Government agencies, law enforcement, and retail businesses are increasingly making use of surveillance technologies like license plate readers to monitor and track members of the public. While privacy rights advocates critique the way these institutions can abuse the data they’re collecting, some individuals opt to use these technologies in their own homes.
Producer Ahmed Ashour explores the relationship between immigrants and consumer home surveillance devices like Ring cameras. Do immigrants feel that these technologies keep them safe? And how have attitudes towards these devices changed in recent years?
Surveilled and Sold is an investigative series about how surveillance technologies track immigrants in an era of mass deportation — and the ways private companies and the U.S. government buy, sell, and exchange our personal data.
A Hero In Your Neighborhood
On February 8, 2026, Sharareh Drury, an Iranian American entertainment journalist, sat down with her family in Irvine, California to partake in a particularly American tradition: Super Bowl Sunday. Sharareh was anticipating the big game, of course, but not as much as the historic halftime performance by Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny.
No Super Bowl is complete without flashy commercials, and Sharareh was hoping to see some good ones. Then, one commercial in the third quarter caught Sharareh’s attention — and not in a good way.
The commercial was for Ring, an Amazon-owned company that makes doorbell cameras and other home security devices. In the ad, Ring was introducing an AI feature called “Search Party” that helps families reunite with their lost dogs using images and text-based descriptions. In one shot, all the Ring cameras on a neighborhood block activated simultaneously to look for Milo, a yellow labrador gone missing. Within seconds, Milo was found.
After Sharareh watched the commercial, something felt off. She turned to her father and said, “This isn’t about dogs, this is about catching people. This is about catching and snatching.”
Sharareh — a Ring user herself — wondered if she should get rid of the Ring camera she had installed on her own front door..
“This isn’t about dogs, this is about catching people. This is about catching and snatching.”
Sharareh Drury
Sharareh was not alone in her discomfort. After the Super Bowl, the Ring commercial’s dystopian, Skynet-like overtones generated a swell of backlash from users and non-users alike. Tech watchdogs warned of the implications of AI being used in home surveillance devices for recognition and identification — a concern that has only become more prominent in today’s era of heightened surveillance. Some people, including those from immigrant backgrounds like Sharareh, seemed to no longer want these devices around them.
A Mirage of Safety
Ring cameras are prolific in the home security market. The company’s devices are cheap, easy to install, convenient, and — per Ring’s website — they “make neighborhoods safer.” Sharareh had always had security cameras in her home after a traumatic kidnapping experience she went through as a teenager. And when she moved to her new home in Irvine two years ago, she decided to get a Ring camera. A 2023 report in Politico estimated that 10 million households in the United States have Ring cameras installed.
If these cameras are so ubiquitous, do they actually fulfill their mission of “making neighborhoods safer?” The answer is: not really.
Dana Calacci is a computer scientist and lead author of a 2022 paper titled, “The Cop In Your Neighbor’s Doorbell: Amazon Ring and the Spread of Participatory Mass Surveillance.” In the paper, she writes that there is no strong evidence to suggest these cameras have any impact as tools of crime deterrence. Instead, she says, they promote “a culture of paranoia and distrust…often combined with racial biases.”
A 2020 NBC investigation interviewed 40 law enforcement agencies that had partnered with Ring for crime prevention. Some agencies said that the public can share Ring videos so easily that officers can become overwhelmed with footage that does not constitute a crime. Officers said they spent a lot of time sorting through videos of raccoons or small disagreements between neighbors. Others noted the sheer magnitude of the footage rarely led to actual suspects being identified, let alone arrested.
Devices like Ring cameras instead create a mirage of safety for Ring users through a process Dana Calacci calls “responsibilization.” Users “[perform] certain policing or carceral logics themselves,” she writes, normalizing surveillance and turning Ring into a panacea for their concerns. At this time, however, immigrant communities have safety concerns and fears that extend beyond the kinds of dangers a doorbell camera purports to prevent.
In Queens, What Do Immigrants Really Fear?
Jackson Heights, Queens is home to vibrant South Asian and Latine immigrant communities in New York City. Here, the question, “What are you afraid of right now?” garners different yet illuminating answers.
“I was kind of worried that there might be a little bit more crime here,” said a Nepalese student who immigrated to Jackson Heights in 2025. He spoke to Feet in 2 Worlds anonymously. “But when I came here, it was a lot safer compared to other places.”
When asked if he was afraid of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids that have become commonplace across the country, the student wasn’t as confident. “ We were concerned like a month ago because there was a raid on the Woodside area and also on Canal Street, there were [a] few ICE officers.”
We pray and we hope that they won’t take us, that we’re just people here trying to make a living.
A bangladeshi woman in JAckson Heights
A Bangladeshi woman who identified herself as an undocumented immigrant spoke about increased ICE presence in Jackson Heights. When asked if she was aware of the ways in which technology — including her phone — could pose a risk to her, the woman replied in Bangla, “Of course I’m aware. But even then, we pray and we hope that they won’t take us, that we’re just people here trying to make a living. I brought my two sons here and I’m just trying to make them good men who provide back to this country. We’re just all praying.”
Ring, Ring, It’s the Police!
Regardless of Ring’s ability to prevent crime, the company has historically leveraged its data to establish a symbiotic relationship with law enforcement. This has taken the form of giveaways, discounts, and even facilitated access to user data in exchange for the police’s vote of confidence and community promotion. Ring turned police officers into de facto brand ambassadors; in return, the company could sell more devices while lending credibility to the idea that it was creating safer neighborhoods.
In a surveillance state — one where the government constantly monitors and keeps tabs on its citizens, including immigrants — a company like Ring has a lot to gain from offering its services and user data to law enforcement in this manner.
Freddy Martinez, Co-Director of the Lucy Parsons Labs in Chicago, IL, has observed this relationship closely. He works to raise awareness within marginalized communities about the surveillance state, including the ways in which user data can be collected and shared openly for value.
“The value of the network goes up as a number of people join the network,” said Freddy. “The data [that companies] hold is the valuable bit.”
After years of criticism and a 2023 Federal Trade Commission charge of $5.6 million, Ring reformed many of its privacy policies and discontinued features that critics deemed “dystopian” or overreaching.
The value of the network goes up as a number of people join the network. The data [that companies] hold is the valuable bit.
Freddy Martinez
More recently, however, the company has rolled out similar features again — like “Familiar Faces,” where a Ring camera can recognize repeat visitors to a user’s home. Ring also announced (and later canceled) partnerships with companies like Flock, which has established ties to law enforcement. And, of course, there’s “Search Party.”
What’s Comfortable and What’s Right
In an email leaked to 404 Media after the Super Bowl commercial aired, Ring CEO Jamie Siminoff wrote to Ring employees, saying, “I believe that the foundation we created with ‘Search Party,’ first for finding dogs, will end up becoming one of the most important pieces of tech and innovation to truly unlock the impact of our mission. You can now see a future where we are able to zero out crime in neighborhoods.”
It is not unreasonable to take Siminoff at his word; to believe that the AI technology powering “Search Party” could evolve from the harmless and unbiased act of finding lost dogs to the more complex and often-biased mission of crime prevention.
Accordingly, should immigrants — like the ones who live in Jackson Heights — worry about Ring giving their data away to federal law enforcement agencies, including ICE?
There’s no evidence that Ring cameras are being actively used by ICE to track, detain, or deport immigrants. Ring has reiterated this in a statement to Feet in 2 Worlds, saying, “Ring has no partnership with ICE, does not give ICE videos, feeds, or back-end access, and does not share videos with them.”
One truth has become evident in today’s increasingly techno-authoritarian world: our data, now more than ever, is not solely ours. It is rendered vulnerable through always-connected devices and technologies — some of which exist in our own homes.
My husband’s Mexican. I am Iranian. I am so scared all the time. I’m just thinking that this is going to turn into, ‘Where is this dirty brown person and how can I use my Ring camera to find them faster?’
Sharareh Drury
Sharareh’s immediate response to the Super Bowl commercial was to take down her Ring camera. She is joining the ranks of those who do not or no longer want to be complicit in what they see as an increasingly visible mass surveillance network.
“My husband’s Mexican. I am Iranian. I am so scared all the time,” said Sharareh. “I’m just thinking that this is going to turn into, ‘Where is this dirty brown person and how can I use my Ring camera to find them faster?’ I can’t have a Ring camera anymore. We need to step out of what’s comfortable and go towards what’s right.”
We Keep Us Safe
It is unlikely that each and every Ring user will follow in Sharareh’s footsteps and take down their Ring camera. If it is difficult to fully opt out of the surveillance state, is it possible to engage with it in a manner that still prioritizes individual and collective safety?
Tazin Khan is a cybersecurity expert and founder of Cyber Collective, an organization dedicated to online harm prevention for marginalized communities.
She argued that yes, immigrants can continue to purchase and install Ring cameras as long as they are able to assess the risk to both themselves and to others.
“Are you an immigrant? Are you undocumented?” asked Tazin. “Do you fear that law enforcement or the government will find you? Now, let’s reconsider Ring.”
Occasionally, Tazin said, these devices can meet an individual’s basic needs — like preventing package theft — without risking their safety and wellbeing.
Meanwhile, Freddy emphasized that it is Ring (and Ring’s parent company, Amazon) that should take action and respond to the safety and privacy concerns of their users.
“We do ourselves a big disservice when we talk about consumer choices as, ‘Well, don’t just put one up. Just opt out of these features,’” said Freddy. “There’s a bigger issue here. I think what these companies are engaging in are largely undemocratic practices that we should question writ large.”
There’s a bigger issue here. I think what these companies are engaging in are largely undemocratic practices that we should question writ large.
Freddy Martinez
In response to technologies that both promise and compromise safety, many immigrants have instead created community-led safety networks during an era of mass deportation. This has taken many forms, including grassroots neighborhood ICE watches that have become prominent in many cities and states across the country.
Unweaving an ever-expanding web of surveillance is no easy task. And in the face of the U.S. government’s crackdown on civil rights and liberties, fear and inaction can seem like the path of least resistance.
Can these community-led efforts offer long-term solutions? What happens if doorbell cameras stop searching for dogs and start searching for people? The answer remains unclear, but perhaps in community, immigrants can find hope and a reason to keep watching out — for both themselves and others.
Credits
Produced by Ahmed Ashour
Edited by Quincy Surasmith and Mia Warren
Fact checking by Julie Schwietert Collazo
Sound design and scoring by Ahmed Ashour
Mixing and mastering by Kojin Tashiro
Original theme music by Gautam Srikishan
Special thanks to Dr. Matthew Guariglia, Rudrani Ghosh, Dr. Maytha Alhassen, Assia Boundaoui, Moustafa Bayoumi, Yussef El Guindi, and Rubel Rahman and his aunt.
Feet in 2 Worlds is supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Ford Foundation, the Fernandez Pave the Way Foundation, the Elizabeth Bond Davis Foundation, an anonymous donor, and contributors to our annual NewsMatch campaign.
You must be logged in to post a comment.