Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley recently addressed concerns about the company’s gunshot-detection microphones during an onstage interview at TechCrunch Disrupt. He stated plainly that the microphones detect “just gunshots,” pushing back against criticism and concerns about broader audio surveillance. However, Flock’s website presents a more expansive capability, indicating the system can also detect other sounds such as fireworks, sideshows, car crashes, and disruptive community events alongside gunfire. This discrepancy between the CEO’s statements and the company’s marketing materials has drawn scrutiny.

The Gunshot Detection feature, introduced last year, was initially met with controversy due to its capability to listen for “screaming,” which privacy advocates heavily criticized. In response, Flock amended its messaging to focus on “sounds of human distress” before eventually removing this feature for customers who were testing it. Despite Langley’s insistence that the technology monitors only gunfire, Flock’s online materials continue to emphasize a broader audio detection scope, and the technology’s detection library is said to be expanding to address emerging community threats.

Langley explained that the product evolved from gunshot detection to exploring alerts for other emergencies, such as abductions or harm, based on customer interest. However, after backlash, the company limited the audio detection to gunshots exclusively. Despite this, privacy concerns persist, especially as Flock deals with growing public scrutiny from civil rights groups like the ACLU, protests against surveillance, and the loss of contracts in states such as Texas and Florida. Additionally, key partners, including Amazon’s Ring, have severed ties over privacy-related issues.

Flock has a number of microphones comparable to industry peer ShotSpotter, a company with about 25,000 sensors as of 2024. The ongoing controversy raises questions about mass surveillance and the ethical implications of audio monitoring in public spaces. As public sentiment continues to shift against pervasive surveillance technologies, Flock faces significant challenges balancing customer desires for safety tools with demands for privacy protections. Langley’s statements at Disrupt aim to clarify the company’s position but highlight the tension between product capabilities and public perception.