We want these surveillance systems removed.
That does not give us permission to exaggerate what a document says.
Credibility is part of the campaign strategy.
Our confidence labels
When useful, we describe information as:
Confirmed - directly supported by a strong primary record or equivalent evidence.
Well supported - multiple strong sources support the conclusion, though a perfect primary record may still be missing.
Reported - credible reporting supports the claim, but we have not independently obtained the underlying primary record.
Research lead - worth investigating, not ready to publish as fact.
Unknown - we do not have enough evidence to answer yet.
Prefer primary records.
For local government claims, we prefer:
- executed contracts;
- official agendas and packets;
- meeting minutes;
- policies;
- invoices and purchase records;
- government inventories;
- court opinions;
- legislation;
- official audits;
- and other original government material.
Journalism can be excellent, especially when it obtains records we do not have.
But a headline is not a substitute for the underlying contract when the contract is available.
Vendor claims are vendor claims.
Vendor materials are useful evidence of what a company says its products can do.
They are not neutral evaluations of effectiveness, privacy or necessity.
When we say:
Flock advertises Convoy Search.
that is a vendor-capability claim.
It does not prove Redford purchased Convoy Search.
Capability ≠ configuration ≠ policy ≠ actual use.
Keep these separate:
- Vendor capability - what the product can do.
- Local configuration - what the agency bought or enabled.
- Written policy - what users are supposed to do.
- Actual use - what records show happened.
This single distinction prevents a lot of bad surveillance reporting.
It should not be misread to mean only today’s verified settings matter. Technical capacity shapes future risk because software, integrations, subscriptions and permissions can change while the same physical equipment remains installed.
If current enablement cannot be verified, say unknown. Then ask for product entitlements, administrator settings, configuration-change records and audit logs so the public can learn whether a capability was added or used.
Old contracts need dates.
A contract from 2023 may prove a system existed in 2023.
It may not prove the same contract governs the system today.
Time-sensitive claims should include dates and, where useful, a last verified date.
Link the evidence.
Where practical, public factual claims should point to the source.
We want residents, officials and journalists to be able to check us.
Screenshots are not always enough.
A screenshot can be useful for preserving what a page looked like.
Whenever possible, keep the original URL or document too.
A cropped screenshot without context can become impossible to verify later.
Preserve originals.
If you receive a government record, keep the original file and the response that accompanied it.
If a public version needs unrelated personal information reduced, preserve the evidentiary original separately.
Maps have limits.
Camera maps are valuable research tools.
They can also be incomplete or outdated.
Follow DeFlock’s current mapping rules, including physical verification requirements where applicable.
Remote imagery can generate leads. It should not substitute for required in-person verification.
Numbers need context.
“500 searches” means little without knowing:
- over what time period;
- by how many users;
- against how many cameras;
- for what purpose;
- and what the outcome was.
Do not make a large number sound meaningful merely because it is large.
Association is not causation.
Two vehicles appearing near each other does not prove the drivers know each other.
A vehicle appearing near a clinic does not prove the driver was a patient.
Location data can reveal patterns. Interpreting those patterns still requires caution.
Allegation is not conviction.
Use legal status accurately.
Someone can be:
- accused;
- charged;
- subject to an internal finding;
- found liable;
- convicted;
- acquitted;
- or still in pending litigation.
Those are not interchangeable.
Court cases need precise holdings.
Do not say:
The Supreme Court ruled Flock unconstitutional.
It has not.
Explain what the case actually involved and what the court actually held.
Surveillance law changes quickly. We re-check legal pages after major new decisions and periodically when making current legal claims.
Do not publish rumors as facts.
A Facebook post saying “there are 50 new cameras” is a lead.
Go find the record or verify the equipment.
Do not assume bad motive.
A contract can be bad policy without assuming every person who approved it wanted to harm privacy.
Criticize what the evidence shows.
Municipality pages stay focused on the campaign.
We do not recreate every city website.
A local page preserves the campaign-critical layer:
- system and vendor;
- contract;
- important deadlines;
- major votes;
- current campaign status;
- unanswered questions;
- and next actions.
For current meeting dates, officials and procedures, link to the government’s live page.
Research serves action.
Research is not a hobby project where we collect every possible document forever.
The useful question is:
What fact changes the next campaign decision?
Deadlines beat interesting trivia.
Protect irrelevant personal information.
Public records can contain personal details that add nothing to the campaign.
Do not amplify them merely because the government disclosed them.
Evidence should survive disagreement.
The best campaign fact is one a skeptical resident can verify for themselves.
That does not guarantee they will agree with our policy conclusion.
It means the argument can be about the policy instead of whether we made up the evidence.
Trust the evidence. Then decide.