Instructions:
The advertising industry has undergone a dramatic transformation in the past decade. In the past, advertisers had to guess where they could reach potential customers on television, radio and print. Now, much of the advertising budget is spent online where advertisers are able to reach specific individuals who are most likely to buy their advertiser’s product or service. Through Google they know what you have searched for and deliver ads for that. Amazon knows what you buy and suggests products based upon that. Facebook know a great deal about your life through your posts, you friends, your messages as well as any web site you sign in using your Facebook credentials. By matching email addresses, mobile phone numbers, IP addresses, advertisers can identify who you are and where you live. Superimposed upon this system is a network of data brokers who buy and sell data from online companies and assemble disparate pieces of data into a profile of individuals that undoubtedly include you. There is hardly any regulation of this data ecosystem. For an example, read the linked New York Times articles on data apps and the data they provide and respond to the questions below.
A Brief History of How Your Privacy was Stolen
Grindr and OkCupid Spread Personal Details, Study Says
Do you find any of these particular practices to be ethically questionable? What are those practices?
Why do you think these practices are unethical using one of the ethical theories in your toolkit?
Are you surprised or alarmed that so much of your personal data is available in this ecosystem?
Do you think the system ought to be changed to eliminate these practices and, if so, what changes would you suggest?
Brittany Bichell
Some aspects discussed in the articles can be considered ethically questionable. Based on the utilitarian theory, the collection of personal data without explicit consent and the creation of detailed user profiles for the purpose of targeted advertising can be seen as ethically questionable. From a utilitarian perspective, this practice may maximize the utility (happiness or well-being) for advertisers and data brokers, as it allows them to tailor their ads effectively. However, it can lead to negative consequences for users, such as privacy invasions, potential manipulation, and unwanted exposure to advertising. Also, many users may not be fully aware of how their data is being collected and shared. This lack of transparency undermines users’ autonomy and informed decision-making. From a utilitarian standpoint, this can be considered unethical as it deprives users of the ability to make choices that maximize their own happiness and well-being. Lastly, The articles mention that the spread of sensitive information, such as sexual orientation and drug habits, could present risks, especially in countries where such information is legally sensitive. From a utilitarian perspective, these practices could cause harm to vulnerable individuals, which goes against the principle of maximizing happiness and well-being.
I think it is alarming that so much personal data is available within this ecosystem, especially when users may not have a clear understanding of how their data is being used. This lack of control and awareness raises ethical concerns.
To address these ethical issues, changes in the system may be necessary. From a utilitarian perspective, potential changes could include implementing and enforcing strict data privacy laws that require explicit consent for data collection and sharing, as well as penalties for violations. There should also be transparency requirements requiring companies to be transparent about their data practices, including clear and accessible privacy policies.
Shori Otsuba
There are some practices that are ethically questionable. First, sharing personal information can be a violation of privacy. Apps like Grindr and OkCupid were found to share users’ personal information such as their sexual orientation, ethnicity, and personal profile answers with third-party marketing firms. Moreover, lack of transparency can be a serious problem. Many users do not know much about how it works so that not being aware of the extent to which their data is shared with third parties can be dangerous. From this point of view, lack of transparency raises ethical concerns amongst users as well as those who want to start these apps.
Utilitarianism focuses on maximizing overall happiness or benefits for the greatest number of people (UMGC, n.d.) and is a reason-based approach to determining what is right and wrong (Carla, 2023). Utilitarianism such as sharing information and location tracking suggest that these practices are unethical because they often result in harm or negative consequences for users’ well-being and can put people in danger. Sharing sensitive information of users without explicit consent a harm users’ privacy and personal autonomy. The potential harm to individuals in terms of discrimination, safety risks, or identity theft outweighs any potential benefits to third-party companies. Furthermore, sharing precise location data can have serious consequences for user safety, particularly in regions where certain activities are illegal. Users could face physical harm or legal repercussions. The potential harm and distress caused by this practice clearly outweigh any benefits to advertising companies.
I am surprised to know the fact that there are a lot of platforms that eventually can raise valid concerns about privacy, security, and data protection. It is, therefore, important for each individual to be aware of the consequences of using these apps in order to protect personal information and privacy.
The world has dramatically changed since the advent of the internet, social media, and devices. In other words, we cannot live without them in our lives. Thus, instead of eliminating these certain data-sharing practices, there needs to be stronger data privacy regulations. Governments can enact and enforce stricter data privacy regulations, similar to the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). These regulations should require explicit user consent for data sharing, clear disclosure of data practices, and severe penalties for non-compliance.
James Nie
The practices that I believed to be ethically questionable were the following: platforms monitoring users’ emails and chats; platforms selling users’ information; and platforms utilizing data to forecast the actions of platform users. Google came up with a method to leverage the data that was created by user queries and turn it into something that could be used to forecast user behavior (McNamee, 2019). Even if they believe they are assisting their users by being suggestive with items, platforms shouldn’t have the power to forecast their users’ behavior, even if they believe they are. Google constructed computers that could read Gmail conversations and advised reading private communications in order to gain further information about behavioral predictions. Users will have little privacy left after this change since the platform will be able to monitor anything a user discusses and perhaps buys on their device (New York Times, 2020). Platforms have the ability to acquire user information and data, which they then frequently sell to the highest bidder. In addition to exploiting the data for its own purposes, the platform also makes money by selling the information to third parties for their own purposes. Because they violate a person’s individual rights, these acts do not adhere to ethical standards and are thus unethical (Sage, 2012). The Rights and Duties Theory of Ethics would be applicable in this situation. The rights and duties approach places an emphasis on both the rights we have as people and the way we behave with one another. The communication that the platform maintains with its customers regarding the utilization of their personal data and information is going to be the single most significant aspect to look out for (Gilbert, 2016). This might have been included in one of those stupid contracts that are twenty pages long and that you have to click to agree with in order to proceed. No matter how one chooses to analyze the case, the outcome appears to be both unjust and incorrect. It does not surprise me that our data is being exploited and sold to such an extensive degree. In many situations, I believe that it is unjust since there is no other way for society to function in the same manner that it does now without anyone having an email account. Internet access is universally available and often regarded as an essential amenity, much like mobile phone service. I try to keep a low profile on social media and have done so from the beginning; as a result, I am not concerned about providing a large number of details about myself to the public or to the platform. In my opinion, it would be to everyone’s advantage if the platforms required the user to affirmatively consent to the collection of data at the outset. Some users may find it more beneficial if a platform can provide recommendations on websites or items that are appropriate for them based on the data mining they have done.