Ethical Issues in Social Media. within western society. It offers an alternative to mainstream media and past methods to

Transcription

1 Lauren Armstrong CS323 Craig Beam Due: March 29 th, 2012 Ethical Issues in Social Media Social media has become an integral part to communication and culture practices within western society. It offers an alternative to mainstream media and past methods to communication. It has provided an easy, effective way to communicate, access to information and, more recently, business development. However, there are many ethical issues that can be associated with the recent expansion in social media. The compromise of privacy, free speech, security, truth and objectivity are only a few of the issues that this paper will focus on. This paper will look critically into issues surrounding social media, outline cases involving social media and how an awareness of publically shared information through social media is vital to our information-rich society. The recent increase and development of social media and networking sites has changed the way in which society operates. Through Facebook, twitter, LinkedIn, Youtube and Myspace to name a few, society is able to regulate, monitor and shape the information available to the public. Social networking makes a global community for those involved. Communication is not impacted by distance and people can stay informed from all around the world. Not only can they edit information on themselves, they can include pictures, links to websites and constant updates to keep friends and family informed. Where the media use to be responsible for shaping stories, news events and giving commentary, the public is now able to take control. This not only changes the way 1

2 the public receives information, but changes the entire process all together. Individuals are increasingly more active in the making and reporting of news than ever before. The public has the opportunity to participate over their social networking sites, taking power away from large corporations who previously decided what was shared to the public. In turn, this also introduces problems not experienced before social media. Instead of telling one or two people information personally, posting it on their wall or tweeting it allows for all their friends and followers to read it as well. People give up more information on social networking sites than they would to friends or even strangers. The information individuals post is available to a wider audience than ever before, which means that personal updates are public for anyone to find. Pictures and information can be saved on computers and retrieved at a later date. Since the Internet, and more specifically social networks, are such a large community, people have many different values and ideas of what is and is not ethical. This introduces an array of problems from personal privacy and security to free speech to corporate ethics and social media in the workplace. What is legal is not always ethical (Beam, January 6, 2012) and many issues arise due to the lack of correlation between these two terms. One of the benefits to social media and networking is the free speech it enables. Citizens are able to control what they say and show, within reason, on their social networking profile. This gives them the opportunity to voice opinions, questions or daily activities for others to see. In this context, the issue lies more within the content being exposed than the channel itself. This means that social networking may enable free speech but what is said is what creates the issues within this medium. But nowhere in 2

3 the First Amendment does it say that freedom of speech is limited only to ideas and symbols that further freedom, dignity and nonviolence (Hentoff, 49). There are always people with different morals, beliefs and different ethics codes; therefore, freedom of speech enables alternative viewpoints. Where some people follow mainstream media and mainstream ideologies, some oppose them. The whole point of social media is the ability to control the world as individuals see it. The opposition of a certain political campaign or celebrity action may spark interest with people around the globe and their ability to participate online through free speech allows them to provide their view to others. This has both positive and negative associations as alternative views are sometimes beneficial in informing, they can also be controversial. It becomes a problem when free speech takes away other peoples rights. Areas of controversy in social media include criticizing the government, nudity or pornography, promoting racism or hatred and lying or making untrue claims about an individual (Beam, February 3, 2012). Promoting racism and hatred, and criticizing or lying about an individual are particularly detrimental as a part of media ethics. These take away rights other people have by making false claims, which are harmful or untrue. Recent examples of this are seen in cyberbullying on the Internet and throughout social media. As seen in the case Cyber Bullying, Internet websites can be made displaying information on individuals without their knowledge (Leishman, October 10, 2002). The misuse of social media can turn into a tool for embarrassing, spreading personal information or actions that can be detrimental to an individual. Severe consequences result from the lack of control on the Internet and social networking sites. At the same time, when SOPA and 3

4 PIPA were passed through government to try to control Internet content, citizens were outraged because the control of the Internet in turn, takes away free speech. Truth and objectivity are vital to the content and are at the heart of problems throughout social media. One of the functions the media must fulfill is to report, and evaluate, appropriately, events that affect our lives as members of society (Kieran, 23). When journalists and columnists write, they are covered by many corporate individuals, lawyers and academics who abide by laws and swear the information they are giving is correct. When it comes from non-professionals, they do not have to answer to anyone so they can write about their personal view. They might not be educated on the matter or know what they are talking about, so by getting involved, they may be spreading false information. An example of this can be illustrated through the cases Digital Manipulation of Photos with New Computer Technology and Faking Photos: Is it Ever Justified. It describes how, with photo editing software on computers, a photo can be manipulated to look like something completely different (Reaves, 230). In the second article, a photo assignment was made using an actor, posed as a homeless man (Van Meter, 237). Both of these examples show that objectivity is important. Although something may seem to be real, it is hard to tell the truth. In addition, social media provides many opportunities for a person to be fed false information. It is not always directly from the source or someone credible, they may not be a professional, and as the two photo cases show, the truth can be manipulated to suit the story. There are also ways in which social media can be seen to have intellectual and property right infringement issues. As explained previously, social media and networking are often used to repost or use information from another source to inform. Since not 4

5 everyone who uses social media finds credible sources, or sources anything at all, they are possibly stealing property. The availability to post material from other websites, including videos, articles and pictures, makes it seem acceptable to take work that belongs to someone else. Society with property rights are more developed than ones without (Beam, February 3, 2012). Property rights are put in place to preserve order, give creators credit for the work they produce and deter people from taking work that doesn t belong to them. Social media lacks regulation and monitoring, making it a perfect channel for free-riding. Similar to property rights issues are those surrounding security and privacy on public social media and social networking sites. There are two forms of privacy: intrinsic and instrumental (Beam, March 2, 2011). Intrinsic privacy focuses on parts of a person s life that are not necessarily secrets, but are not open for the public either. This can include sex life or relationships, which people might find out about through social networking sites. In contrast, instrumental privacy is part of a person s life in which they want to keep a secret. They can include bad habits, medical records, finances and sex life as well. These are all personal aspects, which could be detrimental to an individual if leaked (Beam, March 2, 2012). There are many specific issues surrounding unethical privacy issues within social media as well. The first major concern is not knowing the exact audience who will see the information available. Second is the design of the websites themselves. Not only do they allow you to save material off of them, but you can also go back in the history on the Internet to see the same content over and over again. Next, although making profiles private, there are still ways to gain access to someone s LinkedIn, Facebook or twitter 5

6 profiles. Without the privacy settings set properly, the material meant for friends and family can be available from co-workers to strangers. In addition, once someone gains access of the profile, they are able to save and download pictures off the website, whether they become private or not. An example and controversial subject within media and ethics is the privacy of celebrities. Part of the function of celebrities is being in the public eye. This means that many of the luxuries we have being out of the public eye they cannot avoid. It is inevitable that being followed by paparazzi or news journalists will capture personal or private moments. The drama and controversy is part of what makes following celebrities fascinating. In addition, they are not necessarily true, making free speech a problem for celebrity privacy. However, they are real people and must have some kind of privacy in order to function as a normal human being. They undergo photographs, false claims and imposters, all of which end up throughout social media. Social media, such as twitter, allows for almost instant updates on celebrity sightings or gossip. False claims and exposure of drugs or alcohol problems can be harmful to celebrities, both with their careers and fans. Social media acts as a tab on celebrities, keeping them in the public eye and making it hard for them to have privacy or security. There is not a distinct line between invasion of privacy and being in the spot light. It also depends on the celebrity s tolerance to being in the public eye, their personal life and what they do in their free time. Another more recent ethical issue within social media are the human rights acts. This includes advocating for a cause or company online through social media. An example of this would be the Kony 2012 video with spread across twitter, Facebook and Youtube within two days. It seems beneficial to receive information through social media 6

7 but it becomes very one sided. People posted the video after watching it and without criticism or thought, supported it. A narrative through their peers made it seem like a trustworthy cause to support. In fact, hardly anyone researched more in depth, or looked at the alternative view. It provided information on questionable spending, unethical practices and other NGO s, which work directly with those affected. Although it was used as a tool to inform society, they must in turn think critically and not adopt the view of their peers. Finally, there are many unethical practices through social media used in the workplace or with corporations. What started as a tool for communication among citizens has turned into an advertising and marketing avenue for businesses. There is not one business that has not signed up to a social networking site in hopes that it will boost sales. Restaurants provide daily updates and specials for their customers to see. Stores give information about their products or services. However, the problem also lies within the additional, less conscious advertising that goes on. There are advertisements lining the side of Facebook and LinkedIn that are generated based on previous websites visited and interests. They are put out directly and specifically for the audience viewing. This form of personal advertising could in turn be more dangerous as it moves to a deeper level. Another issue in the workplace is the use of social media and social networking in the workplace. Not only does it affect and perhaps decrease productivity, but the use of personal information at work could affect co-worker relations or even the job itself. About 42% of active social networkers felt that it was acceptable to post both negative and positive workplace comments on social media (Islam, 2012). This can show two things through social media. The first is that it is unprofessional to write about the 7

8 workplace in social networking sites, unless it is LinkedIn, which asks for workplace history and current workplace. Second, it can also affect how customers, clients or consumers feel about the business. If they see negative comments, posts or tweets about a job, they might think twice before using that service or going to that store. As noted before, the power of social media through what peers say is effective in gaining or decreasing support. People are more likely to take the word of their friend or co-worker and so they may believe a negative portrayal. This goes back to the objectivity talked about throughout social media. Finally, as explained on the American Inns of Court website, there are many ways that what people say on social media sites can affect them legally. It explained how lawyers cannot tell their clients to delete something they have already put up as it is illegal and can be detrimental to their future law practices (DiBianca, 2010). Instructing a client to delete evidence, including the client s Facebook page, may constitute spoliation of evidence, which could result in an adverse-inference instruction to a jury or sanctions against the attorney (DiBianca, 2010). However, they can use what they find on social networking sites as evidence, and as described before, more people put personal information on their social networking site that they would not give out normally. This shows not only unethical issues but possible legal complications as well. The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers reports that 66% of divorce attorneys use Facebook as their primary source for online evidence (DiBianca, 2010). This is a perfect example to show the personal information available, as well as its use in investigation. It reiterates the potential to privacy and security issues and shows how lawyers or judges could gain access to someone s personal life. 8

9 In conclusion, social media is a tool to stay connected; to friends, co-workers, family and even with news. The recent explosion of businesses, development and advertising on social media sites shows a correlation between society and the need to stay connected. There are many ways, as discussed above, that social media is a gateway to unethical practices including privacy and security issues, objectivity and free speech issues and more recently, business and advertising issues. It encompasses personal information, which is available for the Internet, and in turn the world, to see. Social media must be used responsibly, as there are numerous ways unethical practices can occur. The only way to counter these unethical practices is to stay informed, be critical of content seen and to use with caution. Pictures can be saved, content can be leaked and as the world is a large community, there are many people with unethical morals. 9

10 Bibliography Beam, Criag. Free Speech. Wilfrid Laurier University. February 3, 2012 Bowlen. Jason. "Canadian Social Media Statistics 2011." Web-fuel. Web-Fuel, Web. 21 Mar < 2011/>. DiBianca, M.. "American Inns of Court." Complex ethical issues of social media (the bencher). N.p., Web. 14 Mar < Eid, Mahmoud, and Stephen J. A. Ward. "Editorial: Ethics, New Media, And Social Networks." Global Media Journal: Canadian Edition 2.1 (2009): 1-4. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 21 Mar Hentoff, Nat. Free Speech for Me, But Not for The. Ethics and Values in the Information Age (Eds: Rudinowl & Graybosch) Wadsworth Publishing Company (2002): Islam, Ayan. "To Tweet or Not to Tweet? The Use of Social Media in the Workplace Raises Ethical Issues.". Social Media Week, Web. 18 Mar < Kieran, M. Objectivity, Impartiality and Good Journalism. Media Ethics (Ed: Kieran) Routledge, 3 rd Ed. (1998): Lieshman, Joan. Cyber-bullying: The Internet is the latest weapon in a bully's arsenal. CBC: The National. 10 Oct Web. 4 Feb < 02&tId=269279>. Reaves, Sheila. Digital Manipulations of Photos with New Computer Technology. Media Ethics (Eds: Patterson and Wilkins) Longman Canada Limited, 3 rd Ed. (1991): "Point/Counterpoint: Does Social Media Affect The PR Profession And Ethics Negatively?." Public Relations Tactics 16.9 (2009): Business Source Complete. Web. 21 Mar Van Meter, James. Faking Photos: Is it Ever Justified? Media Ethics (Eds: Patterson and Wilkins) McGraw Hill Inc, 3 rd Ed. (1998):