The collaboration between Intellicheck and Accio Data has created quite the storm on social media with this major announcement. Sounds great, right? More efficient background checks, less fraud. Before we uncork the champagne, let's consider a less palatable truth: progress for some can mean problems for others. Have we become so dazzled by the gleam of security that we ignore new and terrible unintended consequences? This is particularly troubling for individuals who are already disproportionately impacted by systemic barriers.
Whose Identity Are We Really Validating?
That stated goal – slashing fraud – is certainly laudable. Intellicheck CEO Nicole Nevin was spot on when she said, “The bad guys are becoming really sophisticated. At $390 million in fraud reported by the FBI in 2022, that is likely only the tip of the iceberg. And to Accio Data, reducing data errors represents an emerging “profit center” and “responsibility” for CRAs. All well and good. But whose accountability are we actually discussing?
Think about it. More robust identity validation, which may sound like a neutral requirement, is actually contingent on people’s ability to access verifiable identity documents. What about those who by virtue of circumstance or social barriers are unable to obtain more standardized forms of ID? Perhaps they are newly displaced, or don’t have a stable mailing address, or they’ve run into bureaucratic barriers in securing the necessary identification. Are we building a system that systematically prevents these people from gaining access to good, high-paying jobs?
This barrier is not merit-based, but instead grounds itself on how easy it is for someone to prove their identity.
The implications go well beyond access to the public’s documents. Even with the best of intentions, background checks are prone to bias. Issues such as criminal records, for instance, have a disproportionate effect on marginalized communities because of things such as over-policing and racial profiling. Adding another layer of scrutiny – identity validation – would worsen these pre-existing disparities.
The Invisible Hand of Bias
Imagine a scenario: a qualified candidate from an underrepresented background is flagged due to a minor discrepancy in their documentation. A discrepancy that someone from a more privileged background might easily resolve with a phone call or a visit to a government office. This candidate, though, without access to those resources or that social capital, is unjustly filtered out of the process.
This isn't about being "anti-security." It’s simply recognizing that with these positive technological advancements, there are social costs that are sometimes unforeseen. That means calling for more transparency from organizations like Intellicheck and Accio Data—and the CRAs that power their systems.
Where are the voices of those who will be adversely affected by this partnership? I haven’t seen that in the press releases. I haven’t heard them in the noise of the industry’s weirdest highway-infrastructure moonshot. Are we so focused on the potential for profit and fraud reduction that we're ignoring the potential for human cost?
We’re especially hoping to hear from labor lawyers and civil rights advocates. Most critically, we need your voices—those whose livelihoods and opportunities are at stake. We need to ask tough questions:
| Factor | Potential Impact |
|---|---|
| Limited ID Access | Job Application Denials, Housing Instability |
| Systemic Bias | False Positives in Background Checks, Discrimination |
| Digital Divide | Exclusion from Online Job Applications |
| Bureaucratic Hurdles | Difficulty Obtaining Necessary Documentation |
It’s really easy to get swept up in the hype surrounding new tech. As advocates and leaders, we have a duty to go beyond the appearances to understand what such a change might mean. Let’s make sure that in our pursuit of security we don’t lose sight of fairness and opportunity. We need to do everything we can to ensure that progress works for all Americans—not just the wealthy few.
Forgotten Voices, Unheard Concerns
We need to hold CRAs accountable. We need to demand transparency. And we all need to listen to the voices that are too often drowned out. We will only be making security truly equitable and effective—or at the very least, alleviate unconsciously supporting inequality in the name of security. And that, friends, is a peril we shall not dare to overlook. Their anger is just as real, but now it’s up to them to translate that anger into action.
We need to hear from labor lawyers, civil rights advocates, and, most importantly, the individuals whose livelihoods could be affected. We need to ask tough questions:
- What safeguards are in place to prevent false positives?
- How will CRAs ensure that identity validation processes are fair and equitable?
- What recourse do individuals have if they are unfairly denied employment due to a background check error?
It is easy to get caught up in the hype around new technology. But we have a responsibility to look beyond the surface and consider the potential consequences. Let's not allow the pursuit of security to come at the expense of fairness and opportunity. Let's make sure that progress benefits everyone, not just a select few.
We need to hold CRAs accountable. We need to demand transparency. And we need to listen to the voices that are too often ignored. Otherwise, we risk becoming complicit in a system that perpetuates inequality under the guise of security. And that, my friends, is a danger we can't afford to ignore. The anger is real, and it's time to channel it into action.
