Madison Square Garden (MSG) has forcefully denied a report from WIRED magazine that claimed the iconic New York City venue maintained a secret database assigning "risk scores" to hundreds of celebrities and public figures. In a statement provided to Us Weekly, a spokesperson for MSG declared the reporting "inaccurate and false" and stated that the company is "pursuing legal remedies." The denial came just hours after the explosive article was published on Thursday, July 9, sparking widespread debate about privacy, surveillance, and the treatment of high-profile individuals at one of the world's most famous entertainment venues.
The WIRED report, based on leaked documents from the criminal hacker collective ShinyHunters, alleged that MSG maintained a database of nearly 40,000 celebrities and public figures. According to the article, approximately 1 percent of those individuals—more than 400 people—were assigned a specific risk score, ranging from a simple "flag" (the lowest level) to "banned from MSG." The database allegedly included not only athletes and entertainers but also political figures and other individuals who had interacted with the venue.
The timing of the report was particularly notable. It arrived just weeks after Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce held their star-studded wedding at Madison Square Garden, which was attended by numerous celebrities who were reportedly included in the database. According to the leaked documents, five specific wedding guests—Ice Spice, Selena Gomez, Benson Boone, Michael Strahan, and Mariska Hargitay—were labeled as "low risk." Low risk is the second-lowest tier in the database, below the simple flag but above medium and high risk. Other celebrities allegedly assigned scores include Edie Falco, Tracy Morgan, and Ben Stiller, all described as diehard Knicks fans and also listed as low risk.
Medium risk supposedly included Lily Allen, Anna Wintour, and Morgan Wallen, while high risk encompassed Freddie Gibbs, Lil Jon, DaBaby, and A Boogie Wit da Hoodie. The most severe designation—banned from the venue—was reportedly applied to rapper Lil Tjay. The reasons for these classifications remain unclear, but the report suggested that some labels were linked to critical comments about MSG or its CEO, James Dolan. For instance, rapper Fat Joe was allegedly flagged as "medium risk" due to his association with Jadakiss, who once publicly stated about Dolan: "It seems like he's always more happier when the team sucks."
Madison Square Garden has a long and storied history as a premier entertainment and sports venue in New York City. It is home to the New York Knicks (NBA), the New York Rangers (NHL), and hosts countless concerts, award shows, and special events. Under the leadership of James Dolan, the venue has also become known for its stringent security measures and legal battles over surveillance practices. This is not the first time MSG has been under scrutiny for its approach to guest monitoring. Earlier this year, WIRED published a separate investigation detailing what it called MSG's "surveillance machine," which allegedly obsessively tracked a transgender woman over a two-year period. The report claimed that security logs noted the exact times she took an escalator, purchased a drink, entered a restroom, and hugged an usher—down to the second.
That earlier investigation also suggested that MSG's security operations disproportionately focused on LGBTQ+ individuals. The recent leaked database appears to corroborate this, as it reportedly includes a category for "LGBTQIA" that lists 93 people, among them Ricky Martin and Phoebe Bridgers. Evan Greer, director of the digital rights group Fight for the Future, told WIRED: "They just seem overly interested in queer and trans people in their venue." Such allegations have raised broader questions about data privacy, corporate surveillance, and the ethics of tracking individuals without their knowledge or consent.
The practice of assigning risk scores to celebrities and public figures is not entirely unprecedented. Many venues and event organizers use threat assessment tools to identify potential security risks, often based on past behavior, known affiliations, or public statements. However, the scale and secrecy of MSG's alleged database, combined with its inclusion of non-threatening personal characteristics like sexual orientation, have drawn sharp criticism from civil liberties advocates. The fact that the database was compiled without public knowledge—and only came to light through a hack—adds another layer of concern.
James Dolan, the CEO of Madison Square Garden Entertainment, is a polarizing figure in the sports and entertainment world. He has been known to take legal action against critics and has been involved in several high-profile disputes, including a long-running feud with former Knicks star Charles Oakley. Oakley was infamously ejected from MSG in 2017, leading to a lawsuit and a temporary ban. When asked about Oakley's status in the risk database, an MSG spokesperson told Us Weekly in June that it would be "inaccurate" to say Oakley is banned—though the WIRED report did not mention him by name. The exclusion of Oakley from the leaked data has fueled speculation that the database may not have been comprehensive or that some entries were redacted.
The political implications of the database have also drawn attention. The report indicated that 32 political figures who have supported MSG in the past were listed, though their risk levels were not disclosed. This has raised questions about whether MSG was targeting individuals based on their political affiliations or public stances. Additionally, the database apparently tracked race, gender identity, and sexual orientation for some entries, which could potentially violate anti-discrimination laws if used for denial of service or other adverse actions.
Data privacy experts have weighed in on the controversy, noting that while companies are allowed to maintain internal security databases, the collection of sensitive personal information—such as sexual orientation—without explicit consent may run afoul of regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe or similar laws in the United States, including the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). "If these allegations are true, this kind of tracking goes well beyond typical security measures," said one anonymous expert. "It suggests a level of surveillance that is disproportionate and potentially invasive."
Madison Square Garden's denial of the report has not been accepted by all parties. WIRED stands by its story, and the leaked documents have not been independently verified by other publications. The hacker group ShinyHunters has a reputation for releasing stolen data, but the authenticity of the documents remains a point of contention. MSG's statement did not specify which aspects of the reporting were inaccurate, leaving room for further investigation. The company's pursuit of "legal remedies" suggests it may intend to sue WIRED for defamation, a move that would likely unearth more details about the database if the case proceeds to discovery.
The celebrity community has reacted with a mix of surprise and amusement. Several of the named celebrities have not publicly commented, but social media has buzzed with speculation about who made the list and why. Some have joked about their risk scores, while others have expressed concern about being tracked in such a manner. The incident has also reignited debates about the culture of celebrity surveillance and the lengths to which venues will go to protect their interests.
Madison Square Garden remains one of the most iconic venues in the world, hosting everything from Knicks games to concerts by the biggest names in music. Its security operations are typically seen as top-tier, but this controversy has cast a shadow over its practices. As the story develops, the public will likely learn more about how MSG handles its celebrity guests—and whether the risk scores were ever used to deny access or services. For now, the venue is standing firm against the allegations, but the leaked data has already sparked a broader conversation about privacy, power, and the line between security and surveillance.
Source:Yahoo News News