Professional Communication and Ethics in IT - Essay Example

Professional Ethics in IT xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lecturer xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date Introduction Communication is governed by processes which are grouped into spheres. These spheres in communication are made to be in line with the spheres in the society. Information from one sphere should always remain in the same sphere. At al the times communication is being done, information from one sphere should not intercept with that from another sphere. Communication therefore takes a particular process in the society which is governed by the infrastructure design of information. Ethics in information and technology enables the right of the human beings to privacy not to be infringed while distributing or passing across information (Nagenborg 2009). Summary Communication holds the key upon which many activities undertaken by human beings are to be coordinated and implemented. Information is distributed in spheres which correspond to the spheres within the society. Information spheres should at all times not intercept if at all privacy is to be maintained. The contextual flow of norms while distributing information is what should be used in the governing of the spheres of communication. There is need for information to be distributed from their rightful spheres to avoid injustices (Nagenborg 2009). There is also the need to clearly draw a boundary to separate public and private life. Privacy on information should be considered as a human right and should not be violated at all times (Nissenbaum 2004). Critique Challenges do exist in relation to privacy of information being relayed. The main reason behind this is the inability to be able to make a clear demarcation of the spheres and how they are able to intercept. The interception of various spheres is what is thought to be the cause privacy to be violated (Walzer 2002). The infringing of privacy is considered to be injustice. This is in accordance to information and technology ethics. Information communicated from one sphere should at all times not be connected to the other spheres as this would lead to injustice. The sub spheres that exist in the design of information infrastructure should also not be connected since they will also lead to injustices. For instance when one is accessing medical information from an economic sphere, injustice is said to have taken place since a connection has been made between two different spheres. Various researchers however continue to have different or divergent opinions to the root of privacy violation. Formulation of an effective practical approach to address the issue of privacy of information still poses a challenge in the world today even with the advancements of modes of communication (Walzer 2002). In the designing of spheres of informational justice, Walzer thinks that information qualifies to be a social good and privacy is a fundamental human right. He also suggest that separation of private from public life goes ahead to create a sphere of individuality, family freedom, privacy and domesticity (Walzer 2002). Walzer therefore suggests that privacy of information is said to have taken place when there is traffic of information across separate social spheres agree with Walzer that the spheres within the society offer the foundation upon which the information infrastructure design is built on. The information in these spheres is what eventually when allowed to communicate with each other leads to the violation of privacy. I very much agree with Walzer on the issue regarding privacy because for one to have privacy, he or she needs to separate the private as well as the private needs (Walzer 2002). Most people especially in the African countries oppose the notion of privacy as a product of western civilization liberalism. This is because most of the Africans tend to focus on communalism and interdependence as core values therefore to approach them it would require one to be able to explain as well as justify privacy in a less individualistic frame work for it to be beneficial. Walzer’s theory is thus offers the best approach in addressing the issue of privacy (Star et al 2006). On the other hand however, Nissenbaum goes ahead to give a comprehensive theory on privacy that focuses on separation of institutions rather than spheres. He argues that privacy is said to have been infringed in instances when there is blockage of the exchange of information between two different spheres which is totally opposite to what Walzer is argues. I tend to think that Nissenbaum finds value on the effect that the institutions have on the information traffic rather than spheres that the institutions are. I do not support this totally since it is the spheres which form the building blocks of the information infrastructure design. According to Nissenbaum, information should be allowed to occur between the different spheres. This would lead to violation of privacy since according to his theory. Most of the information that will be accessed will be basically that which was not meant for the recipient. This means that the theory suggested by Nissenbaum would ideally lead to violation of privacy other than promoting privacy. Nissenbaum’s theory on privacy should therefore be avoided since it would lead to the creation of various interceptions among different spheres and this would ultimately lead to violation of privacy when communicating (Nissenbaum 2004). However both Walzer and Nissenbaum agree that privacy is a fundamental right and that its violation is an injustice. Walzer and Nissenbaum all think that the human being has from time immemorial valued his or her privacy whether or not human beings do odd and exciting things in their privacy. They both hold the position on the importance of ethics and professionalism as far as information distribution is concerned. On the issue of privacy, they both agree that the blocking of the exchange of information within the design of an ethical information infrastructure denies one his or her privacy to information (Walzer 2002). Even with the formulation of various approaches in addressing the issue of privacy of information, it is evident that there is difficulty in the possibility of clearly framing privacy basing on the art of separation by merely looking at the point at which intersections are set to occur within the information infrastructure (Nagenborg 2009). References Nagenborg, M, 2009, Designing spheres of informational justice Springer Science+Business Media B.V. Walzer, M. (2002). The argument about humanitarian intervention. Dissent, 49(3), 29–37. Nissenbaum, H, 2004, Privacy as contextual integrity, Washington Law Review, 79, 119–158. Star, L, & Bowker, C, 2006, How to infrastructure, In L. A. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), The handbook of new media, (pp. 230–245), London, New Delhi: Sage, Thousand Oaks, Updated Student Edition. Read More