This course examines ethical issues relevant to computing and information technology, including privacy; freedom of speech and content control on the Internet; individual and social responsibility; cybersecurity; cybercrimes; social impact of computers and other digital technologies; and ethical obligations of IT professionals. Students will gain a broad understanding of central issues in cyberethics and the ways fundamental ethical theories relate to these core issues. To be able to address ethical issues in cybersecurity requires an understanding of ethical principles and reasoning as there many different ethical concepts such as:

  • Supernaturalism
  • Subjectivism
  • Consequentialism
  • Intuitionism
  • Emotivism
  • Duty-based ethics
  • Virtue ethics
  • Situation ethics

The key to ethical reasoning is the ability to identify, assess, and develop ethical arguments from varying ethical positions which helps in determining the difference between right thinking, decisions, and actions and those that are wrong, hurtful, and/or harmful to others and ourselves. Ethics is mostly emotion-based and motivated by facts, values, beliefs, and feelings. 

Google Street View is one technology by Google that has helped improve navigation and travel. But all of this improvement in navigation didn’t come without a price, hence the need to employ ethics in addressing the concerns posed by people in different geographic areas who were not happy with the way Google went about collecting data for the Google Street View technology. An example of how ethics was used to address the issue of Google Street View is in the journal below.

What would have been a more ethical way to implement Google Street View?

There have been tremendous advancements in technology over the past decades, affecting how things are done, from making complex processes into simple actions. Of all these technological advancements, the invention of a technology that allows us to see any geographical area virtually whenever we want is impressive. This technology, known as Google Street View, has made it easy for businesses, individuals, and even law enforcement agencies to verify locations and addresses without necessarily having to waste resources to travel for verification. This is because, with the simple use of a computer or any mobile device, one can sit in the comfort of their homes or places of work and virtually explore the existence of different locations and not just the location but the ability to have a 360-degree view of the location. For example, suppose one must travel to a location for business. In that case, they can use google street view to verify the location and see what is around to familiarize themselves with the area even before arriving. Although such an invention makes life comfortable and easy to verify places, it has also generated many controversies relating to privacy. Many people feel that using this innovative invention fringes upon their privacy, especially without prior consent from the inventors. In this case analysis, I will argue that both Contractarianism and utilitarianism show us that Google’s Street View has the interest of the majority of people across many nations. This is because the benefits of using google street view will bring the utmost satisfaction to many users, with or without their consent. However, with regards to issues of privacy violations must be addressed through contractarianism. In the reading, we can see an important idea that was pointed out by Floridi, which is central to Google Street View, is how the world has become a global village due to technological advancements. He expressed how through technology, there is an increase in the abuse of privacy in a digitally globalized village as opposed to a non-digitally globalized village. The concept of the digitalized global village relating to the use of Google Street View (GSV) can be liked a typical village where everyone knows each other, including the very personal and intimate aspects of their lives. The same cannot be said about big cities and larger communities with many people and subdivisions. To know everything and everyone in a big city without globalized digital technology like the GSV will be impossible. Privacy infringement is one of many reasons why a digitalized global village can be frowned upon by specific populations and cultures. This is a problem with small villages and cultures that values their privacy and does not encourage certain changes, such as the introduction of GSV. In the reading by Vaidyanathan, Osamu Higuchi, an advocacy writer, was concerned about the infringement of privacy and how Google does the mapping. Osamu writes to Google about Google’s lack of respect for the culture and the offensiveness that Google Street View presented to the Japanese urban neighborhoods. For people living in urban communities, the Japanese culture is very particular about their neighbors’ privacy. Although they may know each other and may also have ideas about their daily lives regarding their livelihood, nature, and the looks of the environment around their homes, they are also respectful of their neighbor’s privacy. They do not intrude in their personal space by taking pictures of their neighbor’s compound without prior consent. This concern that Osamu meant to address with Google as their mapping and view capturing vehicles going around taking pictures of environments including people’s life and posting on the internet for easy by the public and internet users without prior consent. However, Google couldn’t use utilitarianism as a justification for their actions in pushing forward their initiative of introducing Google Street View (GSV). Because of certain cultures, like the Japanese culture, seeking the people’s consent and understanding of their culture would have prevented any impediment and facilitated a smooth transition and initiation of the Google Street View. No one likes to have others invade their privacy, especially without their consent, regardless of the benefit. Respect for confidentiality should be in any institution’s best interest, especially when instituting any initiative like Google Street View, even within the context of the utilitarianism model as it pertains to people’s data that are exposed to the public without their consent. The right thing for Google to have done since the evasion of privacy has become such a huge problem among many cultures was to consider applying the Contractarianism model, which is based on the unspoken social contract between all members of society as members of the society. Considering the internet cuts across many geographical locations. Hence, online users are from many different countries with diverse cultures. The use of GSV will also vary from place to place and many other users. In a perfect digitized global village, using Google Street View will bring everything closer to its user. Many users are and will be able to monitor their projects several thousands of miles away. Using Google Street View, the public has access to intrude on other people’s privacy virtually without their consent. It can use whatever personal information is discovered through its analysis and invasion to cause problems and create an alarming environment where safety and security may be in question. Using the contractarianism model will allow google to have the experience to know what it feels like to have one’s privacy invaded if Google was in the position of those whose privacy was infringed upon. Sometimes having the lens placed on each gives us an awakening call of how it feels to be on the other side. This will provide a better picture when structuring and developing any product, such as Google Street View. There will also be an understanding of why different public inputs are important to consider before introducing the product to different cultures and settings. One should have the choice and opportunity to decide when or not to be part of anything by giving the option to opt-in or opt-out. This will ensure the product’s (GSV) success for both Google and the public, creating a sense of pride and inclusion. In the United Kingdom, an information commissioner, Christopher Graham, had various concerns about Google’s activities, some pertaining to data mining as passwords and other personal data of the citizenry was picked up as Google’s Street View cars would go round mapping and storing the maps data. Graham also pointed out the need for Google to consider evaluating their action for any possible consequences as they intend to roll out their products. This will allow them to address all adverse events and ensure a successful launch and execution of any of their products. Floridi pointed out the fact that some people may have very little control over their usage of their data on the internet when it becomes publicized. This, according to Vaidhyanathan is the fact that others may not have the necessary capability or means to access the internet hence the inability to realize that the public can access some pertinent information about them. Even when they know their information has been exposed, it is impossible to take it down. To curb this, the must be a structure in place to ensure that Google can be made accountable for any actions of theirs when collecting data for Google Street view. People will be allowed to decide what information about their environment can be public by giving consent and having the option to either opt-in or opt-out of any program. For example, Japan could have Google take down all inappropriate pictures against Japanese privacy laws and culture because of contractarianism. Although Google anticipated some of these issues, they did not think it would in this proportion. Today, Google vehicles are made to follow the directions and standards stipulated by their country. Anything contrary to that will result in a very hefty fine, and in most European countries with strong data privacy laws to protect their citizenry. In conclusion, looking at both ethical models of Utilitarianism and Contractarianism, each ethical model, when applied, will yield a positive result for both parties. Google should be open minded when implementing its Street View, mindful of the public and the impact that an invasion of their privacy will have on their lives since the internet has diverse users with different intentions. While it is important to address the negative impact of the Google Street View on society in terms of data privacy, it is also imperative to appreciate the many positive uses and effects that this same tool has had on society and the world at large. Many crimes have been solved with the help of Google Street View, and there is also the ease with which we can move around anywhere in the world and discover interesting educative things with this same tool. In consultation with their many stakeholders, I think that Google should consider making it part of the business Operandi to include and consult the people by educating them about the products’ benefits and allowing them to consent. Also, if the product can produce more positive results for society across the board, they can make their own ethical decision in the interest of the people and community.