Flock Surveillance Cameras Face Backlash and Hacking in Knoxville
Left 50%
Center 50%
Right 0%
1 left · 1 center · 0 right
What happened
A group identifying itself as stegan0gram physically removed a Flock Safety automated license-plate reader camera and extracted data from the device. The group shared recovered material with Wired and 404 Media, which published a joint investigation. Recovered logs indicated the camera generated more than 1 million images over several weeks and that the software can produce dozens of images from a single passing vehicle. Flock Safety supplies these cameras to police departments and municipalities in the United States.
Sourcing check · Partly on the record · 3 articles
1 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It started with a Wired and 404 Media report citing unnamed sources; a named source appeared 16 hours later.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 1 of 3
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Ashley Smith
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 3
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: recovered logs
- Credits another outlet 1 of 3
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Wired and 404 Media
- Unnamed sources 0 of 3
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 16, 17:55 UTC by The Hill, crediting Wired and 404 Media, with no named source. First named source 16 hours later, from The Intercept. First document 21 hours later, from NewsNation (recovered logs).
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK.
Only left-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days;
Breitbart reported it on 2026-09-04.
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Right-leaning outlets have not covered the Flock camera theft. Left-leaning coverage reports that hackers ripped down a camera and stole its data, finding that the software can generate dozens of images from a single passing vehicle. The theft was attributed to a group called stegan0gram, which The Hill says shared the findings with Wired. Another left-leaning outlet covering Flock in the same period, The Intercept, never mentions that stolen camera or those logs. A reader on the silent side would not know the device was taken or what was on it.
Left-leaning coverage splits on how to frame attacks on the cameras. The Hill leads with a theft whose data went to journalists. The Intercept treats those attacks as a popularity test, citing people "taking chainsaws to light poles."
Did the files taken off that camera include identifiable pictures of drivers, and were those pictures published?
Bottom line
NewsNation reported recovered logs showing more than 1 million images from one Flock camera over several weeks, a theft right-leaning outlets have not covered.
The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Hackers ripped down a Flock camera and stole its data
- Recovered logs showed the camera generated more than 1 million images over several weeks
- The group stegan0gram shared its findings with 404 Media
- The Knox County commission voted to cancel the Flock contract
The Left View
The Hill reported that hackers calling themselves stegan0gram ripped down a Flock camera, stole its data, and shared findings with Wired and 404 Media, which found the system can generate dozens of images from one vehicle to build a signature. NewsNation reported that recovered logs showed more than 1 million images over several weeks. In related Flock coverage, The Intercept described a partnership between Flock and a newly formed nonprofit, Neighbors for Strong Communities, that used local-looking texts and AI-drafted emails to urge Knox County, Tennessee, residents to support the cameras; named residents and commissioners called the effort astroturf, and the county commission later voted to cancel the contract. Covering outlets frame the episode around invasive image capture and, separately, corporate influence tactics around a contested surveillance product.
Our Take (balanced)
The camera-theft story is substantive: it names a group and newsrooms, cites recovered device logs, and makes specific checkable claims (more than 1 million images; dozens of frames per vehicle). What is established is that journalists say they reviewed data from a seized Flock unit and published those figures. The physical taking of the camera, chain of custody, and whether the logs represent normal Flock operations remain alleged until the company or investigators corroborate or dispute them. The Knoxville outreach episode is separately grounded in named residents, commissioners, incorporation records, and a recorded contract cancellation; the nonprofit’s funding and Flock’s exact role are not fully documented. No right-leaning outlet has reported the camera-theft story. Watch for a Flock statement on the device and logs, any criminal investigation of the theft, independent verification of the image counts, and further municipal contract decisions.
3 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.