Akossiwa Agbenou
PHIL 355E
March 17, 2024
4.4. Case Analysis on Professional Ethics
A seasoned developer named Bill Sourour recalls a disturbing incident from 2000, when
he was assigned to code a pharmaceutical quiz for a customer of the interactive marketing
company he worked for. Teenage girls were the intended audience for the quiz, which was
integrated into a website that seemed like a general knowledge source. Based on their responses,
a particular drug was recommended. The quiz consistently recommended the client’s drug as the
best treatment, regardless of the responses given, which caused Sourour to become
uncomfortable. Sourour continued with the project despite this ethical dilemma, justifying his
acts by citing their necessity for carrying out his duties as an employee. Nevertheless, his
uneasiness remained, particularly after discovering that the drug had serious adverse effects, such
as depression and suicidal thoughts, which were not mentioned in the quiz. Because of this
encounter, Sourour has been thinking more deeply about the moral consequences of his
profession and pushing for more ethical considerations in software development. Regarding the
ethical soundness of his work on the pharmaceutical quiz, Sourour was presented with a complex
quandary. On the one hand, he had to complete the quiz in accordance with the client’s
specifications as part of his professional duties as a developer. These standards, however, did not
address the possible repercussions of endorsing a particular drug without revealing the hazards
associated with it, nor did they provide openness regarding the quiz’s biased suggestions.
Between his professional obligations and his moral convictions, Sourour struggled to weigh the<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ramifications of taking part in a project that might endanger weaker people, such adolescent
females looking for medical information. Moreover, Sourour’s predicament was made worse by
the absence of clear ethical standards or supervision in the workplace, which left him to handle
things mostly on his own. Ultimately, the ethical challenges present at the nexus of technology,
marketing, and healthcare are highlighted by Sourour’s choice to move on with the project in
spite of his misgivings. In this case, I will argue that Contractarianism demonstrates the moral
problematic nature of the code due to its violation of the principles of honesty and transparency,
and that Sourour should have acted differently in order to respect ethical standards.
A cornerstone of many professional codes of ethics, such as those governing software
development and marketing procedures, is the idea of honesty and transparency. Transparency is
the open and unambiguous disclosure of pertinent information, whereas honesty is the genuine
portrayal of facts. Respecting this principle in software development means that developers must
be truthful about the things they provide and reveal any potential dangers or biases that might
have an impact on users. By promoting trust between users and developers, transparency reduces
the possibility of harm and allows for informed decision-making. Honesty and transparency are
crucial for upholding credibility and integrity in the field of marketing ethics. It is expected of
marketing professionals to provide any facts that could influence consumers’ decisions, avoid
misleading techniques, and appropriately portray goods and services. If these values are not
followed, there may be trust violations, legal ramifications, and harm to people or society.
The construction of the pharmaceutical quiz in Sourour’s case clearly fails to adhere to
the principles of honesty and transparency. The quiz, which presented itself as a generic
knowledge resource, was actually created to suggest a particular drug to teenage girls without
openly acknowledging that its suggestions were biased. The conclusion by Sourour that the quiz,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
irrespective of the answers given, continuously advertised the client’s drug highlights the
project’s lack of integrity and openness. The principle of transparency is further violated by the
drug’s possible side effects, which include severe depression and suicidal thoughts, not being
disclosed. The quiz’s developers put the pharmaceutical client’s interests ahead of the welfare of
its users by hiding important information that might have an influence on people’s health and
wellbeing. The ethical conundrum that occurs when moral values and professional commitments
collide is best illustrated by Sourour’s dilemma. Even though he had to code the quiz in
accordance with the client’s specifications, he was left to consider the ethical ramifications of his
job because there were no ethical standards or oversight in place at work. With the benefit of
hindsight, it is clear that Sourour would have needed to defend the deceptive nature of the quiz
and push for complete disclosure of its suggestions and related risks in order to uphold the
principles of honesty and transparency.
It is clear that there were serious ethical errors when evaluating the case’s conduct using
the principles of honesty and transparency. During the creation of the pharmaceutical quiz,
Sourour and the other developers did not adhere to these standards. First first, the quiz was
created dishonestly, passing for a broad knowledge source while secretly endorsing a particular
drug made by the customer. Because the quiz’s genuine aim and prejudices were hidden, users\u2014
especially adolescent females seeking medical guidance\u2014were deceived by this lack of
transparency. Moreover, regardless of the user’s responses, the quiz constantly recommended the
client’s drug as the best course of treatment. This information manipulation goes against the
honesty principle because it involves offering recommendations that were prejudiced without
taking into account the users’ best interests or the accuracy of the information that was presented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The project’s ethical flaws were further exacerbated by the drug’s possible negative effects,
which were not disclosed. These included depression and suicidal thoughts. The interests of the
pharmaceutical client were given precedence above the users’ safety and autonomy by the
developers of the quiz when they withheld important information that could have an influence on
their health and overall wellbeing.
It is clear from this evaluation and analysis that prioritizing integrity and openness in
professional behavior would have been the appropriate course of action. As a developer, Sourour
had a moral responsibility to make sure the quiz gave users clear recommendations and
appropriately represented the material. Sourour should have acted sooner to expose the quiz’s
deceitfulness and pushed for complete disclosure of its prejudices and the risks connected with
the recommended drug in order to protect these principles. This might have included voicing
concerns to his supervisors, having ethical conversations at work, or, in extreme cases, declining
to work on the project at all. Sourour may have protected the integrity of the software
development industry, met his ethical obligations as a developer, and reduced the possibility of
harm to users if he had placed a higher priority on honesty and transparency. In addition, his acts
might have acted as a spark for the development of an ethical consciousness and responsibility in
the workplace, which would have ultimately benefited society as a whole.
Armstrong’s framework for making ethical decisions in work-related settings highlights
the significance of taking a variety of elements into account when resolving ethical conundrums.
The idea that professionals should act in a way that promotes the greatest good while respecting
the autonomy and rights of all parties concerned is fundamental to this paradigm. According to
Armstrong, making ethical decisions entails a methodical assessment of the rights and interests<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
of those impacted by the decision, the ethical principles at stake, and the possible outcomes of
one’s actions.
Professionals are urged to use Armstrong’s framework to conduct ethical reflection in
which they analyze the advantages and disadvantages of various options and determine whether
their choices are consistent with moral values like justice, honesty, and integrity. During this
process, the ethical aspects of the issue are critically assessed, pertinent parties are consulted, and
choices are made in accordance with professional obligations and ethical standards. The ethical
aspects of the conundrum Armstrong encountered when creating the pharmacological quiz are
clarified by his theory. First and foremost, Sourour would have to think about the possible
repercussions of his actions, such as how they would affect the users of the quiz’s health and
wellbeing. Through the promotion of a particular drug without mentioning the hazards that come
with it, Sourour ran the risk of causing harm and damaging the confidence of those who are
vulnerable and seeking medical advice. Second, Sourour would have to assess the ethical
standards involved, especially those pertaining to integrity, honesty, and openness. These
standards were broken by the quiz’s deceptive design and the omission of important information
regarding the recommended drug, jeopardizing the project’s and the industry’s overall ethical
integrity.
Lastly, Sourour would have to take into account the rights and interests of all parties
impacted by his choice, such as the users of the quiz, the pharmaceutical client, and the general
public. Sourour failed in his duty to behave in the best interests of all parties involved when he
put the client’s interests ahead of the users’ wellbeing and the ethical standards of the profession.
Based on the analysis presented here, Armstrong’s methodology recommends that Sourour have
been more aggressive in addressing the ethical issues raised by the study. For example, she might<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
have pushed for complete disclosure of the drug’s hazards and declined to engage in misleading
marketing tactics. Sourour might have prevented harm, preserved the reputation of his
profession, and advanced societal welfare by acting in accordance with ethical standards and
professional obligations.
Several important factors become apparent when evaluating the case’s activities through
the lens of Armstrong’s ethical decision-making framework. First and foremost, it is necessary to
assess the activities’ possible outcomes. Here, the creation of the pharmaceutical quiz without
providing a complete disclosure of the drug’s hazards may have major repercussions for users,
especially for adolescent girls who might be swayed by the quiz’s recommendations. The drug’s
negative effects, including possible health hazards and psychological discomfort for users, are
not fully disclosed, which puts users at risk for harm. Second, it’s important to look at the
underlying ethical concepts. Fundamental ethical norms including honesty, integrity, and respect
for autonomy are violated by the quiz’s deceptive nature and the recommendations’ lack of
openness. The developers of the quiz breached the project’s ethical integrity and disregarded their
professional obligations by putting the pharmaceutical client’s interests ahead of the wellbeing of
the quiz’s consumers. In addition, the rights and interests of the parties impacted by the choice
need to be taken into account. The developers, including Sourour, were obligated to operate in
the best interests of all parties concerned, which included the users of the quiz, the
pharmaceutical client, and society at large. By disregarding pertinent facts about the drug and
putting the client’s interests ahead of users’ welfare, the drug’s developers broke their ethical
obligations and damaged public confidence in the industry.
It is evident from the evaluation and analysis performed using Armstrong’s framework
that giving ethical values like integrity, openness, and respect for autonomy top priority in this<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
situation would have been the correct course of action. It was Sourour’s moral duty as the quiz’s
developer to make sure that consumers were given clear and correct information, especially with
regard to the prescription drug suggestions. In order to adhere to these values, Sourour need to
have addressed the project’s ethical flaws sooner rather than later. This might have meant
opposing the quiz’s deceptive design, pushing for complete disclosure of the drug’s hazards, and
declining to take part in unethical marketing strategies. Sourour might have prevented harm,
preserved the reputation of his profession, and advanced societal welfare by acting in accordance
with ethical standards and professional obligations. Ultimately, this case emphasizes how critical
ethical thought and accountability are to the process of making decisions. Sourour and other
professionals in the technology sector need to practice critical ethical thinking in order to
recognize and resolve ethical conundrums in their job. Professionals can improve ethical
standards and the welfare of society by emphasizing ethical issues and accepting accountability
for their actions.
In conclusion, contractarianism tool of ethics contends that Sourour ought to have
behaved differently to preserve ethical standards, demonstrating the morally problematic
character of the code as a result of its transgression of the principle of honesty and transparency.
The examination of Sourour’s experience highlights the complex ethical concerns involved in
software development and marketing techniques. It does this by utilizing both Armstrong’s
framework for ethical decision-making and the ideal of honesty and transparency from
professional codes of ethics. Sourour’s predicament serves as a lesson, highlighting the necessity
of giving ethical values like integrity, openness, and respect for individual liberty first priority in
one’s professional dealings. The evaluation reveals serious ethical transgressions, whereby the
quiz developers jeopardized the integrity of their profession and ran the risk of doing harm by<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
putting the interests of the pharmaceutical client ahead of the well-being of the users. In addition
to undermining public confidence in the field, the developers’ disregard for their ethical
obligations and disregard for these principles put vulnerable people in danger when they sought
medical advice. Therefore, it becomes clear that resolving difficult ethical conundrums in the
technology industry requires devotion to ethical values above all else. Going forward, in order to
advance the common good of society and preserve stakeholders’ trust, professionals need to
ponder ethically, give ethical issues top priority when making decisions, and accept
accountability for their actions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Akossiwa AgbenouPHIL 355EMarch 17, 20244.4. Case Analysis on Professional EthicsA seasoned developer named Bill Sourour recalls a disturbing incident from 2000, whenhe was assigned to code a pharmaceutical quiz for a customer of the interactive marketingcompany he worked for. Teenage… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25812,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","wds_primary_category":0},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/25812"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=116"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":117,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116\/revisions\/117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.wp.odu.edu\/agbenou04\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}