Sign in

Washington Privacy Organizers

@wa-privacy.net
277 followers 157 following 1.1K posts

It's time for real privacy protections in Washington state! Skeets by @jdp23.thenexus.today. See wa-privacy.net for more -- although the 2026 leg session has been so hectic we haven't updated it yet

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Deflock Yakima @deflockyakima.bsky.social · 01/10/2026
Our website is now live! Fill out the survey below. www.deflockyakima.org
042
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Groundwork Collaborative @groundwork.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
Walmart can send out as many letters walking back their use of surveillance pricing as they want. But it's not enough, @lindsayowens.bsky.social told @inc.com. If Walmart doesn’t intend to use the technology, it should stop collecting that data and withdraw its pending patent applications.
inc.com
Walmart Says It Won't 'Price the Person.' Now Small Businesses May Have an Opening
After customers raised concerns about alleged targeted strategies, Walmart's CEO said the retailer does not charge shoppers based on their personal data.
073
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Reuters Legal @legal.reuters.com · 30/09/2026
A federal judge in Manhattan blocked New York state from enforcing a first-of-its-kind law prohibiting landlords and real estate industry professionals from using algorithmic pricing tools to set, and potentially inflate, residential rents.
reut.rs
Judge blocks New York rent-setting software ban
A federal judge in Manhattan blocked New York state from enforcing a first-of-its-kind law prohibiting landlords and real estate industry professionals ​from using algorithmic pricing tools to set, and potentially inflate, residential ‌rents.
064
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
EPIC @epic.org · 28/09/2026
EPIC and consumer groups are urging the FTC to crack down on surveillance pricing, a practice in which companies charge different people different prices based on their personal data. Telling consumers it's happening isn't enough. The practice should be prohibited. epic.org/epic-and-con...
epic.org
EPIC and Consumer Groups Urge FTC to Treat Surveillance Pricing as an Unfair Practice
144
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Washington AI Resistance @wa-air.bsky.social · 26/09/2026
Big Tech IS shady. Resist, and send a message to officials and hopefuls by planning a data center moratorium action for October 4! We need YOU to fight for this world with us: actionnetwork.org/event_campai...
Poster with three guys in dark trench coats that say Sam, Elon, and Dario, with larger text that says Big Tech is Shady, Resist AI.
044
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Open Markets Institute @openmarkets.bsky.social · 25/09/2026
NEW: We've urged the FTC to scrutinize the use of surveillance pricing as an unfair method of competition & take a closer look at AI pricing systems. 📩 Find our comment letter here: www.openmarketsinstitute.org/publications...
openmarketsinstitute.org
OMI Urges FTC to Crack Down on Surveillance Pricing as AI Gives Corporations New Tools to Exploit Consumers — Open Markets Institute
In a comment letter to the FTC, Open Markets Institute urges the Commission to use the full extent of the law to crack down on surveillance-enabled pricing.
035
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
James everything is analog @analogist.net · 21/09/2026
Failed former councilmembers Sara Nelson + Tanya Woo + the lead for the Seattle chapter of neoliberals (“New Liberals”) + the government relations guy at PEMCO and Vulkan have joined forces to create an AI-generated spin site to aggregate pro-big-business, messaging against progressive city bills
Sara Nelson, Tanya Woo, Erik Nielsen, Dan McGradyAnti-union pro-capital messaging on this new site

Turning the tide toward accountable governance at
Seattle City Hall
IN THE PRESS
OPINION
ABOUT
ARCHIVE

Seattle City Hall, explained plainly: tracking legislation so you can make a difference.
CB 121267
COMMITTEE VOTE
• 2026-07-20
Mayor's "Fair and
Transparent Pricing_ill likely to raise grocery store prices
UFCW-backed CB 121267 would preserve grocery store worker jobs but could result in higher grocery store prices and the elimination of online and in-store discounts.
STAKES
So who benefits? Primarily UFCW 3000. It takes a lot of time and labor to change traditional shelf prices by hand so this is really a job (and member dues) protection effort.
STAKES
Who loses? Grocery shoppers and residents.
Here's why: 1) Grocery stores will bear the additional cost of compliance requirements (including strict record-keeping and disclosures) and could get caught up in lengthy, expensive lawsuits - and those costs will be passed on to consumers in higher prices. 2) Stores could also discontinue loyalty-club discounts because the bill's exclusionary language is too vague to risk the legal exposure - so no more discounts at the register. 3) Seattleites could end up living in food deserts after their neighborhood grocery store shuts its doors because the higher operational costs and the risk of said lawsuits wasn't worth their 1-
3% margins.
54217
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Emily M. Bender @emilymbender.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
There seems to be a coordinated talking point among the EA folks that the "standard" approach to "AI" on "the Left" is "AI is just stochastic parrots so no need to worry about it". (Sorry for all the scare quotes, but y'know) >>
7408109
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
South Seattle Emerald @soseaemerald.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
COLUMN: Meta's new teen account limits may be easy to get around. Two Seattle students tell Di Zhang what the rules miss — and why teens should help shape them. Read here: soseaem.org/47dL49w #Seattle
soseaem.org
COLUMN | Meta's New Social Media Rules Should Have Started With Teens
A Seattle teen already found a way around Instagram's age check. Di Zhang argues that young people should help shape the rules meant to protect them.
032
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 24/09/2026
Surveillance pricing bills allow that, and they just prohibit individualized pricing. It’s not clear just how much surveillance pricing is happening today in brick-and-mortar stores … but they wouldn’t be lobbying so hard against these laws if they weren’t planning on doing a lot more of it.
111
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 24/09/2026
Yeah, at Safeway or Kroger’s / QFC, people like me who don’t use apps or even sign up for loyalty programs pay more (which is why I don’t shop there, but I’m lucky enough to have other options fatally close). But I think people understand the trade off there: discounts in return for your data
110
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 24/09/2026
Today, algorithmic pricing in stores happens via the apps. Somebody in one of the hearings in Seattle talked about comparing prices in the app with other shoppers and seeing that they’re different. They’re working on smart shopping carts that could show different prices but it’s not deployed yet
111
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal @jayapal.house.gov · 24/09/2026
Great news! Seattle is leading the way and is now the first city to ban surveillance pricing, which has let large grocery retailers track our personal data to set individualized prices.
king5.com
823947
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Washington State Labor Council AFL-CIO @wslc.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
Seattle has secured the country’s strongest ban on surveillance pricing, stopping grocers from using personal data to charge different prices for the same products.“My coworkers & the customers we serve proudly stood together to stop this scheme,”-Kristen Wilder, UFCW 3000. ow.ly/iBG950ZQL2T
1102
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
wavotingjustice.bsky.social @wavotingjustice.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
Don't panic! Just vote smart. Yes, federal changes to the USPS caused more WA ballots than usual to arrive late in the mail. But if you follow these 3 steps, your vote should be locked in this year. See our FAQ for all the updated guidance: wavotingjustice.org/voter-suppre...
002
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Congrats and thanks to all of you -- really outstanding work, and an ordinance Seattle can really be proud of!
010
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
AMR - Alexis Mercedes Rinck @alexis4seattle.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
We did it!! Thanks to your advocacy and support, Seattle City Council just passed our historic legislation banning surveillance pricing on groceries with no corporate amendments.
313011
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
The Nexus of Privacy @thenexusofprivacy.net · 23/09/2026
A big win for a broad coalition, a bad day for big grocery chains and Big Tech! Seattle is the first city in the country to band surveillance pricing for groceries, and it's the first surveillance pricing ban to include a private right of action. thenexusofprivacy.net/a-big-win-fo...
thenexusofprivacy.net
A big win for a broad coalition, a bad day for big grocery chains and Big Tech!
Seattle City Council votes 7-2 to ban surveillance pricing for groceries -- the first city in the country with a ban!
095
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
pnwpolicyangel aka Angelita 👼 @pnwpolicyangel.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
Shout out to @alexis4seattle.bsky.social for holding it down in Seattle and passing policies that serve the people
3651
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
pnwpolicyangel aka Angelita 👼 @pnwpolicyangel.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
Seattle is gonna mog of the hell out of Portland with their surveillance pricing ordinance because for some reason, electeds living in the so called bastion of progressivism Portland Oregon, cannot close loopholes that allow the price fixing Smdh
315514
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Yeah really. In my public comment I described it as giving lobbyists a mulligan to undo all the Council's good work by pressing the state legislature to pass something weaker. But "clarifying amendment" is often a synonym for "loophole".
010
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
And that's it! The Seattle Fair Pricing and Transparency Ordinance passes 7-2, and surveillance pricing is now banned in Seattle!!!!!!
1177
Reposted by Washington Privacy Organizers
mlklabor.bsky.social @mlklabor.bsky.social · 23/09/2026
🚨 SEATTLE HAS BANNED SURVEILLANCE PRICING ON GROCERIES! Grocery workers led the way to win this groundbreaking protection against AI price hikes.
213730
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
And that's it! The Seattle Fair Pricing and Transparency Ordinance passes 7-2, and surveillance pricing is now banned in Seattle!!!!!!
1177
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Council President Hollingsworth thanks sponsors. Wants to highlight that we want to support businesses, working on stores at 23rd and Jackson, replacing the Fred Mayer in Lake City. Are we ready? We are!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
This will be the strongest policy in the country. Asks for a yes vote for privacy and for affordability!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
The staffers really did a great job on this -- as they so often do! Thanks UFCW 3000, WA People's Privacy, MLK Labor and the 30 other organizations
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Noest that they worked i partnership with data privacy advocates, consumer advocates, workers, and yes even grocery associations. Thanks co-sponsors Foster and Saka, Tomaso and Jasmine from central staff, and all of her team, Mayor Wilson and her team
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
AMR: "the price of groceries should be based on the product, not what an algorithm thinks somebody is and what they will pay". "No company invests millions of dollars just to give people discounts."
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Foster: "I'm really proud of us for taking action." Thanks CM Rinck and her staff. Also excited to vote yes!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Goes back to the committee testimony of somebody (I think from AI Now) who looked at the price on her phone and andother person's phone and they were different. That isn't right! "It shouldn't be that the value of somebody's data determines the price they're getting"
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Foster, also a co-sponsor. So important to protect residents, including consumer protections. When others fail, it's important for municipalities to lead, and that's what this bill does! Thanks people who were involved, including frontline workers at @ufcw3000.bsky.social
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Saka talks aout all the food deserts in D1. "My constituents shouldn't pay more just because predatory corpoations can get away with it!" Deliberations made the bill better and more precise. Firmly aligned with its goals, proud to be cosposor, excited to vote yes. Thanks Mayor, co-sposnors.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Saka: "The time is now!" Thjis legislation does not, DOES NOT, ban discounts and loyalty programs. It simply ends predatory tactics that inflate prices and undermine trust. Improves affordability for everyone.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Lin: Surveillance pricing is creepy. Hopefully after today's vote it will be illegal, at least for this one industry. Hopes it expands to other areas, and to the state and federal level
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Notes that it's not a partisan issue -- a KIRO reporter supports it, so does Consumer Reports. "Discounts existed long before surveillance pricing", yeah really!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Lin: concerned about how our data is used, bought and sold witout consent -- and then to add insult to injury used to boost prices. This bill doesn't address the first, but does addresses the second.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Lin thanks the public for staying through this long session. Accurately describes all the @ufcw3000.bsky.social workers here as whistleblowers, thanks them for standing up for all of us.
110
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Says it would be better to do at the state level, and maybe that will happen. Very concerned about affordability.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Rivera: also concerned about affordability, a lot of folks rely on loyalty programs. Suggests that the folks who are likely to be hurt by the bill are the blue-collar workers ... but wait all the unions are supporting this bill!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Kettle: concerned about affordability, tarrifs, Iran, property taxes, county sales taxes, utility rates. "Yes I can afford it but my concerns are people who are more vulnerable." But everybody representing vulnerable communities who spoke supports the ordinance!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Amendment H passes 7-2, Rinck and Foster voting no. Kettle is happy. Now on to the final bill!
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
AMR agrees she loves reports, but asks about the cost. Tomaso says Mayor's office says there would be a fiscal impact, not clear how much. President Hollingsworth says data is good. CM Strauss thanks CM Kettle for his good spirit and humor. A polite round of applause for Kettle
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Amendment H. Kettle: "I know you all love reports! Here's a chance to let one amendment of mine pass. I know deep inside you can support this." seattle.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=...
Effect: This amendment would request that the Executive analyze the price of groceries, reward
and loyalty program availability, and number of covered retailers in Seattle and report to Council
on these findings on an annual basis while this ordinance is in effect.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Amendment G. AMR asks what guarantees there are that the state legislation would be as strong as Seattle's? None. SHe asks for a no vote. Amendment G fails 7-2.
Effect: This amendment would clarify that this Chapter would be superseded and
unenforceable upon the effective date of any law passed by the State of Washington regulating
the use of algorithmic-based price discrimination by covered retailers.
200
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
As somebody who sent that mail, I didn't disrespect her intent, just the net impact! Amendment F passes 8-1-, only AMR voting no.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
President Hollingsworth highlights the issue of retail theft and loss prevention. Says that she felt the emails talking about how the emails saying this would enable DHS didn't respect her intent. The goal here is to clarify that these technolgoies are available for loss prevention.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
Now amendment F. seattle.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=... Tomaso notes that this responds to an issue that term "electronic surveillance technologies" wasn't defined in the bill
Effect: This amendment adds a new section to clarify that nothing in the bill prevents
businesses from using technology for the sole purpose of security, loss prevention, safety, fraud
prevention or detection, or compliance with law
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Kettle says he doesn't do hypotheticals, but what if they found out something happened in year 4? Amendment E fails 7-2.
100
Washington Privacy Organizers @wa-privacy.net · 23/09/2026
CM Rivera Asks about why it was considered at the municipal level and not the state level. Tomaso wisely defers to sponsor and mayor. Notes that there was a state-level bill that was unsuccessful (yeah because lobbyists killed it).
100