Ethical Problems Facing Facebook - Case Study Example

Ethical Problems Facing Facebook The world is arguably becoming a global village, and the dynamic aspect of technology has seen many individuals embrace technological leaps in order to keep up with the dynamics of the modern world. Client communication can be said to be less than 100 percent guaranteed in terms of the privacy. On the Internet emails can end up to the wrong recipients, social sites share private data and information with third parties and cases of phone conversation been listened to by others have become prevalent. Individuals have become aware of today’s ethical pitfalls that are coupled with social media. Technology has become strongly embedded in our social lives that it is a challenge to be fully mindful and aware of any impending disclosure of information to third parties. Facebook has been faced with numerous cases founded on the privacy of its users. Privacy can be defined as the state of being hidden or concealed from the external environment. In Facebook, privacy can be said to refer to how much information is accessible to the user of the creator of information and not to any other party or friends. The ethical problems facing Facebook started with the implementation of Beacon, a free online tool for tracking the activity of users. Online partners including The New York Times, Blockbuster, and Overstock.com were the first to get a feel of the tool (Martin, 2). Beacon works by first being embedded in a partner’s website and then it goes on to keep a record of Facebook user activities and proactively post such activities to the user’s friends. In addition, advertising agencies chose this tool because it reached a large customer base. However, the mechanism used by Beacon tool to target potential customers for their clients’ sparked criticism from users who claimed their privacy was being infringed. Although this tool provided users with a pop up window in which they could either chose to opt-out or opt-in, the opt-out notice quickly disappeared without users consent. The application did not give users the ability to decide whether to reject all sharing because Facebook went on to send the user activity data to all friends of the user. Beacon program tracked the activities of a user and asked Facebook for information on whether the user was a member on Facebook or not. Then Facebook would ask the members if their information would be shared to their friends’ accounts. However, MoveOn.org accused Facebook of invading on the privacy of members. Facebook’s strategic expansion from 2004 through 2007 was founded on the type of user who accessed the site, and later through technological enhancements, Facebook was able to acquire a larger user base. The ultimate launch of News Feed and Mini-Feed changed the way users received new information about their friends. Information could now be broadcasted automatically to them. Also, the opening of Facebook website to software developers and outside sources meant that any individual or corporate could access the platform and post information on the site since no limits were placed on the type or purpose of applications. Nonetheless, Facebook acted strategically and differentiated its services from those of its fierce rival, MySpace, by incorporating various privacy settings that enabled users to control the degree to which their information could be accessed by other parties and friends. The fierce competition between Facebook and MySpace, as well as LinkedIn, led the company to restructure and implement organizational principles that substantially integrated privacy concerns. The principles centered on two core concepts: the ability of users to control their personal information and users’ ability to access what their friends want to share (Martin, 7). With each new breakthrough in the field of information technology, individuals are able to find ways to access user information from various social sites. News Feed does not provide users with the freedom to explicitly choose from which friends to receive broadcasts. Facebook’s software through a series of sophisticated algorithms decides which information may be of interest to a user without seeking the consent of the user. Online community members were outraged by the intensity and depth of privacy infringement. Even in instances where users say they do not want to share information, Facebook is left with user information in its database. This makes users uncomfortable knowing that their privacy is not guaranteed. Beacon program is able to track online purchases done by Facebook users and can provide this information to third parties since it is critical towards advertising and marketing operations. MoveOn.org petitioned Facebook and received profound support from through signatures collected from individuals opposing the Beacon program. The program provided users with no opt-out options. Also, in case of an opt-out option, Facebook only deletes information from servers of third party partners and is left with user information that they can use for the benefit of their business. Individuals want policies that enable them to directly select the kind of information and data that should be shared with their friends or other parties. Facebook needs to evaluate its code of ethics and integrate these issues in its policies. Moreover, it needs to be stricter in enacting new policies and ensuring they are implemented and followed to the core. Any information that is critical to users and whose usage can compromise the user should be handled with care and it is neither good nor right for use in business purposes. Recommendations 1. Facebook should critically evaluate its code of ethics, and ensure personal information and private details of users are not shared, and any radical actions on user information geared towards realizing a profit through business efforts should be curbed. User-generated information should be controlled, and marketers and advertisers should not be allowed to access such information and data. 2. Facebook should carry out user awareness on the possibility of third parties accessing their information. Even with privacy settings, today’s technological advancements enable hackers and other individuals to access user accounts without their consent. Therefore, they should be advised on the nature of content they share and the kind of passwords to use. Also, users need to acquaint themselves with privacy settings and how they can be able to make their accounts more private. This incorporates knowing how the technology works and the kind of critical information that users make available. Users need to be mindful of the content they disclose on the site and how harmful or delicate the information maybe. 3. Facebook should refrain from holding user information even when the user is not logged into the website. This would help create trust from stakeholders and users. Beacon tracked users even when they not logged into Facebook. Such scenarios can be alleviated. Moreover, Facebook should stop following on the activities of users when they are not logged on, and when they digress to other websites. 4. Facebook needs to incorporate fundamental principles of social media research in its policies in order to protect personal details of its users. This enables respondents to provide an informed consent of their participation. 5. Terms of Use for Facebook should be revised because they restrict the use of the social site to personal and non-commercial uses. This means that any use that is geared towards making gains is not accepted. This has not been the case. 6. Partner sites who have implemented Beacon program should incorporate nuanced approaches in installing the program. Also, they can start with Beacon program turned off so that user’s personal details may not be sent back to Facebook. Justification Facebook users need to have the option of opting-out when accessing websites outside Facebook. Demographic differences are critical because young people may not view things in the same perspective that older individuals may do. Therefore, individuals are justified in their criticism of Facebook’s infringement on their privacy. Third party partners do not provide users with information that they are posting information on the users’ Facebook profile. This may be harmful to the image of the user or compromise their stand. Like in the case of Sean Lane, who wanted to surprise his wife a gold ring, Lane is justified in suing Facebook if at all the necessary avenues exist. The recommendations are justified because they are aimed at providing a viable means for both users and Facebook. Also, marketers would be able to advertise their products and services by following the right channels. Moreover, the recommendations integrate ethical considerations, which are the primary cause of the rift between Facebook and its users. Works Cited Martin, Kirsten, “Facebook (A): Beacon and privacy.” Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics. 2010. December 6, 2011. Read More