Editing Samsung TVs

{{ProductLineCargo
|ArticleType=Product
|Category=Television,Smart TV
|Company=Samsung
|Description=Samsung smart TVs collect viewing data every 500ms, cheated on reviewer benchmarks, and display ads that can't be fully disabled
|InProduction=Yes
|ReleaseYear=2008
|Website=https://www.samsung.com/us/televisions-home-theater/tvs/
}}
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Samsung TVs}}

'''Samsung smart TVs''' have been the subject of multiple lawsuits, regulatory complaints, & consumer backlash over data collection practices, benchmark manipulation, & post-purchase advertising. In December 2025, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Samsung & four other TV manufacturers, alleging their smart TVs collected detailed viewing data without consumers' knowledge or consent.<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit">{{Cite web |title=Texas sues 5 smart TV manufacturers over data collection practices |url=https://therecord.media/texas-sues-5-smart-tv-makers-over-acr-tech |website=The Record |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> Samsung settled in February 2026, agreeing to halt data collection without express consent.<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement">{{Cite web |title=Samsung updates ACR privacy practices after Texas sues TV manufacturers |url=https://therecord.media/samsung-updates-acr-privacy-practices-texas |website=The Record |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

== Incidents ==

=== Automatic content recognition surveillance ===

{{Main|Texas Attorney General sues multiple TV makers over ACR user data collection}}

Samsung smart TVs use [[wikipedia:Automatic_content_recognition|Automatic Content Recognition (ACR)]], which Samsung brands as "Viewing Information Services." According to the Texas AG's petition, the technology captures screenshots of the TV display every 500 milliseconds, regardless of the content source.<ref name="petition-samsung">{{Cite web |date=December 15, 2025 |title=State of Texas v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Original Petition |url=https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Samsung%20TV%20Petition%20Filed.pdf |publisher=Office of the Texas Attorney General |format=PDF |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> ACR doesn't just track Samsung apps. It also captures content routed through HDMI ports from cable boxes, game consoles, DVD players, & devices casting via Apple AirPlay.<ref name="petition-samsung" /><ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit" />

On December 15, 2025, Paxton filed separate lawsuits against Samsung, Sony, LG, Hisense, & TCL under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit" /><ref name="iapp-acr">{{Cite web |title=Automated content recognition technology takes privacy enforcement spotlight |url=https://iapp.org/news/a/automated-content-recognition-technology-takes-privacy-enforcement-spotlight |website=IAPP |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> The Texas AG alleged that Samsung used dark patterns to prevent consumers from opting out, requiring consumers to navigate buried settings menus to disable data collection that took a single click to enable during setup.<ref name="petition-samsung" /><ref name="privacyguides-settlement">{{Cite web |date=2026-03-02 |title=Samsung Forced to Halt Data Collection in TVs in Texas Without "Express Consent" |url=https://www.privacyguides.org/news/2026/03/02/samsung-forced-to-halt-data-collection-in-tvs-in-texas-without-express-consent/ |website=Privacy Guides |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

Samsung became the first of the five manufacturers to settle, on February 26, 2026.<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> The settlement required Samsung to halt all ACR data collection without express consent & rewrite its consent screens to be "clear and conspicuous."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Samsung stated it "shares the Texas Attorney General's goal of promoting transparent and consumer-friendly privacy practices" while maintaining that its TVs "do not spy on customers."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Sony, LG, Hisense, & TCL had not settled as of the IAPP's January 2026 report.<ref name="iapp-acr" />

A separate federal class action, ''DiGiacinto v. Samsung Electronics America Inc.'' (Case No. 1:26-cv-00196, S.D.N.Y.), was filed on January 9, 2026, by five Samsung TV owners alleging the company collected & disclosed their viewing data without consent.<ref name="pacer-digiacinto">{{Cite web |title=DIGIACINTO et al v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/62368800/DIGIACINTO_et_al_v_Samsung_Electronics_America,_Inc |website=PACER Monitor |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

In 2017, the FTC settled with [[Vizio]] for $2.2 million after Vizio collected second-by-second viewing data on 11 million TVs without consent & sold it to advertisers with demographic information appended.<ref name="ftc-vizio">{{Cite web |date=2017-02-06 |title=VIZIO to Pay $2.2 Million to FTC, State of New Jersey to Settle Charges It Collected Viewing Histories on 11 Million Smart Televisions without Users' Consent |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-new-jersey-settle-charges-it-collected-viewing-histories-11-million |publisher=Federal Trade Commission |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> The FTC required Vizio to delete the data & obtain affirmative express consent for future collection.<ref name="ftc-vizio" />

=== Benchmark manipulation ===

In June 2022, reviewers at HDTVTest & FlatpanelsHD discovered that Samsung's S95B QD-OLED & QN95B Neo QLED TVs were programmed to detect standard reviewer test patterns & artificially inflate performance measurements.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark">{{Cite web |last=Larsen |first=Rasmus |date=2022-06-03 |title=Samsung caught cheating in TV benchmarks, promises software update |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1654235588 |website=FlatpanelsHD |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark">{{Cite web |title=Samsung caught using algorithms to mislead reviewers about display accuracy |url=https://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/Samsung-caught-using-algorithms-to-mislead-reviewers-about-display-accuracy |website=HDTVTest |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

Professional TV calibrators use a standardized 10% window to measure HDR brightness & color accuracy. Samsung's firmware detected this specific window size & altered the TV's output.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> On the QN95B, the TV boosted its peak brightness by approximately 80%, from a sustainable 1,300 nits to 2,300 nits, by sending short bursts of power into the miniLED backlight that couldn't be maintained without damaging the panel.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /> On both models, the Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) & luminance tracking were adjusted to appear accurate to testing equipment.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" />

Reviewers bypassed the cheat by switching to a non-standard 9% window. The firmware didn't recognize it, & the TV displayed its actual performance.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> Vincent Teoh of HDTVTest first identified the issue during his S95B review; Rasmus Larsen of FlatpanelsHD confirmed it on the QN95B.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" />

Samsung denied cheating, stating: "Samsung Electronics does not use any algorithm for the purpose of yielding specific test results."<ref name="techhive-benchmark">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV benchmark brouhaha: Scandalous cheating, or tempest in a teapot? |url=https://www.techhive.com/article/784413/samsung-tv-benchmarks.html |website=TechHive |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> Samsung then pushed firmware update version 1211 for the S95B, which eliminated the discrepancy between 9% & 10% window measurements.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" />

This wasn't Samsung's first benchmark manipulation. Samsung was previously caught artificially boosting processor performance on the Galaxy Note 3 & Galaxy S4 smartphones when they detected benchmarking software was running.<ref name="register-benchmark">{{Cite web |date=2022-06-15 |title=Samsung accused of cheating on hardware benchmarks -- again |url=https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/15/samsung_tv_benchmark/ |website=The Register |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> Samsung settled the resulting class action in 2019 for $13.4 million, paying Galaxy S4 owners $10 each.<ref name="register-s4-settlement">{{Cite web |date=2019-09-30 |title=Ever own a Galaxy S4? Congrats, you're $10 richer as Samsung agrees payout over dodgy speed tests |url=https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/30/samsung_benchmarking_settlement/ |website=The Register |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> The settlement required Samsung to stop using benchmark-manipulating code in its smartphones for three years, after which Samsung was free to resume the practice.<ref name="register-s4-settlement" />

=== Voice recording privacy controversy ===

In February 2015, CNET's Chris Matyszczyk reported that Samsung's smart TV privacy policy warned: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."<ref name="cnet-voice">{{Cite web |last=Matyszczyk |first=Chris |date=2015-02-08 |title=Samsung's warning: Our Smart TVs record your living room chatter |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/samsungs-warning-our-smart-tvs-record-your-living-room-chatter/ |website=CNET |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> The third-party contractor processing the voice data was Nuance Communications, a voice-to-text company.<ref name="computerworld-epic">{{Cite web |title=EPIC files FTC complaint about Samsung's Smart TV 'surveillance' |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/1618951/epic-files-ftc-complaint-about-samsungs-smart-tv-surveillance.html |website=Computerworld |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

Samsung published a blog post on February 10, 2015 titled "Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations."<ref name="samsung-response-voice">{{Cite web |date=2015-02-10 |title=Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations |url=https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-smart-tvs-do-not-monitor-living-room-conversations |website=Samsung Newsroom |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> Samsung clarified that voice data was only transmitted when users pressed an activation button on the remote control to perform a search, & updated its privacy policy to explain this mechanism.<ref name="samsung-response-voice" />

EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center) filed a formal complaint with the FTC on February 24, 2015, alleging Samsung violated the FTC Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), & the Cable Communications Policy Act.<ref name="epic-complaint">{{Cite web |title=Samsung "SmartTV" Complaint |url=https://epic.org/documents/samsung-smarttv-complaint/ |publisher=Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> EPIC alleged that Samsung routinely intercepted private communications in the home & marketed its smart TVs to children under 13 without obtaining parental consent as required by COPPA.<ref name="epic-complaint" />

A security researcher then discovered that Samsung was transmitting some voice recordings unencrypted, in plain text.<ref name="computerworld-epic" /> Samsung later conceded it had not deployed the software necessary to encrypt these transmissions.<ref name="epic-complaint" />

In March 2017, WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" data dump revealed that the CIA had developed a hacking tool codenamed "Weeping Angel" that targeted Samsung Smart TVs.<ref name="cbsnews-weeping-angel">{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks says CIA hacked Samsung smart TVs |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-hacked-samsung-smart-tvs-wikileaks-vault-7/ |website=CBS News |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> According to the leaked engineering notes, the tool was co-developed with MI5, installed via USB, & placed the TV into a "Fake-Off" mode where the screen appeared powered down but the microphone remained active, recording room audio.<ref name="wikileaks-weeping-angel">{{Cite web |title=Weeping Angel (Extending) Engineering Notes |url=https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_12353643.html |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

=== Post-purchase advertising ===

Samsung displays advertisements on smart TVs that consumers have already purchased.<ref name="flatpanelshd-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1583755244 |website=FlatpanelsHD |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref> Users have reported ads appearing on the home screen & during normal TV use.<ref name="flatpanelshd-ads" />

Samsung operates a dedicated advertising division, Samsung Ads, which sells targeted advertising across its TV ecosystem. Samsung Ads promotes access to "TV viewing data from the world's #1 Smart TV footprint" & first-party data from Samsung devices to help advertisers reach audiences.<ref name="samsung-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung Ads |url=https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/ |publisher=Samsung |access-date=2026-04-04}}</ref>

== See also ==

* [[Texas Attorney General sues multiple TV makers over ACR user data collection]]
* [[Vizio]]
* [[Right to Repair]]

== References ==

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Samsung]]
[[Category:Privacy]]
[[Category:Smart TVs]]