Privacy 2
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 12

Privacy (2) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 64 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Privacy (2). Computers and society. Statistics vs. Spying. Target learned that a girl was pregnant before her parents knew – simply by monitoring shopping habits It was not technically breaking the law, but privacy was infringed upon Should retailers have the ability/right to do this? .

Download Presentation

Privacy (2)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Privacy 2

Privacy (2)

Computers and society


Statistics vs spying

Statistics vs. Spying

  • Target learned that a girl was pregnant before her parents knew – simply by monitoring shopping habits

  • It was not technically breaking the law, but privacy was infringed upon

  • Should retailers have the ability/right to do this?


Kantianism

Kantianism

Positive

Negative

Privacy infringement – e.g. can guess that a customer is pregnant, before they have told anyone elseOR make false assumptions

Can potentially find out a lot of private information about the consumer

  • Better deals/access to needs/wants for individual consumers

  • Can help company make sales

Conclusion?

Slightly ethical – Seeing as the goal is simply to improve targeted advertising, making more sales and providing better service to the customer


Act utilitarianism

Act Utilitarianism

Positive

Negative

Manipulative?

Privacy infringement – e.g. can guess that a customer is pregnant, before they have told anyone elseOR make false assumptions

Can potentially find out a lot of private information about the consumer

  • Better deals/access to needs/wants for individual consumers

  • Can help company make sales

Conclusion?

Slightly unethical – invades on people’s privacy, even with the positives that may come out of it, consumers may feel unprotected with the amount of information collected on them


Rule utilitarianism

Rule Utilitarianism

Positive

Negative

Manipulative?

Privacy infringement – e.g. can guess that a customer is pregnant, before they have told anyone elseOR make false assumptions

Can potentially find out a lot of private information about the consumer

  • Better deals/access to needs/wants for individual consumers

  • Can help company make sales

Conclusion?

Slightly ethical – it is not strictly against the law, nor can companies collect this information unless they have opted in to some system


Social contract theory

Social Contract Theory

Positive

Negative

Manipulative?

Privacy infringement – e.g. can guess that a customer is pregnant, before they have told anyone elseOR make false assumptions

Can potentially find out a lot of private information about the consumer

  • Better deals/access to needs/wants for individual consumers

  • Can help company make sales

Conclusion?

Slightly ethical – provided the companies’ use of the information is strictly for improving consumer relations, and the information is otherwise secure


Social media and free s peech

Social Media and Free Speech

People have been fired for comments on:

  • Their boss

  • Co-workers

  • Conditions of the workplace

    Is it acceptable for a boss to demand certain topics be kept physically in the workplace, and remain undiscussed elsewhere, especially in social media?

    Do/should they have a right to demand access to potential/current employees’ social networking accounts?


Social media and free speech

Social Media and Free Speech

Can information posted on social media sites be used against the original poster?

What if a user posts a status suggesting violent behaviour? Discriminative beliefs?

What about private correspondence?


Kantianism1

Kantianism

Positive

Negative

Restriction/elimination of free speech rights

Conversely, employer can address issues negatively by firing someone, or not hiring someone

Unjust access to otherwise private information (albeit not immediately to everyone)

Inconvenience caused on incorrect assessment of threats

  • Keeps work issues IN the workplace – can allow boss to address issues positively

  • Can prevent violent (or other illegal) acts

Conclusion?

Unethical - restricts on free speech & forced release of private information


Act utilitarianism1

Act Utilitarianism

Positive

Negative

Restriction/elimination of free speech rights

Conversely, employer can address issues negatively by firing someone, or not hiring someone

Unjust access to otherwise private information (albeit not immediately to everyone)

Inconvenience caused on incorrect assessment of threats

  • Keeps work issues IN the workplace – can allow employer to address issues positively

  • Can prevent violent (or other illegal) acts

Conclusion?

Unethical – the idea that someone has access to, or is legally allowed to scrutinize something as trivial as a social media post can be disconcerting


Rule utilitarianism1

Rule Utilitarianism

Positive

Negative

Restriction/elimination of free speech rights

Conversely, employer can address issues negatively by firing someone, or not hiring someone

Unjust access to otherwise private information (albeit not immediately to everyone)

Inconvenience caused on incorrect assessment of threats

  • Keeps work issues IN the workplace – can allow employer to address issues positively

  • Can prevent violent (or other illegal) acts

Conclusion?

Balanced – access to private information is a problem, however if there is sufficient evidence that someone may be engaged in illegal/dangerous activities it can be useful


Social contract theory1

Social Contract Theory

Positive

Negative

Restriction/elimination of free speech rights

Conversely, employer can address issues negatively by firing someone, or not hiring someone

Unjust access to otherwise private information (albeit not immediately to everyone)

Inconvenience caused on incorrect assessment of threats

  • Keeps work issues IN the workplace – can allow employer to address issues positively

  • Can prevent violent (or other illegal) acts

Conclusion?

Slightly ethical/balanced – we give up our free speech rights (or not), in the hope that it is beneficial to us


  • Login