AI võimalused järjest avarduvad, tehnoloogia pakub ikka täpsemaid võimalusi ja kasutamisjulgus muudkui suureneb. Tehnoloogia võimalusi ongi arukas kasutada, kuid teadliku õppimise kontekstis ning moraali ja eetikaküsimusi kogu aeg meeles hoides. Siinviidatu on tähelepanuväärne tekst vähemalt kahest aspektist: (1) see pakub empiirilist teadmust inimeste näoilmetest (millest on tehtud järeldusi!) ja (2) uurimistöö metoodika ja analüüs on midagi, mis võiks huvi pakkuda kasvõi uudishimust.


Public support for the use of FRT by police is essential for strong police–citizen relationships. However, the main source of information about policing practices tends to come from the media, in particular, social media—which does not always represent a balanced and accurate portrayal (Keelan et al., 2007; Loeb et al., 2019). Furthermore, the media has the ‘ability to influence the importance placed on the topics of the public agenda’ (McCombs and Reynolds, 2002, p. 1), consequently influencing public perceptions of police legitimacy.

Näotuvastussüsteemi politsei töövoogu lülitamise võimalused:

There are various tools available to police that incorporate facial recognition software such as Google Glasses, body-worn cameras, and closed-circuit television (CCTV; Celine, 2019; Hong, 2013; Hood, 2020). These benefits of FRT ultimately provide police with a quick, efficient, and less subjective tool that has the potential to enhance policing operations.

Millele oleks kasulik mõelda:

Perhaps, the biggest concern lies with its accuracy (or inaccuracy). An independent study commissioned by Scotland Yard concerningly found that the FRT used in the Metropolitan Police trial was inaccurate 81% of the time (Gayle, 2020). […] Thirdly, the collection process for creating the matching databases from publicly available data (such as social media) also raises issues of consent and privacy.

… ja avalikkuse usaldus tuleb teenida:

Indeed, Bragias et al. (2021) found that the public’s opinion was quite divisive about the use of FRT by police.

Autorite ambitsioon:

This study examines the media’s portrayal of police use of FRT to gain an understanding about who is talking about it, who it is reaching, and moreover, what is being said and what the sentiment is about police use of FRT.


To unpack the messages being conveyed in the media discourse, agenda-setting theory can be applied as a framework to understanding these messages. Agenda-setting theory proposes that sentiment analysis and emotions are linked to the concept of the affective component of the agenda-setting framework.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks vihjed:

The overall positive sentiments indicate that the message being sent by posters is mostly setting a positive agenda. […] However, the positive sentiment findings align with Intravia et al. (2018) findings that when people consume social media content rather than mainstream media content, they tend to have more favourable attitudes towards police.

Robert W Fleet, Kelly A Hine, Surprise, anticipation, sadness, and fear: A sentiment analysis of social media’s portrayal of police use of facial recognition technology, Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 2022;, paab083,