In this case study we were given the opportunity to read “The Code I’m Still Ashamed Of” by Bill Sourour. This article was told from the perspective of Sourour and describes a moment early in his career where his code of ethics and moral boundaries were compromised. Sourour was given a task to write a code for a pharmaceutical client. The website he built consisted of a quiz used as a marketing tactic to target an antidepressant to teenage girls. When testing the website another colleague mentioned that there was something wrong with the site as no matter what answer you chose you would be told that the antidepressant was needed (unless you were allergic). While this raised a red flag to Sourour he was young and was told to do a job which is what he did. The Pharmaceutical company he designed the quiz for was ecstatic as to how it turned out but Sourour still felt off about the code he built. Later, he learned that a young woman who used the quiz died by suicide. Sourour learned that a side effect of the drug was depression and suicidal thoughts. After learning this he informed his sister as she was also on the drug. He was then overcome with guilt about his role. This case showcases the importance of ethical duties and concerns around professional responsibility and transparency. As well as the duty of care developers owe to the public. As Sourour noted, developers are one of the last people to spot any concerns with what they are building and something like what was mentioned in the article should have been discussed prior to releasing the quiz. In this case analysis I will argue that Kantian ethics shows us that Sourour’s code was morally problematic as it violated the moral duty to respect individuals as ends in themselves as opposed to being a means to anothers end. Sourour should have acted differently by refusing the assignment or at least raising concerns to uphold his professional and ethical responsibilities. 

During this Case Analysis we were presented with professional ethical codes such as ACM Code of Ethics, IEE Code of Ethics and the NSPE Code of Ethics. Each of these codes lay out clear expectations for honesty, responsibility, and putting the public’s safety first. In the ACM Code of ethics it mentions “Avoid Harm to Others” and “Be honest and trustworthy”. The IEE Code of Ethics  “to hold paramount safety, health, and welfare of the public, to strive to comply with ethical design and sustainable development practices, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment. The NSPE Code Of Ethics has a rule stating “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. Each of these codes of ethics clearly lays out in one way or another that professionals have a duty to put people’s safety before profits or employer requests. Especially when someone’s well being is at stake. When reflecting on the code of ethics we can see that Sourour was put in a tough place because he went ahead and built the code for a quiz knowing that it would compromise any of the code of ethics presented before. The website created was not a marketing site. It was intentionally designed to look unbiased while secretly pushing a specific drug. As brought to the attention by his colleague. The design behind the website is a huge breach of honesty and transparency. It directed teenage girls to a specific drug that may have not even been necessary for the consumer. The website promoted a product without full disclosure that it had serious side effects. Under the ACM code, Sourour had a responsibility to push back or at least raise the concern of the drug. Under the IEE Code he would have had an ethical duty to highlight the risk of the drug to users even if his employer did not want him to, under the NSPE code Sourer had an ethical duty to protect public safety. Public safety should have been prioritized over the employer’s request. Observing this situation with Kantian ethics the ethical failure becomes even more obvious. Kant’s theory is that we should act in ways that we’d be okay with everyone else acting too, and that we should always treat people with respect–as individuals, not just a way to get what we want. In the code that Sourours wrote he used users as a means to boost a pharmaceutical company’s profits without respecting the user’s ability to make their own informed decisions. Misleading people, young teenage women about something as serious as their health. The exact thing that Kantian ethics warns against. When reviewing the code of ethics alongside Kantian ethics it is clear that Sourour should have either refused the project, or at the bare minimum brought attention to his strong objections against the pharmaceutical’s “marketing” tactic. As Sourour recalled he was young and inexperienced so he felt the pressure to create the code even with his objections. Kantian ethics stresses that duty doesn’t disappear when it’s inconvenient. Kantian ethics means doing the right thing which means respecting others autonomy and dignity even when it’s risky to your own career. While this may be easier said than done. Especially when it comes to Sourour, a young employee with little power. Pushing back to your employer might seem impossible. But following the ethical codes and moral duties you are helping to create a guide to doing your job while following what is ethically right. 

During this case study we were also able to read “Confidentiality: a Comparison across the Professions of Medicine, Engineering and Accounting”, by Mary Beth Armstrong. In this reading Armstrong talks about how being a professional means holding a special kind of trust with the public. She argues that doctors, engineers, and accountants aren’t just doing “technical work”. They have a deeper duty to protect people who rely on their expertise. Whether you’re a doctor, an engineer, or an accountant, society gives you certain privileges (status, money, independence) because it trusts you to put public welfare first. Armstrong mentions that professionals have extra duties because the people they serve often don’t have the expertise to fully protect themselves. If these professionals begin to act irresponsibly, real harm can happen and trust will be broken. While it may have seemed like Sourour’s only job was to write code he was still acting within a system of professional trust. The users of the website didn’t know that the quiz they were taking was basically a hidden advertisement. The users trusted that the website was giving them real neutral information. Since Sourour was the technical expert who helped build that system he had a special duty to protect the user’s best interest even if it went against his employer’s instruction. Armstrong also states that sometimes being a true professional means standing up to our own boss especially when the public is being put at risk. Layering on the Kantian ethics to this situation it becomes more serious. Kant’s ethics argues that being moral means doing what’s right because it’s your duty not just because someone told you to or because you are trying to get some type of result. Kant’s ethics says that we must treat people as ends in themselves, not as tools for someone else’s profit. When Souruor wrote the code that misled users into promoting a drug they didn’t fully understand he treated users like tools to boost a pharmaceutical company’s profits instead of respecting them as people who deserved honest information and a real choice. If Souruor had been thinking like Kantian he would have recognized that his duty wasn’t just to his employer it was to the users and to the public. Following orders wouldn’t excuse helping to deceive people. The right thing to do would have been to refuse to write the deceptive code to raise serious objections. We can’t help but think how differently things could have been had he brought up the concerns. Even if Sourour couldn’t have stopped the project from happening (because let’s be honest the pharmaceutical company would have found someone else to execute their plan) Kant argues that Sourour still had a duty to step back from the unethical practices. Doing the right thing means acting on moral duty even when it’s uncomfortable. He should have respected the user’ trust. That should have been his top priority. Both Armstrong and Kant emphasize that ethical professionalism demands real internal strength. Obviously in real life it’s not obvious when and if you’re crossing an ethical line sometimes it only becomes clear in hindsight. Sourour obviously had some red flags raised but he didn’t fully realize the seriousness of the situation until after the tragic consequences came to light. This is why it is important to follow strong professional codes and internal moral frameworks. Ethical codes are meant to be a guidance before harm happens. 

In this case analysis, I argued that Sourour’s involvement in creating a deceptive website was morally problematic because it violated both professional codes of ethics and Kantian’s principles of respect and duty. View this case through the lens of ACM, IEE, and NSPE code. It’s clear Sourour had a responsibility to protect the public’s welfare. If anyone else was in Sourours position they would be facing the consequences and ethical dilemma but it begs the question would they have brought up the red flags? It’s not easy telling your employer no. But that is why ethical education and clear company standards are crucial. Ultimately the Sourour case shows that professionalism is more than just technical skill; it’s about carrying moral responsibility and being willing to act even when it’s difficult. Ethics can’t be something we only think about after the fact; it needs to be the backbone of every step of the work we do.