redesigned airport security
I flew out of BWI, where fortune guided me to the new, remodeled security checkpoint. The waiting area was surrounded by gently-lit wall panels, and the retractable barrier ropes were thick and soft-looking. Soothing ambient music was playing. There was a big sign welcoming travelers and explaining that TSA had based this design on comments they'd received over the last few years, and they hoped to hear from us if we could think of other ways to make the screening more pleasant. That struck the right note with me -- I bear a special bitterness towards those "hi, we searched your luggage" tags you sometimes find when you unpack, which pointedly don't solicit comments and instead direct you to website so you can learn how to pack your luggage to make it easier for them to search.
As the line moved along, there was a series of small posters titled "you may have more in common with your screener than you think!" They had photos and profiles of some of the screening people (presumably) working at this airport, with personalized descriptions and stories about how they work to make the team run smoothly. I guess the point was to remind disgruntled travelers that the people searching them are ordinary folks doing their jobs, and not the Gestapo. (but then again, isn't the terrifying thing about the gestapo that it was made up of ordinary people?)
There was a little area designated for people who needed to step to the side and repack, with a recycling bin for anything you had to throw away. I think they even had free ziploc bags! (I've seen that before, but it was always ad hoc and I think the screeners were bringing them themselves). They'd also rearranged the area where you empty your pockets into bins, so that one person who takes a long time to unpack doesn't stall the whole line. And the X-ray machine used a flat conveyor belt instead of a slanted one, so you didn't have to wince as you saw the bin with your computer tumble down the rollers and slam into someone's suitcase.
One possibility is that this was all camouflage for the biggest change, which was one of those new imaging devices that use non-ionizing radiation to let them see you naked. There was a nice sign explaining how it works and why it's safe (two key phrases: "less energy than a cell phone" and "millimeter wavelength"). They weren't using it at the time, so I didn't get to try it out. I know some people are angry about this system, but I say that the main problems with airport security are racial and gender profiling, insane and irrational rules, and various forms of harassment, and compared to that their choice of technology is small potatoes.
They'd clearly redesigned the training for screeners as well. It's the first time I've ever been at an airport security checkpoint with no shouted orders or implied threats. Everyone spoke quietly and courteously, and when I made mistakes they helped me quickly. They haven't changed the rules -- I still had to take off my shoes and unpack my computer, and they still threw away the multitool I accidentally left in my backpack -- but at least they were nice about it.
I'm quite pleased by all this. It's true that a user-friendly focus-grouped police state is still a police state, but the ugly spectacle of airport security has always been part of my dislike for it. I feel like the shouting, the rush, and the arbitrary rules were designed to increase people's sense of imminent threat and of protection through strength. The new system feels like the point is to reduce inconvenience for travelers, which doesn't seem manipulative in the same way.
PS - I'm open to convincing that the naked-imaging scanner is more objectionable than I suggest here. I might especially have a different view if I were female, given the different social significance attached to viewing my body. On the other hand, part of my reasoning is that a screener using that machine will probably see about 480 asses a day (or 960 breasts). They've got to get pretty jaded. Also, in my experience the same people who take creepy amounts of pleasure in contemplating attractive people's bodies claim to experience disgust and alarm if they have to look at someone they don't find attractive. Being a screener would be a losing proposition for those folks. (more prosaically, they did offer a pat-down option for people who refused the scanner).
As the line moved along, there was a series of small posters titled "you may have more in common with your screener than you think!" They had photos and profiles of some of the screening people (presumably) working at this airport, with personalized descriptions and stories about how they work to make the team run smoothly. I guess the point was to remind disgruntled travelers that the people searching them are ordinary folks doing their jobs, and not the Gestapo. (but then again, isn't the terrifying thing about the gestapo that it was made up of ordinary people?)
There was a little area designated for people who needed to step to the side and repack, with a recycling bin for anything you had to throw away. I think they even had free ziploc bags! (I've seen that before, but it was always ad hoc and I think the screeners were bringing them themselves). They'd also rearranged the area where you empty your pockets into bins, so that one person who takes a long time to unpack doesn't stall the whole line. And the X-ray machine used a flat conveyor belt instead of a slanted one, so you didn't have to wince as you saw the bin with your computer tumble down the rollers and slam into someone's suitcase.
One possibility is that this was all camouflage for the biggest change, which was one of those new imaging devices that use non-ionizing radiation to let them see you naked. There was a nice sign explaining how it works and why it's safe (two key phrases: "less energy than a cell phone" and "millimeter wavelength"). They weren't using it at the time, so I didn't get to try it out. I know some people are angry about this system, but I say that the main problems with airport security are racial and gender profiling, insane and irrational rules, and various forms of harassment, and compared to that their choice of technology is small potatoes.
They'd clearly redesigned the training for screeners as well. It's the first time I've ever been at an airport security checkpoint with no shouted orders or implied threats. Everyone spoke quietly and courteously, and when I made mistakes they helped me quickly. They haven't changed the rules -- I still had to take off my shoes and unpack my computer, and they still threw away the multitool I accidentally left in my backpack -- but at least they were nice about it.
I'm quite pleased by all this. It's true that a user-friendly focus-grouped police state is still a police state, but the ugly spectacle of airport security has always been part of my dislike for it. I feel like the shouting, the rush, and the arbitrary rules were designed to increase people's sense of imminent threat and of protection through strength. The new system feels like the point is to reduce inconvenience for travelers, which doesn't seem manipulative in the same way.
PS - I'm open to convincing that the naked-imaging scanner is more objectionable than I suggest here. I might especially have a different view if I were female, given the different social significance attached to viewing my body. On the other hand, part of my reasoning is that a screener using that machine will probably see about 480 asses a day (or 960 breasts). They've got to get pretty jaded. Also, in my experience the same people who take creepy amounts of pleasure in contemplating attractive people's bodies claim to experience disgust and alarm if they have to look at someone they don't find attractive. Being a screener would be a losing proposition for those folks. (more prosaically, they did offer a pat-down option for people who refused the scanner).