of its workforce. In her layoff letter, Business Insider’s CEO Barbara Peng said “there’s a huge opportunity for companies who harness AI first.” She told the remaining employees there that they are “fully embracing AI,” “we are going all-in on AI,” and said “over 70 percent of Business Insider employees are already using Enterprise ChatGPT regularly (our goal is 100%), and we’re building prompt libraries and sharing everyday use cases that help us work faster, smarter, and better.” She added they are “exploring how AI can boost operations across shared services, helping us scale and operate more efficiently.”
Last year, Hearst Newspapers executives, who operate 78 newspapers nationwide, told the company in an all-hands meeting audio obtained by 404 Media that they are “leaning into [AI] as Hearst overall, the entire corporation.” Examples given in the meeting included using AI for slide decks, a “quiz generation tool” for readers, translations, a tool called Dispatch, which is an email summarization tool, and a tool called “Assembly,” which is “basically a public meeting monitor, transcriber, summarizer, all in one. What it does is it goes into publicly posted meeting videos online, transcribes them automatically, [and] automatically alerts journalists through Slack about what’s going on and links to the transcript.”
For this week’s podcast, I’m talking to our friend Casey Johnston, a tech journalist turned fitness journalist turned independent journalist. Casey studied physics, which led her to tech journalism; she did some of my favorite coverage of Internet culture as well as Apple’s horrendous butterfly laptop keyboards. We worked together at VICE, where Casey was an editor and where she wrote Ask a Swole Woman, an advice column about weightlifting. After she left VICE, Casey founded She’s a Beast, an independent site about weightlifting, but also about the science of diet culture, fitness influencers on the internet, the intersections of all those things, etc.
She just wrote A Physical Education: How I Escaped Diet Culture and Gained the Power of Lifting, a really great reported memoir about how our culture and the media often discourages people from lifting, and how this type of exercise can be really beneficial to your brain and your body. I found the book really inspiring and actually started lifting right after I read it. In this interview we talk about her book, about journalism, about independent media, and how doing things like lifting weights and touching grass helps us navigate the world.
Listen to the weekly podcast on Apple Podcasts,Spotify, or YouTube. Become a paid subscriber for access to this episode's bonus content and to power our journalism. If you become a paid subscriber, check your inbox for an email from our podcast host Transistor for a link to the subscribers-only version! You can also add that subscribers feed to your podcast app of choice and never miss an episode that way. The email should also contain the subscribers-only unlisted YouTube link for the extended video version too. It will also be in the show notes in your podcast player.
This week, we’re going to try something new at 404 Media. Which is to say we’re going to try doing nothing at all. The TL;DR is that 404 Media is taking the week off, so this is the only email you’ll get from us this week. No posts on the website (except a scheduled one for the podcast). We will be back with your regularly scheduled dystopia Monday, July 7.
We’re doing this to take a quick break to recharge. Over the nearly two years since we founded 404 Media, each of us have individually taken some (very limited) vacations. And when one of us takes off time it just means that the others have to carry their workload. We’re not taking this time to do an offsite, or brainstorm blue sky ideas. Some of us are quite literally gone fishin’. So, for the first time ever: A break!
We are not used to breaks, because we know that the best way to build an audience and a business of people who read our articles is to actually write a lot of articles, and so that’s what we’ve been doing. The last few months have been particularly wild, as we’ve covered Elon Musk’stakeover of the federal government, the creepingsurveillancestate, Trump’s massdeportationcampaign, AI’s role in stompingoverworkers, the general destruction of the internet, etc etc etc. At the moment we have more story leads than we can possibly get to and are excited for the second half of the year. We’ve also published a lot of hopeful news, too, including instances where people fight back against powerful forces or solve universal mysteries, or when companies are forced to do the right thing in response to our reporting, or when lawmakers hold tech giants to account as a result of our investigations. But in an industry that has become obsessed with doing more with less and publishing constantly, we have found that publishing quality journalism you can’t find anywhere else is a good way to run a business, which means we thankfully don’t have to cover everything, everywhere, all at once.
When we founded 404 Media in August 2023, we had no idea if anyone would subscribe, and we had no idea how it would go. We took zero investment from anyone and hoped that if we did good work often enough, enough people would decide that they wanted to support independent journalism that we could make a job out of it, and that we could make a sustainable business that would work for the long haul. We did not and do not take that support for granted. But because of your support, we now feel like we don’t have to scratch and claw for every possible new dollar we can get, and you have given us the breathing room in our business to quite literally take a breather, and to let the other folks who make this website possible, such as those who help us out with our social accounts, take a paid breather as well.
And if you want to subscribe to support our work, you can do so here.
We are not tired, exactly. In fact, we all feel more energized and ambitious than ever, knowing there are so many people out there who enjoy our work and are willing to financially support it. But we also don’t want to burn ourselves out and therefore, school’s out for summer (for one week). This week’s podcast is an interview Jason recorded with our friend Casey Johnston a few weeks ago; it’ll be the only new content this week. We’ll be back to it next Monday. Again, thank you all. Also, if you want, open thread in the comments to chat about whatever is going on out there or whatever is on your mind.
A federal judge in California ruled Monday that Anthropic likely violated copyright law when it pirated authors’ books to create a giant dataset and "forever" library but that training its AI on those books without authors' permission constitutes transformative fair use under copyright law. The complex decision is one of the first of its kind in a series of high-profile copyright lawsuits brought by authors and artists against AI companies, and it’s largely a very bad decision for authors, artists, writers, and web developers.
This case, in which authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic, maker of the Claude family of large language models, is one of dozens of high-profile lawsuits brought against AI giants. The authors sued Anthropic because the company scraped full copies of their books for the purposes of training their AI models from a now-notorious dataset called Books3, as well as from the piracy websites LibGen and Pirate Library Mirror (PiLiMi). The suit also claims that Anthropic bought used physical copies of books and scanned them for the purposes of training AI.
"From the start, Anthropic ‘had many places from which’ it could have purchased books, but it preferred to steal them to avoid ‘legal/practice/business slog,’ as cofounder and chief executive officer Dario Amodei put it. So, in January or February 2021, another Anthropic cofounder, Ben Mann, downloaded Books3, an online library of 196,640 books that he knew had been assembled from unauthorized copies of copyrighted books — that is, pirated," William Alsup, a federal judge for the Northern District of California, wrote in his decision Monday. "Anthropic’s next pirated acquisitions involved downloading distributed, reshared copies of other pirate libraries. In June 2021, Mann downloaded in this way at least five million copies of books from Library Genesis, or LibGen, which he knew had been pirated. And, in July 2022, Anthropic likewise downloaded at least two million copies of books from the Pirate Library Mirror, or PiLiMi, which Anthropic knew had been pirated."
I was sick last week, so I did not have time to write about the Discover Tab in Meta’s AI app, which, as Katie Notopoulos of Business Insider has pointed out, is the “saddest place on the internet.” Many very good articles have already been written about it, and yet, I cannot allow its existence to go unremarked upon in the pages of 404 Media.
If you somehow missed this while millions of people were protesting in the streets, state politicians were being assassinated, war was breaking out between Israel and Iran, the military was deployed to the streets of Los Angeles, and a Coinbase-sponsored military parade rolled past dozens of passersby in Washington, D.C., here is what the “Discover” tab is: The Meta AI app, which is the company’s competitor to the ChatGPT app, is posting users’ conversations on a public “Discover” page where anyone can see the things that users are asking Meta’s chatbot to make for them.
This includes various innocuous image and video generations that have become completely inescapable on all of Meta’s platforms (things like “egg with one eye made of black and gold,” “adorable Maltese dog becomes a heroic lifeguard,” “one second for God to step into your mind”), but it also includes entire chatbot conversations where users are seemingly unknowingly leaking a mix of embarrassing, personal, and sensitive details about their lives onto a public platform owned by Mark Zuckerberg. In almost all cases, I was able to trivially tie these chats to actual, real people because the app uses your Instagram or Facebook account as your login.
This article was primarily reported using public records requests. We are making it available to all readers as a public service. FOIA reporting can be expensive, please consider subscribing to 404 Media to support this work. Or send us a one time donation via our tip jar here.
Local police in Oregon casually offered various surveillance services to federal law enforcement officials from the FBI and ICE, and to other state and local police departments, as part of an informal email and meetup group of crime analysts, internal emails shared with 404 Media show.
In the email thread, crime analysts from several local police departments and the FBI introduced themselves to each other and made lists of surveillance tools and tactics they have access to and felt comfortable using, and in some cases offered to perform surveillance for their colleagues in other departments. The thread also includes a member of ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and members of Oregon’s State Police. In the thread, called the “Southern Oregon Analyst Group,” some members talked about making fake social media profiles to surveil people, and others discussed being excited to learn and try new surveillance techniques. The emails show both the wide array of surveillance tools that are available to even small police departments in the United States and also shows informal collaboration between local police departments and federal agencies, when ordinarily agencies like ICE are expected to follow their own legal processes for carrying out the surveillance.
In one case, a police analyst for the city of Medford, Oregon, performed Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) lookups for a member of ICE’s HSI; later, that same police analyst asked the HSI agent to search for specific license plates in DHS’s own border crossing license plate database. The emails show the extremely casual and informal nature of what partnerships between police departments and federal law enforcement can look like, which may help explain the mechanics of how local police around the country are performing Flock automated license plate reader lookups for ICE and HSI even though neither group has a contract to use the technology, which 404 Media reported last month.
An email showing HSI asking for a license plate lookup from police in Medford, Oregon
Kelly Simon, the legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, told 404 Media “I think it’s a really concerning thread to see, in such a black-and-white way. I have certainly never seen such informal, free-flowing of information that seems to be suggested in these emails.”
In that case, in 2021, a crime analyst with HSI emailed an analyst at the Medford Police Department with the subject line “LPR Check.” The email from the HSI analyst, who is also based in Medford, said they were told to “contact you and request a LPR check on (2) vehicles,” and then listed the license plates of two vehicles. “Here you go,” the Medford Police Department analyst responded with details of the license plate reader lookup. “I only went back to 1/1/19, let me know if you want me to check further back.” In 2024, the Medford police analyst emailed the same HSI agent and told him that she was assisting another police department with a suspected sex crime and asked him to “run plates through the border crossing system,” meaning the federal ALPR system at the Canada-US border. “Yes, I can do that. Let me know what you need and I’ll take a look,” the HSI agent said.
More broadly, the emails, obtained using a public records request by Information for Public Use, an anonymous group of researchers in Oregon who have repeatedly uncovered documents about government surveillance, reveal the existence of the “Southern Oregon Analyst Group.” The emails span between 2021 and 2024 and show local police eagerly offering various surveillance services to each other as part of their own professional development.
In a 2023 email thread where different police analysts introduced themselves, they explained to each other what types of surveillance software they had access to, which ones they use the most often, and at times expressed an eagerness to try new techniques.
“This is my first role in Law Enforcement, and I've been with the Josephine County Sheriff's Office for 6 months, so I'm new to the game,” an email from a former Pinkerton security contractor to officials at 10 different police departments, the FBI, and ICE, reads. “Some tools I use are Flock, TLO, Leads online, WSIN, Carfax for police, VIN Decoding, LEDS, and sock puppet social media accounts. In my role I build pre-raid intelligence packages, find information on suspects and vehicles, and build link charts showing connections within crime syndicates. My role with [Josephine Marijuana Enforcement Team] is very intelligence and research heavy, but I will do the occasional product with stats. I would love to be able to meet everyone at a Southern Oregon analyst meet-up in the near future. If there is anything I can ever provide anyone from Josephine County, please do not hesitate to reach out!” The surveillance tools listed here include automatic license plate reading technology, social media monitoring tools, people search databases, and car ownership history tools.
An investigations specialist with the Ashland Police Department messaged the group, said she was relatively new to performing online investigations, and said she was seeking additional experience. “I love being in a support role but worry patrol doesn't have confidence in me. I feel confident with searching through our local cad portal, RMS, Evidence.com, LeadsOnline, carfax and TLO. Even though we don't have cameras in our city, I love any opportunity to search for something through Flock,” she said. “I have much to learn with sneaking around in social media, and collecting accurate reports from what is inputted by our department.”
A crime analyst with the Medford Police Department introduced themselves to the group by saying “The Medford Police Department utilizes the license plate reader systems, Vigilant and Flock. In the next couple months, we will be starting our transition to the Axon Fleet 3 cameras. These cameras will have LPR as well. If you need any LPR searches done, please reach out to me or one of the other analysts here at MPD. Some other tools/programs that we have here at MPD are: ESRI, Penlink PLX, CellHawk, TLO, LeadsOnline, CyberCheck, Vector Scheduling/CrewSense & Guardian Tracking, Milestone XProtect city cameras, AXON fleet and body cams, Lexipol, HeadSpace, and our RMS is Central Square (in case your agency is looking into purchasing any of these or want more information on them).”
A fourth analyst said “my agency uses Tulip, GeoShield, Flock LPR, LeadsOnline, TLO, Axon fleet and body cams, Lexipol, LEEP, ODMap, DMV2U, RISS/WSIN, Crystal Reports, SSRS Report Builder, Central Square Enterprise RMS, Laserfiche for fillable forms and archiving, and occasionally Hawk Toolbox.” Several of these tools are enterprise software solutions for police departments, which include things like police report management software, report creation software, and stress management and wellbeing software, but many of them are surveillance tools.
At one point in the 2023 thread, an FBI intelligence analyst for the FBI’s Portland office chimes in, introduces himself, and said “I think I've been in contact with most folks on this email at some point in the past […] I look forward to further collaboration with you all.”
The email thread also planned in-person meetups and a “mini-conference” last year that featured a demo from a company called CrimeiX, a police information sharing tool.
A member of Information for Public Use told 404 Media “it’s concerning to me to see them building a network of mass surveillance.”
“Automated license plate recognition software technology is something that in and of itself, communities are really concerned about,” the member of Information for Public Use said. “So I think when we combine this very obvious mass surveillance technology with a network of interagency crime analysts that includes local police who are using sock puppet accounts to spy on anyone and their mother and then that information is being pretty freely shared with federal agents, you know, including Homeland Security Investigations, and we see the FBI in the emails as well. It's pretty disturbing.” They added, as we have reported before, that many of these technologies were deployed under previous administrations but have become even more alarming when combined with the fact that the Trump administration has changed the priorities of ICE and Homeland Security Investigations.
“The whims of the federal administration change, and this technology can be pointed in any direction,” they said. “Local law enforcement might be justifying this under the auspices of we're fighting some form of organized crime, but one of the crimes HSI investigates is work site enforcement investigations, which sound exactly like the kind of raids on workplaces that like the country is so upset about right now.”
Simon, of ACLU Oregon, said that such informal collaboration is not supposed to be happening in Oregon.
“We have, in Oregon, a lot of really strong protections that ensure that our state resources, including at the local level, are not going to support things that Oregonians disagree with or have different values around,” she said. “Oregon has really strong firewalls between local resources, and federal resources or other state resources when it comes to things like reproductive justice or immigrant justice. We have really strong shield laws, we have really strong sanctuary laws, and when I see exchanges like this, I’m very concerned that our firewalls are more like sieves because of this kind of behind-the-scenes, lax approach to protecting the data and privacy of Oregonians.”
Simon said that collaboration between federal and local cops on surveillance should happen “with the oversight of the court. Getting a warrant to request data from a local agency seems appropriate to me, and it ensures there’s probable cause, that the person whose information is being sought is sufficiently suspected of a crime, and that there are limits to the scope, about of information that's being sought and specifics about what information is being sought. That's the whole purpose of a warrant.”
Over the last several weeks, our reporting has led multiple municipalities to reconsider how the license plate reading technology Flock is used, and it has spurred an investigation by the Illinois Secretary of State office into the legality of using Flock cameras in the state for immigration-related searches, because Illinois specifically forbids local police from assisting federal police on immigration matters.
404 Media contacted all of the police departments on the Southern Oregon Analyst Group for comment and to ask them about any guardrails they have for the sharing of surveillance tools across departments or with the federal government. Geoffrey Kirkpatrick, a lieutenant with the Medford Police Department, said the group is “for professional networking and sharing professional expertise with each other as they serve their respective agencies.”
“The Medford Police Department’s stance on resource-sharing with ICE is consistent with both state law and federal law,” Kirkpatrick said. “The emails retrieved for that 2025 public records request showed one single instance of running LPR information for a Department of Homeland Security analyst in November 2021. Retrieving those files from that single 2021 matter to determine whether it was an DHS case unrelated to immigration, whether a criminal warrant existed, etc would take more time than your publication deadline would allow, and the specifics of that one case may not be appropriate for public disclosure regardless.” (404 Media reached out to Medford Police Department a week before this article was published).
A spokesperson for the Central Point Police Department said it “utilizes technology as part of investigations, we follow all federal, state, and local law regarding use of such technology and sharing of any such information. Typically we do not use our tools on behalf of other agencies.”
A spokesperson for Oregon’s Department of Justice said it did not have comment and does not participate in the group. The other police departments in the group did not respond to our request for comment.