The Brief

For the first time, internal TikTok communications have been made public that show a company unconcerned with the harms the app poses for American teenagers. This is despite its own research validating many child safety concerns.

The confidential material was part of a more than two-year investigation into TikTok by 14 attorneys general, including California, that led to state officials suing the company on Tuesday. The lawsuit alleges that TikTok was designed with the express intention of addicting young people to the app. The states argue the multi-billion-dollar company deceived the public about the risks.

In each of the separate lawsuits state regulators filed, dozens of internal communications, documents and research data were redacted — blacked-out from public view — since authorities entered into confidentiality agreements with TikTok.

But in one of the lawsuits, filed by the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office, the redactions were faulty. This was revealed when Kentucky Public Radio copied-and-pasted excerpts of the redacted material, bringing to light some 30 pages of documents that had been kept secret.

After Kentucky Public Radio published excerpts of the redacted material, a state judge sealed the entire complaint following a request from the attorney general’s office “to ensure that any settlement documents and related information, confidential commercial and trade secret information, and other protected information was not improperly disseminated,” according to an emergency motion to seal the complaint filed on Wednesday by Kentucky officials.

NPR reviewed all the portions of the suit that were redacted, which highlight TikTok executives speaking candidly about a host of dangers for children on the wildly popular video app. The material, mostly summaries of internal studies and communications, show some remedial measures — like time-management tools — would have a negligible reduction in screen time. The company went ahead and decided to release and tout the features.

Separately, under a new law, TikTok has until January to divest from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or face a nationwide ban. TikTok is fighting the looming crackdown. Meanwhile, the new lawsuits from state authorities have cast scrutiny on the app and its ability to counter content that harms minors. 

In a statement, TikTok spokesman Alex Haurek defended the company’s child safety record and condemned the disclosure of once-public material that has now been sealed.

"It is highly irresponsible of NPR to publish information that is under a court seal,” Haurek said. “Unfortunately, this complaint cherry-picks misleading quotes and takes outdated documents out of context to misrepresent our commitment to community safety.”

He continued: “We have robust safeguards, which include proactively removing suspected underage users, and we have voluntarily launched safety features such as default screentime limits, family pairing, and privacy by default for minors under 16.”

Kentucky AG: TikTok users can become ‘addicted’ in 35 minutes

As TikTok’s 170 million U.S. users can attest, the platform’s hyper-personalized algorithm can be so engaging it becomes difficult to close the app. TikTok determined the precise amount of viewing it takes for someone to form a habit: 260 videos. After that, according to state investigators, a user “is likely to become addicted to the platform.”

In the previously redacted portion of the suit, Kentucky authorities say: “While this may seem substantial, TikTok videos can be as short as 8 seconds and are played for viewers in rapid-fire succession, automatically,” the investigators wrote. “Thus, in under 35 minutes, an average user is likely to become addicted to the platform.”

Another internal document found that the company was aware its many features designed to keep young people on the app led to a constant and irresistible urge to keep opening the app.

TikTok’s own research states that “compulsive usage correlates with a slew of negative mental health effects like loss of analytical skills, memory formation, contextual thinking, conversational depth, empathy, and increased anxiety,” according to the suit.

In addition, the documents show that TikTok was aware that “compulsive usage also interferes with essential personal responsibilities like sufficient sleep, work/school responsibilities, and connecting with loved ones.”

TikTok: Time-limit tool aimed at ‘improving public trust,’ not limiting app use

The unredacted documents show that TikTok employees were aware that too much time spent by teens on social media can be harmful to their mental health. The consensus among academics is that they recommend one hour or less of social media usage per day.

The app lets parents place time limits on their kids’ usage that range from 40 minutes to two hours per day. TikTok created a tool that set the default time prompt at 60 minutes per day.

Internal documents show that TikTok measured the success of this tool by how it was “improving public trust in the TikTok platform via media coverage,” rather than how it reduced the time teens spent on the app.

After tests, TikTok found the tool had little impact – accounting for about a 1.5-minute drop in usage, with teens spending around 108.5 minutes per day beforehand to roughly 107 minutes with the tool. According to the attorney general’s complaint, TikTok did not revisit this issue.

One document shows one TikTok project manager saying, “Our goal is not to reduce the time spent.” In a chat message echoing that sentiment, another employee said the goal is to “contribute to DAU [daily active users] and retention” of users.

TikTok has publicized its “break” videos, which are prompts to get users to stop endlessly scrolling and take a break. Internally, however, it appears the company didn’t think the videos amounted to much. One executive said that they are “useful in a good talking point” with policymakers, but “they’re not altogether effective.”

Document: TikTok demoted people it deemed unattractive on its feed

The multi-state litigation against TikTok highlighted the company’s beauty filters, which users can overlay on videos to make themselves look thinner and younger or to have fuller lips and bigger eyes.

One popular feature, known as the Bold Glamour filter, uses artificial intelligence to rework people’s faces to resemble models with high cheekbones and strong jawlines.

Internal documents show TikTok is aware of the harm that beauty filters, like Bold Glamour, can cause young users

(

Image created by NPR's Grace Widyatmadja

/

TikTok

)

TikTok is aware of the harm these beauty filters can cause young users, the documents show.

Employees suggested internally the company “provide users with educational resources about image disorders” and create a campaign “to raise awareness on issues with low self esteem (caused by the excessive filter use and other issues).”

They also suggested adding a banner or video to the filters that included “an awareness statement about filters and the importance of positive body image/mental health.”

This comes as the documents showcase another hidden facet of TikTok’s algorithm: the app prioritizes beautiful people.

One internal report that analyzed TikTok’s main video feed saw “a high volume of … not attractive subjects” were filling everyone’s app. In response, Kentucky investigators found that TikTok retooled its algorithm to amplify users the company viewed as beautiful.

“By changing the TikTok algorithm to show fewer ‘not attractive subjects’ in the For You feed, [TikTok] took active steps to promote a narrow beauty norm even though it could negatively impact their Young Users,” the Kentucky authorities wrote.

TikTok exec: algorithm could deprive kids of opportunities like ‘looking at someone in the eyes’

Publicly, TikTok has stated that one of its “most important commitments is supporting the safety and well-being of teens.”

Yet internal documents paint a very different picture, citing statements from top company executives who appear well-aware of the harmful effects of the app without taking significant steps to address it.

One unnamed TikTok executive put it in stark terms, saying the reason kids watch TikTok is because of the power of the app’s algorithm, “but I think we need to be cognizant of what it might mean for other opportunities,” said the company executive. “And when I say other opportunities, I literally mean sleep, and eating, and moving around the room, and looking at someone in the eyes.”

TikTok’s internal estimate: 95% of smartphone users under 17 use TikTok

TikTok views itself as being in an “arms race for attention,” according to a 2021 internal presentation.

And teenagers have been key to the app’s early growth in the U.S., but another presentation shown to top company officials revealed that an estimated 95% of smartphone users under 17 use TikTok at least once a month. This lead a company staffer to state that it had “hit a ceiling among young users.”

TikTok’s own research concluded that kids were the most susceptible to being sucked into the app’s infinitely flowing feed of videos. “As expected, across most engagement metrics, the younger the user, the better the performance,” according to a 2019 TikTok document.

In response to growing national concern that excessive social media use can increase the risk of depression, anxiety and body-image issues among kids, TikTok has introduced time-management tools. These include notifications informing teens about how long they are spending on the app, parental oversight features and the ability to make the app inaccessible for some down time.

At the same time, however, TikTok knew how unlikely it was these tools would be effective, according to materials obtained by Kentucky investigators.

“Minors do not have executive function to control their screen time, while young adults do,” read a TikTok internal document.

TikTok pushes users into filter bubbles like ‘painhub’ and ‘sadnotes’

TikTok is well aware of “filter bubbles.” Internal documents show the company has defined them as when a user “encounters only information and opinions that conform to and reinforce their own beliefs, caused by algorithms that personalize an individual’s online experience.”

The company knows the dangers of filter bubbles. During one internal safety presentation in 2020, employees warned the app “can serve potentially harmful content expeditiously.” TikTok conducted internal experiments with test accounts to see how quickly they descend into negative filter bubbles.

“After following several ‘painhub’ and ‘sadnotes’ accounts, it took me 20 mins to drop into ‘negative’ filter bubble,” one employee wrote. “The intensive density of negative content makes me lower down mood and increase my sadness feelings though I am in a high spirit in my recent life.”

Another employee said, “there are a lot of videos mentioning suicide,” including one asking, “If you could kill yourself without hurting anybody would you?”

In another document, TikTok’s research found that content promoting eating disorders, often called “thinspiration,” is associated with issues such as body dissatisfaction, disordered eating, low self-esteem and depression

Despite these heedings, TikTok’s algorithm still puts users into filter bubbles. One internal document states that users are “placed into ‘filter bubbles’ after 30 minutes of use in one sitting.” The company wrote that having more human moderators to label content is possible, but “requires large human efforts.”

TikTok’s content moderation missing self-harm, eating disorder content

TikTok has several layers of content moderation to weed out videos that violate its Community Guidelines. Internal documents show that the first set of eyes aren’t always a person from the company’s Trust and Safety Team.

The first round typically uses artificial intelligence to flag pornographic, violent or political content. The following rounds use human moderators, but only if the video has a certain amount of views, according to the documents. These additional rounds often fail to take into account certain types of content or age specific rules.

According to TikTok’s own studies, the unredacted filing shows that some suicide and self-harm content escaped those first rounds of human moderation. The study points to self-harm videos that had more than 75,000 views before TikTok identified and removed them.

TikTok also has scattershot policies on content that includes disordered eating, drug use, dangerous driving, gore and violence. While TikTok’s Community Guidelines prohibit much of this content, internal policy documents say the company “allows” the content. Often, the content is findable on TikTok and just not “recommended,” meaning it doesn’t show up in users’ For You feeds or took a lower priority in the algorithm.

The company has talking points around its content moderation work. One example highlighted in the documents details a child sent to the emergency room after attempting a dangerous TikTok challenge. When dealing with the negative fallout from the press, TikTok told employees to use an internal list of talking points that said, “In line with our Community Guidelines, we do not allow content that depicts, promotes, normalizes, or glorifies [dangerous] behavior, including dangerous challenges.”

TikTok acknowledges internally that it has substantial “leakage” rates of violating content that’s not removed. Those leakage rates include: 35.71% of “Normalization of Pedophilia;” 33.33% of “Minor Sexual Solicitation;” 39.13% of “Minor Physical Abuse;” 30.36% of “leading minors off platform;” 50% of “Glorification of Minor Sexual Assault;” and “100% of “Fetishizing Minors.”

TikTok slow to remove users under 13, despite company policy

Kids under 13 cannot open a standard TikTok account, but there is a “TikTok for Younger Users” service that the company says includes strict content guardrails.

It is a vulnerable group of users, since federal law dictates that social media sites like TikTok cannot collect data on children under 13 unless parents are notified about the personal information collected. And even then, social media apps must first obtain verifiable consent from a parent.

In August, the Department of Justice sued TikTok for violating the federal law protecting the data of kids under 13, alleging that the app “knowingly and repeatedly violated kids’ privacy.”

In the internal documents, however, company officials instructed TikTok moderators to use caution before removing accounts of users suspected to be under 13.

An internal document about “younger users/U13” says TikTok instructs its moderators to not take action on reports of underage users unless their account identifies them as under 13.

The previously-redacted portions of the suit suggest the company is aware these young users have accounts – through complaints from parents and teachers — but does little to remove them.

TikTok in crisis mode after report on TikTok Live being ‘strip club filled with 15-year-olds’

After a 2022 report on Forbes about underage kids stripping on TikTok’s live feature, the company launched its own investigation.

That’s when TikTok officials realized there was “a high” number of underage streamers receiving digital currency on the app in the form of a “gift” or “coin” in exchange for stripping — real money converted into a digital currency often in the form of a plush toy or a flower.

TikTok discovered “a significant” number of adults direct messaging underage TikTokkers about stripping live on the platform.

As part of this internal probe, TikTok officials found that in just one month, 1 million “gifts” were sent to kids engaged in “transactional” behavior.

In an understated assessment, one TikTok official concluded: “[O]ne of our key discoveries during this project that has turned into a major challenge with Live business is that the content that gets the highest engagement may not be the content we want on our platform.”

Copyright 2024 NPR

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who made history in 2021 as the first Black person to hold the office, is seeking a second four-year term.

As the incumbent and the only Democrat in the field, she will almost certainly cruise to victory in November. She faces only one serious challenger: Orange County Supervisor Don Wagner, a Republican. No Republican has won a statewide race since 2006.

During her tenure, Weber has faced criticism for California’s slow ballot-counting process — so slow that projected winners of state legislative races are often sworn in before Weber’s office certifies the results. Under state law, county election officials have 30 days to count ballots and conduct audits. Critics, including Wagner, say the time frame undermines voters’ trust in the state’s election integrity.

In an interview with CalMatters, Weber dismissed the concerns as an issue President Donald Trump drummed up to pick on California. She argued it’s important to count every ballot and that most outcomes are known before she certifies the results anyway.

“I know the value of being fast for some folks,” she said. “For me, accuracy is far more important.”

Wagner criticized Weber for doing little to lobby state lawmakers to speed up the ballot count. He said he would roll back the practice of sending universal mail-in ballots to every voter, which the state made permanent during the COVID-19 pandemic, though that would require legislative approval. He said he’d also support legislation to move up the deadline to certify election results.

“Rather than wait 30 days, let's make these changes that are right now causing people of all parties and no party to question: ‘Geez, is that really a fair election?’” Wagner said.

Weber, a former San Diego assemblymember, was appointed to the position by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and later won a full term in 2022. The daughter of Arkansas sharecroppers who fled the Jim Crow South, Weber drew on her family history and campaigned on expanding voter access and boosting voter turnout.

Over the past five years, Weber has overseen the administration of contentious elections that drew the national spotlight, from the recall against Newsom in 2021 to the congressional redistricting fight last November. She said she has focused on expanding voter outreach to rural corners of California and encouraging voter registration on high school and college campuses — something she said she would continue to focus on in her second term if she is re-elected.

Weber has been in court several times defending California election laws. She has sued local governments for violating election law while also defending the state’s election administration against legal challenges from both Democrats and Republicans. She most recently fended off a lawsuit by Trump’s Department of Justice seeking voter registration data in California.

Weber said she fought to defend Californians’ voting rights. “If we were giving (voter information) away like candy, who would trust us … to protect their records?”

Weber has also faced criticism from advocates who say the state hasn’t done enough to make voting accessible. Disability advocates sued her in 2024 — albeit unsuccessfully — over state election laws that do not allow voters with disabilities to return their ballots electronically.

Former Assemblymember Don Wagner, a Republican from Irvine, is running for secretary of state.

(

Rich Pedroncelli

/

AP Photo

)

Wagner, the Republican challenger, wants to present an alternative to Weber, even though he acknowledged that a GOP upset would shock even himself. But if he were elected, Wagner, who also served in the state Assembly, said he’d garner enough national attention to use the office as a “bully pulpit” with the Democratic supermajority in the state Legislature. He said he would require voters to display ID while voting, which also would require a new law. A GOP-backed voter ID ballot initiative on Friday qualified for the November ballot.

Wagner argued that the goal is to restore voters’ trust in state elections.

“I am not one of those Republicans who is going to be out there telling you that unless a Republican wins, the election got stolen,” he told CalMatters. “What I am saying is I believe folks on either side of the political aisle and in the middle question the integrity.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Sometimes, Gloria Gajownik wishes people acted more like bald eagles.

Bald eagle families don't yell at each other (except for the occasional squawk), they don't criticize, and they seem kinder at times than humans, she said. And Gajownik, 71, would know. She has spent the last 15 years watching hours upon hours of bald eagle nest cameras.

Starting in 2011, Gajownik has logged on to the livestream of a Decorah, Iowa, nest after dinner and been glued to the screen until she goes to bed. Now, she monitors a chat room, answering questions and helping track every movement of "mom and dad Decorah" and their two eaglets. She worked for years in the insurance industry, where some people loved their cars more than their families, so, Gajownik said, this is her passion.

"Eagle people — we're different," she said.

Gajownik's immediate family members have died, but she is never alone with her bald eagles and her fellow eagle lovers. "Between the eagles and the people in the chat rooms, I feel like I have a big … extended family," she said.

Spring is primetime for bald eagle nests. Depending on the region, eagles mate and lay eggs sometime in late winter or early spring. If the eggs hatch, the eaglets will fledge around 12 weeks later and start their own lives.

The livestreams allow anyone, anywhere, to watch the birds at any time. They are on screens in DMV waiting rooms, hospitals, workplaces and schools. Diligent eagle monitors, like Gajownik, track every movement of the birds, from their PS (poop shoots) to their feedings to couple-esque moments between the parents.

Gajownik is one of millions of people who watch the more than 50 bald eagle nest cameras across the U.S. and who share countless photos, videos, memes and updates on Facebook groups and in chat rooms. The fans are the backbone of these nests, donating small-dollar amounts to keep some running and tracking every movement of the eagles and their eaglets. It's a dedicated and fiercely loyal group that sees the eagles just as much a part of the online community as the humans who run that community.

And, yes, most of the eagles and their eaglets have names.

"One of the most important aspects of the chat rooms and watching the eagles is that we're sharing it together," Gajownik said. "We watch through thick and thin."

A little bit of bald eagle history

After World War II, extensive use of the insecticide DDT was catastrophic to eagle populations, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. By 1963, only 417 nesting eagle pairs could be found in the U.S.

They were virtually gone from states in the northeast and southeast, said Tina Morris, author of the memoir Return to the Sky: The Surprising Story of How One Woman and Seven Eaglets Helped Restore the Bald Eagle.

In 1976, Morris, then a graduate student at Cornell University, started the first bald eagle reintroduction program in New York, using one of the first eagle cameras to monitor the birds. "Eagles are hard not to be involved with," Morris said. "They're majestic, they're powerful, they're resilient."

Their resilience is an attribute that many camera watchers love. Jenny Voisard, the media manager at Friends of Big Bear Valley, located in the San Bernardino National Forest in Southern California, said the valley's eagles, Jackie and Shadow, have taken over her life. Jackie and Shadow average thousands of livestream viewers daily, including over 30,000 on a recent Monday morning.

"Watching this couple … you're reminded of resilience and how to move forward and kind of how to get through your own life," Voisard said.

Two eaglets at the Big Bear Valley nest look out across the horizon. The nest is famous for the eaglets' parents, Jackie and Shadow.

(

Friends of Big Bear Valley

/

‎

)

Since the reintroduction work, the bald eagle population has soared in the Lower 48 states, with an estimated 71,400 nesting pairs in a 2020 population report, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

"I think back to 1782, when they picked it to be the national symbol. They picked the right bird," Morris said.

So, how do you get a camera into a bald eagle nest? 

"There's no way you're going to get a better look at a bald eagle's nest than on the eagle cam itself," said Randy Robinson, an instructional systems specialist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Robinson works at the National Conservation Training Center in West Virginia's Shenandoah Valley. The camera there follows Scout and Bella and their two newly hatched eaglets.

The camera lets Robinson observe the eagles up close throughout the spring, provide educational opportunities for kids and biweekly "Live! From the NCTC Eagle Nest" chats for the public, and make observational discoveries about the eagles. The nest cameras across the U.S. have a variety of uses, some for research purposes and others for pure curiosity.

To place the camera, a "knuckle-boom" truck with a 100-foot crane lifts a climber equipped with a harness about 95 feet aboveground, Robinson said. The climber, suspended in the air and attached to a rope at the end of the crane, reaches out to put a small security-like camera into the nest.

A climber, about 95 feet in the air, uses a crane to access a bald eagle nest.

(

Ryan Hagerty

/

USFWS - NCTC Eaglecam

)

Today, the more than 50 cameras across the country range from high up in a tree to the edges of ragged cliffs. Placing a small, unnoticeable camera can be tricky and, for some nests, requires a helicopter.

The real citizen scientists

The people flocking to the livestreams have turned them into massive communities, which, at times, save the eagles from potential disaster.

Deb Stecyk, who lives in Alberta, Canada, has monitored eagle nests for over 20 years and focuses most of her free time chronicling the West Virginia eagles' movements in a daily spreadsheet and running a Facebook page.

Stecyk has the camera running on a computer in her house, and she records at night. In April of last year, for the first time in 22 years, the wind ripped the huge nest in West Virginia from its perch. All three of the 4-week-old eaglets died. Stecyk was the first one to tell Robinson.

Heartbroken community members mourned together in the chat rooms. One YouTube commenter said: "this absolutely destroyed me."

This year alone, eagle-eyed viewers helped save an eaglet in Pennsylvania after it swallowed a fishing hook. Fans also alerted the Institute for Wildlife Studies, a nonprofit that runs multiple eagle cameras on islands off the coast of Southern California, that a Fraser Point eaglet fell out of its nest. The eaglet was safely returned to the nest after a heroic rescue operation.

Wildlife experts approach human intervention with extreme caution. Brian Hudgens, the institute's vice president, said the team uses a minimalist approach and considers a variety of factors before intervening.

Robinson, who monitors the West Virginia nest, said that eagle parents will accept eaglets back into the nest after human interaction, despite popular myth. Staff will intervene if there is a human-caused problem, like an eagle swallowing a fishing hook. Humans going into a nest typically scares away the parents and could allow a predator to grab an eaglet, and the disruption could cause an eaglet to fall out of the nest.

Next year, the Institute for Wildlife Studies will ask the citizen scientists watching the cameras to track the prey the birds bring to the nest. "You have this many observers, and watching so closely. It's something we really want to take advantage of," Hudgens said.

"It's like watching a soap opera"

The draw of the cameras includes the inevitable tragedies, dramatic turns, and joyous occasions that happen each year.

A newly hatched baby eaglet in the Decorah, Iowa, nest.

(

Raptor Resource Project

/

‎

)

"It's like watching a soap opera, " said Morris, the author of Return to the Sky. "Except they're birds."

There are cheating scandals, fertility struggles, early deaths, poisoned raccoons, snowstorms and fights with other birds. Most of the excitement revolves around the eaglets' struggle to make it out of the nests alive.

"As soon as you start watching those eagle cams, you recognize that the eagles are very similar to humans," Morris said. "They're monogamous. They're very loyal to their nest sites. They're incredibly good parents."

John Howe, the executive director of the nonprofit Raptor Resource Project, which runs many raptor cameras, including the one observing the Decorah eagles, said: "It's impossible to look at these cameras and not project your own family experience."

Voisard, the media manager at the Big Bear Valley nest, describes Jackie and Shadow lovingly, calling them "an old married couple."

Voisard said she hears dozens of stories about why people are so invested in the livestreams: Some viewers are stuck in an urban jungle with no nature. Some are recovering from tragedy or illness. Some are grandparents hanging out with their grandkids.

"It's very meaningful and emotional," she said. "It's very deep."

Voisard has six computer monitors around her house playing the livestream, so she doesn't miss a second. "It's a little ridiculous," she said, smiling.

But more than just watching the eagles, it's a community. Jackie and Shadow have 2.6 million followers across their official social media platforms. Some 35 contractors and volunteers watch the nest 24/7 to keep track of the birds. Right now, the fans are attempting to raise millions of dollars to keep a development from springing up less than a mile from the nest.

Gajownik, the eagle superfan, lives in Tennessee miles from the rural Iowa eagles she watches. Every year, she goes on a four-day trip to see the birds in person and meet up with her chat room friends.

Gajownik plans to attend the meetup this July. In the meantime, she will continue meticulously watching the eagles, "probably until I die," she added with a chuckle.
Copyright 2026 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Inglewood police will get drones, automated license plate readers and body-worn cameras after the City Council approved purchasing up to $6.3 million in new tech. 

The Inglewood City Council unanimously approved the tech package during its meeting Tuesday, clearing the way for city staff to finalize a contract with police tech company Axon. Mayor James Butts said the city’s public safety has come a long way in recent decades, but that the new equipment will help the city modernize.

“We have to continue to move to the future. We are an international destination,” Butts said.

Inglewood will host a string of international mega-events over the next few years, including this summer’s FIFA World Cup, the 2027 NFL Super Bowl and 2028 Olympic Games. Butts told The LA Local the tech package is the result of months of city research and negotiations with potential tech suppliers dating to last summer. 

The introduction of police body cameras, though, follows a more local controversy: Bryan Bostic’s still-unexplained March 10 death in Inglewood police custody. 

Activists have redoubled calls for body cams in Inglewood since Bostic died; unlike other L.A.-area police agencies, Inglewood officers are not outfitted with cameras. 

Bystander video from Bostic’s arrest shows police forcibly pinning him to the street after a traffic stop, but it remains unclear what caused his death. Investigations by the L.A. County District Attorney’s office into the police use of force during Bostic’s arrest and by the L.A. County Medical Examiner’s office are ongoing. 

Marie Darden, Bostic’s aunt, said after the council meeting she believes the city only moved the tech package forward because family and activists have pressed the issue.

“They’re doing this to try to silence us,” Darden said. 

Darden and others in Bostic’s family spoke during the Tuesday meeting — as they have for weeks — and asked the city to share more information, including the names of the officers involved in Bostic’s arrest.

Butts replied in his own comments during the meeting that the city is still waiting on the county medical examiner’s findings.

“No one wants to know more than I and the council do, what was the cause of death,” Butts said. 

Here’s the new gear Inglewood police will get

Axon will kit out Inglewood police officers with body cameras as well as new Tasers. The department has 186 sworn officers, according to the city. 

Cameras will also be installed in twenty-five vehicles. The Fleet 3 devices have capability to automatically read and look up vehicle license plates. 

The Automated License Plate Recognition, or ALPR, tech will also be rolled out via 98 stationary cameras mounted on light posts and in other locations. The devices Inglewood is purchasing also have livestream video capability, according to Axon’s website.

Stationary ALPR devices scan the license plate of passing vehicles and log their location at a given time. Police tout the ability of ALPR networks to rapidly locate stolen vehicles or fleeing suspects. Critics say they lack oversight and that their data can be too broadly shared, including with federal immigration agents.

In a statement on Tuesday, local activist Najee Ali called on the city council to create protections for the public before putting the new equipment into use.

“There are no guarantees that body camera footage will be released. No independent oversight. No clear rules about who controls the data or how it will be used,” he said. “You cannot expand surveillance without expanding accountability.”

Axon will also provide the city with seven camera drones, including the Skydio 10 and its indoor-focused cousin, the Skydio R10, as well as a suite of software to manage it all. 

Inglewood Police Chief Mark Fronterotta said the tech package puts Inglewood cops on “the cutting edge” and that the tech is expected to roll out between this summer and the end of the year. 

Councilmember Gloria Gray — who attended the meeting remotely — said she hopes the council and community members will get a chance to discuss police training and policy connected to the new systems.

“Technology alone does not create public trust,” she said.