There was an S on my boarding pass today. S for Search, S for Suspicious; I’m not sure what it stands for but when there’s an S on your boarding pass they’ll single you out and search you specially. A friendly check in man once explained that the airline automatically selects S passengers – if you buy your ticket less than n days before the flight, or pay with cash, or have a one-way ticket, you’ll get an S for sure. I suppose either there are other rules that covered me or they assign some Ses at random.

Once siphoned into a special searching space I was asked to sit while my shoes were x-rayed, my bags were perfunctorily searched and a metal-detecting wand passed along my body. I’ve been searched as closely in ordinary security checks. It wasn’t the searching that was bad. It was being stamped as Suspicious that made my adreneline rise till I felt guilty and angry though I still forced a smile that kept the security guards smiling too. When I got on the plane and showed the flight attendent my boarding pass I cringed to know that she too saw the S.

Most of the time I’m fortunate that I can pretend I’m a free citizen in an open and trusting society. Crossing borders, that illusion becomes very thin.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

2 thoughts on “S

  1. Elin

    Oofs:-( Sounds like the scarlet A, kind of.
    Perhaps they marked you because you travel frequently. I wonder if we’ll ever have a border free society. We’re blurring borders with the www and emerging kinds of digital societies – being tied to and identified by the location of where we once were born is beginning to feel like an old fashioned idea.

  2. Jill

    Borders do seem strange, doesn’t it? My Australian passport certainly doesn’t express my full identity. Probably just as well.

    I searched Google for “S on my boarding pass” and discovered the S stands for Selectee, and either it means that I’m on a list of suspicious people and will henceforth be checked every time I fly in the US, or it means I’m a randomly selected person intended to even out the discrimination inherent in the Selectee list – because of course, having a muslimish name gets you on that list faster. I don’t know whether they randomly add people to the list too as antidiscrimination. Ha.

    I hope I’m not on the list. It would totally suck to get an S on my boarding pass every single time.

    It’s called CAPPS-II profiling. The Practical Nomad blogs about this kind of stuff all the time (very critically). Dontspyonus.com likewise has heaps. The Electronic Privacy Information Center has what appears to be more objective or at least better documented information than the emotional dontspyonus.com.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.