Ethics in the Digital Age

Ethics in the Digital Age

Part 1: Freedom of Expression, copyright, and Censorship

Changes in technology have resulted in a shift in freedom of expression, censorship, and copyright. Online platforms promoted information sharing and changed the traditional way where people feared or lacked an avenue to air their views and opinions freely. Issues arise as to the extent that freedom of expression should be promoted and how to prevent the misuse of online platforms (HRC, 2018). Should social media companies self regulate the content, or should regulations be used to check the actions of social media users? The works of trolls complicate freedom of speech since users engaged each other on heated arguments resulting in discord through inflammatory and off-topic messages. This policy deals with the theme of trolls and ethical issues in the freedom of expression, copyright, and censorship.

Ethical Issues

Freedom of expression is a right enjoyed by citizens. It allows them to air their views and opinions and criticize some of the malpractices that are against the norms of a democratic society. Online platforms have promoted such practices by creating avenues that people can use to send information or express their opinion to an audience that could otherwise be unreachable through traditional means. However, issues arise on the fair use and copyright of online channels since the majority of the views are non-factual and can be misleading.

How should individuals share reliable information that can inform opinion without violation of the legal and ethical requirements? Similarly, how can the government reduce the misuse of online platforms while promoting freedom of expression? How can online companies deal with individuals who violate ethical standards by sharing unverified information? The various stakeholders should adhere to ethical considerations to ensure that they promote freedom of expression, copyright, and reduce censorship.

Trolls cause discord by spreading false or inflammatory messages that negate the freedom of expression created by online platforms. It contributes to increased censorship since it is difficult to differentiate between factual and misinformation, and both can have significant effects since they can influence the audience to take the desired course of action (Rainie, Anderson, & Albright, 2017). How can freedom of expression be promoted without compromising the authenticity of the information or resulting in excessive censorship of online users? How can the copyrights be protected without leading to excessive controls or disclosure that can infringe the interest of the parties?

It is expected that things will remain the same as trolls take change and misinform the audience to create discord and misunderstanding. Efforts to bring sanity in the online platform have not yielded any fruits since the various stakeholders are not united on the issue. Similarly, there is no uniformity on how to conduct online conversations and continue engaging in weighty subjects that arouse emotions and self-defense. There is no sanity, and actions by online companies or regulators have not borne fruits (Rainie, Anderson, & Albright, 2017). The debate will continue, and despite significant efforts to address the issues, there is no solution yet, meaning that the future is likely to remain the same.

The internet is fragmented, and people continue to make unverified claims and assertions that mislead the audience and cause bad blood. People are attracted to discussions that resonate with their thinking, which results in an echo effect. Such self-reinforcement has elements of mob behavior, and others will likely condone bad behavior since others are engaging in the same (Rainie, Anderson, & Albright, 2017). Social media, for example, tends to bring unfortunate events to the attention of the audience, and they feel that everything happened at their proximity, which leads to unease.

How to address Troll

Individuals, online communities, scholars, corporations, and governments can address the issues by taking the following actions. The guidelines by HRC (2018) on state obligation and company obligations can help to address troll. The legal framework presents the dos and don’ts that can reduce troll. Similarly, individuals should restrain from engaging in such acts. The various stakeholders must understand the power of online platforms and how they can contribute to constructive discussions and promote freedom of expression. Some of the approaches that can help to address the issue include establishing relevant policies, moderating online comments, deleting inflammatory and misinformed posts, ignoring trolls, employing humor, and sticking to the facts. Legislations can also address trolls if everything else fails.

From a utilitarian perspective, efforts to address troll should not affect the freedom of speech, copyright, and lead to additional censorship. The results should, therefore, be beneficial to all stakeholders and encourage information sharing and expression of one’s opinion. Similarly, the deontology principle can be applied by ensuring that the acts are morally upright. The government, for example, should ensure that policies and the existing laws promote the good of the general populace. They should not affect freedom of expression or contribute to increased censorship.

Part 2

Cyberbullying is an issue that affects a majority of people who face the wrath of online users who want to settle scores or expose past actions. There are familiar stories of young people who have taken their lives thanks to cyberbullying. Such incidences shock family members, friends, and teachers, the majority of whom are not aware of the challenges faced by such young people (Pendergrass & Wright, 2014). Mobile devices and computers are now tools that perpetrators use to torment victims. Such incidences have resulted in numerous deaths like that of Amanda Todd, Jessica Laney, Rehtaeh Parson, and Rebecca Ann Sedwick. The perpetrators, in this case, intentionally use the imbalance of power and repeatedly harass their target to harm them. Such individuals use ICT or other forms of internet technologies to harm others.

Cyberbullying leads to depression, stress, and withdrawal, and the victim is likely to commit suicide due to the repeated nature of such acts and the ease of reaching a broader audience in the shortest time possible. Amanda Todd’s case is a classic example of how perpetrators can exploit the vulnerability of a victim. She posted a video on YouTube on how she was bullied and harassed (Pendergrass & Wright, 2014). The bully sent photos to family members and friends, forcing Amanda to switch to school, but the bullying followed her. Schoolmates worsened the situation when they made fun of her, including calling names which force Amanda to withdraw and, on one occasion, even tried to kill self-using bleach.

The harassers should be held accountable for cyberbullying cases reported in the article. Even though the minor was not aware of the repercussions of their actions, the cases are not wrongful deaths since the harasser made real his threats by forwarding the pictures to friends and family. The use of online platforms made it easier for photos to reach more people in the shortest time. The recipients further complicated the issue by physically or verbally harassing the victims (Pendergrass & Wright, 2014). Such actions led to depression, withdrawal and anxiety, and ultimate suicide. The harasser, in this case, led to the string of events that followed each other and can solely be blamed for the final decision of the victim. The case is not wrongful or corruption of the minor even though some can argue that it took place online. The perpetrator can be trace, and the decisions of the victims are attributable to cyberbullying.

I have not experienced cyberbullying, but a friend experienced such acts that changed his life. The abuser solicited sexual favors, or else he exposes the actions of the victim to the online community. With time, my friend was a prisoner and acted differently, showing signs of depression, withdrawal, and loneliness. No one understood them since she kept it a secret until one day when the abuser posted her pictures (Duggan, 2017). The incident affected her, but thanks to a supportive family and friends, she was able to overcome the cyberbullying.

Ethical norms should guide online use. One should understand the effect of their actions and the outcome of cyberbullying. One should use ethical frameworks like deontology or social justice to ensure that they act and treat others ethically. They should ensure that their actions do not lead to the suffering of others. Some of the ethical norms include treating online users fairly, doing no harm, adhering to ethical standards, legal guidelines, and existing rules. One should respect the autonomy, justice, and beneficence of online users.

Some of the global cyber threats include weaponizing ICT to attack critical infrastructure or even military intelligence. Other risks include global terrorism, economic losses, loss of intelligence, and vital information and economic espionage. The ethical framework can address some of the identified threats. Countries can cooperate to identify weaknesses and share best practices to counter cyber attacks. States can also develop joint legislations to oversee online activities and to ensure that perpetrators do not exploit loopholes. Countries should also report any incidences and share information on how to counter future occurrences. States should report cyber vulnerabilities. Various stakeholders must use a bottom-up approach while establishing rules on responsible behavior (Chernenko, Demidov, & Lukyanov, 2018). Nations should also engage each other in an honest discussion on cybercrimes and develop appropriate strategies to counter such acts in addition to making incident attribution easier.

Different stakeholders have not considered online ethical conduct and how it can address issues like cybercrime and cyberbullying. The majority have focused on regulations and other standards, while ethical principles have not received the desired attention. It is, therefore, critical to shift the current focus from legislative to moral norms. Some of the recommendations for preventing cyberbullying include educating the youths on the king of information and pictures that they should share with strangers (Duggan, 2017). Victims should also keep some evidence in the form of screenshots. They can report any incidences to authorities and online companies. Similarly, they should talk about the issue with a caring person to prevent problems like depression, anxiety, and withdrawal. Additionally, one should maintain a private life, and if possible, they can talk to the abuser to persuade them not to post personal information.

References

Chernenko, E., Demidov, O., & Lukyanov, F. (2018). Increasing international cooperation in cybersecurity and adapting cyber norms. Council on Foreign Relations.

Dmlp.org. (2020). Fair Use | Digital Media Law Project. Retrieved 23 January 2020, from http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/fair-use

Duggan, M. (2017). Online Harassment, 2017. Pew Research Center.

HRC. (2018). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression: Human Rights Council Thirty-eighth session. Retrieved 23 January 2020, from https://freedex.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/2015/files/2018/05/G1809672.pdf

Pendergrass, W. S., & Wright, M. (2014). Cyberbullied to death: An analysis of victims taken from recent events. Issues in Information Systems (15)1, 132–140

Rainie, L., Anderson, J., & Albright, J. (2017). The Future of Free Speech, Trolls, Anonymity, and Fake News Online. Retrieved 23 January 2020, from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/03/29/the-future-of-free-speech-trolls-anonymity-and-fake-news-online/