Clear for stadium access

I was surprised to get an email today from the SF Giants (Yes, I sometimes attend baseball games) advertising the Clear service to offer quicker access to the stadium. Their pitch (ah, you see what did there with that pun?) is that you don’t need those pesky traditional IDs when you can just use your fingerprint to get into the stadium. I guess if you have the designated Clear lane, that might be a draw, BUT it is pricey. I am really not convinced that it would take longer to check an ID versus a fingerprint. I looked for news on this and see that the Seattle Seahawks are using it as a way to enter stadium quicker, but also are promoting the use of biometrics to buy food and drinks.


Well then I guess it’s a good thing that Joe Panik will be coming back home to NY! (I don’t think the deal is final yet, but since he went to school where my husband teaches, we’re all very excited about the prospect of him returning.) We’ll have to make sure that the Mets keep their stadium free of this awful technology.

I love that you’re a baseball fan! I just got home from a family trip to Cooperstown last night, my dad was wearing his Giants gear all weekend. (He’s been a fan since the 50’s!)

Edited because I actually read the article now… and yup, there go the Mets, disappointing me again, as they have done consistently since 1986. :frowning:

1 Like

I saw that Clear is also being used at Madison Square Garden when I was flying out of LaGuardia last week. It’s interesting (and disturbing) that they’ve expanded from airports to large stadiums.

I find this very troubling. I can easily see masses of people not giving a second thought about using their fingerprint for a quicker line into the stadium or for food. This is going to desensitize people and encourage people toward an anti-privacy-because-of-convenience stance. Does anyone know how Clear stores and manages all the biometric data they have?

Yes, it look like it’s a done deal with Panik. :frowning: Your visit to Cooperstown sounds fun. Your dad sounds rad.

Sorry to see that the Mets stadium is also going to be part of the Clear program.

Yes, it’s disturbing to think that they don’t have enough to do at airports, that they have to expand to sports and event stadiums. I can see how they might get the draw of people that don’t like to wait in lines.

THIS. I saw and overheard so much of this when I was flying to New York out of SFO. The lines were long (even for PreCheck) and so a lot of people were handing over the $179 and getting scanned just to skip the line. People in line around me were watching this happen and talking about how it was worth the price and seemed so much easier - that convenience argument is SO strong.

I didn’t go too in depth but I haven’t been able to find anything about how they store and manage their data. A Gizmodo article about United’s new partnership with Clear has statements from higher ups only talking about convenience and expediency and this: “A United Airlines spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment on Monday about its own data protection protocols. Clear also did not immediately return a request for comment.”


I flew out of LGA this past weekend and the lines were out of the terminal. The night before we had a bad thunderstorm and over 150 flights were cancelled.

Regardless, I witnessed a number of people using Clear to move past the lines. I feel like part of it was convenience like you mentioned, but it also looked like a lot of people weren’t expecting the lines at all and were signing up sheer desperation and fear of missing their flight.

It made me feel like we live in a sci-fi dystopia where only a few are able to afford to interface with the tech to get where they need to go, where everyone else has to face the consequence of not being able to travel and just have to wait.


@Julia and @BelOutwater, maybe we can use some recent news examples in our ALA proposal to show the effects of privacy encroachment. This might be a good angle to explore. Thoughts?!?!