There’s no doubt facial recognition technology (FRT) gives me Minority Report vibes. Not in a creepy dystopian sort of way, but more of a zero-tolerance to crime way. Why? Because if there’s one thing we can all learn from futuristic movies like Minority Report, it’s that biometric surveillance stops crime. It may seem like science fiction, but there’s a way we can test this concept – by rolling out FRT across the country. Is this an extreme measure? Absolutely. But with retail crime now at crisis levels, desperate times call for desperate measures. Considering the tech is only designed to target criminals anyway, what harm could it do?
“We are confronting a full-scale retail crime crisis. The fear and reality of retail crime is experienced daily. Thefts at retail locations rose from 32 per cent of all thefts in 2010 to 45 per cent in 2024, with the number of incidents at the highest recorded level in more than two decades.”
– Australian Retailers Association CEO, Chris Rodwell
The problem is, however, that our privacy laws seem out of touch with reality. The national privacy regulator’s recent ruling against Kmart for unlawful use of FRT only illustrates this. The beloved retailer was taken to task for scanning the faces of customers without their consent during a pilot program designed to combat refund fraud. Other Wesfarmers-owned brand Bunnings was also found to have breached the Privacy Act last year for using FRT to address violence and organised crime in their stores. Instead of being publicly shamed, these two Aussie icons should have been praised for tackling the issue head-on. Sure, they probably could have done a better job of gaining consent from their customers to use FRT, but they were just trying to protect everyone and everything in their stores from thieves and thugs, so isn’t that what really matters? We’re in desperate times now, remember?
Of course, there will always be misguided individuals who believe the use of FRT is shady practice, but seriously, what would they know? They obviously don’t understand that it’s not the invasion of privacy many people think , so should really get their facts straight. Facial scans are only retained if they match an image of a repeat or suspected offender, with all other biometric data deleted within seconds. This is why Bunnings and Kmart continue to defend their actions in using FRT – because it’s clearly legit.
If biometric surveillance were adopted across the board, it would not only keep people safe but also keep the cost of products down in stores. The fact criminals should be the only ones worried about this tech is the exact reason for embracing it. I think it’s time we all got Minority Report vibes by adopting a zero-tolerance approach to retail crime. After all, what’s the worst that could happen?
Brooke 
Holly Catsoulis 
LeighCor