Who will teach journalists to be ethical? Who will teach politicians to be ethical? Who will teach bankers to be ethical? Why single out one industry? Why conflate Elon Musk’s tweets with...
Who will teach journalists to be ethical? Who will teach politicians to be ethical? Who will teach bankers to be ethical?
Why single out one industry? Why conflate Elon Musk’s tweets with Facebook’s disingenuity? What is the overall takeaway here besides ‘some tech people are unethical’? Why is that important to point out? Aren’t there unethical people/organizations in all spheres?
As a society, we generally don’t force anyone to be ethical. Rather, we discourage bad actors and promote normative ethics via social pressure, government regulation, and also, importantly, via a justice system. If Swisher had bothered to research government regulations of technology, or how the justice system is handling relevant cases, rather than surfacing the ridiculous notion of corporations self-regulating by hiring ethics officers, I might have learned something. As is, this was unenlightening.
Ethics is a fundamental part of the curriculum for all three of those professions education (journalism, economics and law). That doesn't guarantee ethical behavior in those fields, but it...
Who will teach journalists to be ethical? Who will teach politicians to be ethical? Who will teach bankers to be ethical?
Ethics is a fundamental part of the curriculum for all three of those professions education (journalism, economics and law). That doesn't guarantee ethical behavior in those fields, but it certainly helps. However ethics is generally not taught as part of computer science programs and so many in the tech industry have degrees with no ethics courses as part of their curriculum (or no formal higher education at all). So this article is simply exploring one potential way in which ethics can be more firmly incorporated/entrenched into the industry, by hiring people who specialize in the field and giving them positions of authority within the management of the companies.
Why single out one industry? Why conflate Elon Musk’s tweets with Facebook’s disingenuity? What is the overall takeaway here besides ‘some tech people are unethical’? Why is that important to point out?
Because of the incredibly far-reaching influence of the tech industry in the social/political/economic spheres, particularly social media companies who thus far have shown themselves to be the least ethical of the bunch. And the fact that recently there has been a spate of high-profile ethical issues pointed out in that industry also justifies singling them out too, IMO.
Aren’t there unethical people/organizations in all spheres?
Sure... but what's your point? We aren't allowed to criticize the tech industry because there are other industries and professions with ethics problems?
And I also don't understand the point of your last paragraph at all either... just because there are mechanisms which can potentially address serious ethical breaches (but largely aren't since as always they are lagging behind due to government bureaucracy and politics getting in the way) doesn't mean that other measures can't be discussed or taken to address the issue either... like hiring chief ethics officers.
I’m not saying that the tech industry is immune from criticism, I just think this particular article is all fluff. I also think you’re overstating things when you say that ethics is a fundamental...
I’m not saying that the tech industry is immune from criticism, I just think this particular article is all fluff.
I also think you’re overstating things when you say that ethics is a fundamental part of academic programs outside of computer science.
I’m asking, ‘Why concentrate on the tech industry and treat it as if its ethical issues are special?’ You seem to imply that journalists, bankers, and politicians have solved ethics, but I think those are areas where there are much more egregious and impactful ethical breaches.
Can you give an example of an ethics officer (at any level of seniority) preventing an ethical breach? Swisher didn’t provide any examples. In fact, the message from the article was basically, ‘Ethics officers don’t have any authority, so you need the executives—the ones with real authority—to be ethical.’
I never said it was a fundamental part of all academic programs outside of computer science, but it absolutely is a fundamental part of journalism, economics and law degree programs. I absolutely...
I also think you’re overstating things when you say that ethics is a fundamental part of academic programs outside of computer science.
I never said it was a fundamental part of all academic programs outside of computer science, but it absolutely is a fundamental part of journalism, economics and law degree programs.
You seem to imply that journalists, bankers, and politicians have solved ethics, but I think those are areas where there are much more egregious and impactful ethical breaches.
I absolutely did not imply that. And while I agree other industries and professions ethical breaches are highly problematic, my point still stands about how that doesn't prevent us from also attempting to address the ethics issues in the tech industry as well. And IMO social media ethical breaches in particular are absolutely critical to address, moreso than any other industry or profession. Facebook in particular for many, many, many, many reasons.
Can you give an example of an ethics officer (at any level of seniority) preventing an ethical breach?
Sure, if you only hire an ethics officer as a token gesture or PR effort they might not be effective. However how is an ethics officer any different than a HR officer? If the position is actually taken seriously, properly empowered both via internal formal, procedures for reporting and reviewing breaches as well as legislation eventually, just like HR is now, then I see no reason why they can't eventually help prevent serious ethical breaches... just like HR depts currently help prevent and deal with serious interpersonal ethical breaches already.
And even if they aren't particularly effective to start, putting pressure on the industry to hire ethics officers is about taking that first step towards a potential long-term solution. Nobody is expecting it to be a silver bullet without challenges, but as the saying goes, "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good."
Hiring an ethics officer will always be a token gesture. There are few areas where self-regulation work, and if ethics in technology is as important as it seems to be to you, I think you would be...
Hiring an ethics officer will always be a token gesture. There are few areas where self-regulation work, and if ethics in technology is as important as it seems to be to you, I think you would be interested in more serious solutions.
HR officers are different because I can think of examples where they have been effective. They are typically given real authority because it is valuable to employees. Ethics officers are not given authority, which is the only glimmer of a real point that the article touched on that might have been interesting to delve into. You didn’t answer my question with even a single anecdote where an ethics officer was effective in their job. That speaks for itself.
Ethical behavior can not be self-regulated in our current social, economic, and legal structures. It simply isn’t valuable enough—someone else will come along who is less scrupulous and put you out of business. We need regulatory bodies and public policy to wise up and catch up with technology. That’s the way to deal with Facebook and Twitter. If you sit around waiting for them to self-correct you’re going to be disappointed.
That wasn't always the case for the modern incarnation of HR until pressure began mounting in the 1950s for corporations to take the position and its role seriously... that's the point. You have...
HR officers are different because I can think of examples where they have been effective.
That wasn't always the case for the modern incarnation of HR until pressure began mounting in the 1950s for corporations to take the position and its role seriously... that's the point. You have to start somewhere and putting pressure on industry to start filling that void with an official role is just the first step. Its an iterative process, not a silver bullet.
They are typically given real authority because it is valuable to employees.
As would empowered ethics officers. Just look at Google's most recent employee revolt regarding military drone AI. If employees see no value in ethics why did that unethical project result in 4,000 employees signing a petition and dozens of employees resigning? Same goes for all the leaks lately regarding ethical breaches by tech companies. Tech employees clearly see the value in holding the companies they work for ethically accountable since they are even willing to risk their jobs to make sure the media is made known about the breaches.
We need regulatory bodies and public policy to wise up and catch up with technology. That’s the way to deal with Facebook and Twitter. If you sit around waiting for them to self-correct you’re going to be disappointed.
¿¡Porque no los dos!? If you only rely only on government to regulate industries that they are deeply in the pocket of you're going to be disappointed too. Public pressure, employee demands and industry standards can be every bit as potent as government regulations.
You really need to stop putting words in my mouth. I never said tech workers are unethical and neither did Swisher. However tech companies at the institutional and managerial level absolutely can...
You really need to stop putting words in my mouth. I never said tech workers are unethical and neither did Swisher. However tech companies at the institutional and managerial level absolutely can (and often do) behave unethically by necessity, unless forced to do otherwise either by their own employees at large, their consumers at large or the government. However that can only happen with awareness of the unethical behavior even taking place, which the idea of ethics officers is meant to help with as well.
And is that seriously your hangup with this whole suggestion of ethics officers? You think people are accusing tech workers at large of being unethical? Because that is not what is happening at all.
The majority of a company's employees can absolutely still be ethical but the institution itself unethical at the policy, decision and managerial levels because of their hierarchical nature, which that Google drone AI revolt highlights. Google management had absolutely no problem with the drone AI program (since it had the potential to make the company money, which they are obligated to do for their stockholders) but the employees at large thought it was unethical and were forced to go to extreme lengths to get the company decision makers to back down from further participating in that development program. Which is a process that would have been made easier had the employees a management level ethics officer to report their concerns to and to whom other members of management would consult with and defer to. Perhaps the whole situation could have even been avoided in the first place with an ethics officer in place who could have pointed out the ethical implications of the military drone AI program at the outset.
I think you need to reread the article if you don’t think it says tech workers are unethical. The article title itself is a rhetorical question which contains an implicature: ‘Silicon Velly needs...
I think you need to reread the article if you don’t think it says tech workers are unethical. The article title itself is a rhetorical question which contains an implicature: ‘Silicon Velly needs to be taught ethics’.
You said that it was important to highlight the unethical behavior of the tech industry. That is the central theme of the article and you were arguing against me when I said I don’t think there’s anything special, ethics-wise with the tech industry. I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m just responding to your and the article’s points.
Instances where corporate power structures are inverted, such as the Google anecdote you’re harping on, are the exception, not the rule. I totally agree that there are ethical problems in tech companies at all levels. I strongly disagree that brining in ethics officers will be effective at all. I’m just repeating myself now, so I’m going to stop replying. We’re both entitled our own opinions on this, and I really don’t think I’ve argued in bad faith here.
Who will teach journalists to be ethical? Who will teach politicians to be ethical? Who will teach bankers to be ethical?
Why single out one industry? Why conflate Elon Musk’s tweets with Facebook’s disingenuity? What is the overall takeaway here besides ‘some tech people are unethical’? Why is that important to point out? Aren’t there unethical people/organizations in all spheres?
As a society, we generally don’t force anyone to be ethical. Rather, we discourage bad actors and promote normative ethics via social pressure, government regulation, and also, importantly, via a justice system. If Swisher had bothered to research government regulations of technology, or how the justice system is handling relevant cases, rather than surfacing the ridiculous notion of corporations self-regulating by hiring ethics officers, I might have learned something. As is, this was unenlightening.
Ethics is a fundamental part of the curriculum for all three of those professions education (journalism, economics and law). That doesn't guarantee ethical behavior in those fields, but it certainly helps. However ethics is generally not taught as part of computer science programs and so many in the tech industry have degrees with no ethics courses as part of their curriculum (or no formal higher education at all). So this article is simply exploring one potential way in which ethics can be more firmly incorporated/entrenched into the industry, by hiring people who specialize in the field and giving them positions of authority within the management of the companies.
Because of the incredibly far-reaching influence of the tech industry in the social/political/economic spheres, particularly social media companies who thus far have shown themselves to be the least ethical of the bunch. And the fact that recently there has been a spate of high-profile ethical issues pointed out in that industry also justifies singling them out too, IMO.
Sure... but what's your point? We aren't allowed to criticize the tech industry because there are other industries and professions with ethics problems?
And I also don't understand the point of your last paragraph at all either... just because there are mechanisms which can potentially address serious ethical breaches (but largely aren't since as always they are lagging behind due to government bureaucracy and politics getting in the way) doesn't mean that other measures can't be discussed or taken to address the issue either... like hiring chief ethics officers.
I’m not saying that the tech industry is immune from criticism, I just think this particular article is all fluff.
I also think you’re overstating things when you say that ethics is a fundamental part of academic programs outside of computer science.
I’m asking, ‘Why concentrate on the tech industry and treat it as if its ethical issues are special?’ You seem to imply that journalists, bankers, and politicians have solved ethics, but I think those are areas where there are much more egregious and impactful ethical breaches.
Can you give an example of an ethics officer (at any level of seniority) preventing an ethical breach? Swisher didn’t provide any examples. In fact, the message from the article was basically, ‘Ethics officers don’t have any authority, so you need the executives—the ones with real authority—to be ethical.’
I never said it was a fundamental part of all academic programs outside of computer science, but it absolutely is a fundamental part of journalism, economics and law degree programs.
I absolutely did not imply that. And while I agree other industries and professions ethical breaches are highly problematic, my point still stands about how that doesn't prevent us from also attempting to address the ethics issues in the tech industry as well. And IMO social media ethical breaches in particular are absolutely critical to address, moreso than any other industry or profession. Facebook in particular for many, many, many, many reasons.
Sure, if you only hire an ethics officer as a token gesture or PR effort they might not be effective. However how is an ethics officer any different than a HR officer? If the position is actually taken seriously, properly empowered both via internal formal, procedures for reporting and reviewing breaches as well as legislation eventually, just like HR is now, then I see no reason why they can't eventually help prevent serious ethical breaches... just like HR depts currently help prevent and deal with serious interpersonal ethical breaches already.
And even if they aren't particularly effective to start, putting pressure on the industry to hire ethics officers is about taking that first step towards a potential long-term solution. Nobody is expecting it to be a silver bullet without challenges, but as the saying goes, "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good."
Hiring an ethics officer will always be a token gesture. There are few areas where self-regulation work, and if ethics in technology is as important as it seems to be to you, I think you would be interested in more serious solutions.
HR officers are different because I can think of examples where they have been effective. They are typically given real authority because it is valuable to employees. Ethics officers are not given authority, which is the only glimmer of a real point that the article touched on that might have been interesting to delve into. You didn’t answer my question with even a single anecdote where an ethics officer was effective in their job. That speaks for itself.
Ethical behavior can not be self-regulated in our current social, economic, and legal structures. It simply isn’t valuable enough—someone else will come along who is less scrupulous and put you out of business. We need regulatory bodies and public policy to wise up and catch up with technology. That’s the way to deal with Facebook and Twitter. If you sit around waiting for them to self-correct you’re going to be disappointed.
That wasn't always the case for the modern incarnation of HR until pressure began mounting in the 1950s for corporations to take the position and its role seriously... that's the point. You have to start somewhere and putting pressure on industry to start filling that void with an official role is just the first step. Its an iterative process, not a silver bullet.
As would empowered ethics officers. Just look at Google's most recent employee revolt regarding military drone AI. If employees see no value in ethics why did that unethical project result in 4,000 employees signing a petition and dozens of employees resigning? Same goes for all the leaks lately regarding ethical breaches by tech companies. Tech employees clearly see the value in holding the companies they work for ethically accountable since they are even willing to risk their jobs to make sure the media is made known about the breaches.
¿¡Porque no los dos!? If you only rely only on government to regulate industries that they are deeply in the pocket of you're going to be disappointed too. Public pressure, employee demands and industry standards can be every bit as potent as government regulations.
Did that actually stop the project?
Yes.
So this is an anecdote that shows that tech workers aren’t as unethical as you and Swisher are painting them, huh?
You really need to stop putting words in my mouth. I never said tech workers are unethical and neither did Swisher. However tech companies at the institutional and managerial level absolutely can (and often do) behave unethically by necessity, unless forced to do otherwise either by their own employees at large, their consumers at large or the government. However that can only happen with awareness of the unethical behavior even taking place, which the idea of ethics officers is meant to help with as well.
And is that seriously your hangup with this whole suggestion of ethics officers? You think people are accusing tech workers at large of being unethical? Because that is not what is happening at all.
The majority of a company's employees can absolutely still be ethical but the institution itself unethical at the policy, decision and managerial levels because of their hierarchical nature, which that Google drone AI revolt highlights. Google management had absolutely no problem with the drone AI program (since it had the potential to make the company money, which they are obligated to do for their stockholders) but the employees at large thought it was unethical and were forced to go to extreme lengths to get the company decision makers to back down from further participating in that development program. Which is a process that would have been made easier had the employees a management level ethics officer to report their concerns to and to whom other members of management would consult with and defer to. Perhaps the whole situation could have even been avoided in the first place with an ethics officer in place who could have pointed out the ethical implications of the military drone AI program at the outset.
I think you need to reread the article if you don’t think it says tech workers are unethical. The article title itself is a rhetorical question which contains an implicature: ‘Silicon Velly needs to be taught ethics’.
You said that it was important to highlight the unethical behavior of the tech industry. That is the central theme of the article and you were arguing against me when I said I don’t think there’s anything special, ethics-wise with the tech industry. I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m just responding to your and the article’s points.
Instances where corporate power structures are inverted, such as the Google anecdote you’re harping on, are the exception, not the rule. I totally agree that there are ethical problems in tech companies at all levels. I strongly disagree that brining in ethics officers will be effective at all. I’m just repeating myself now, so I’m going to stop replying. We’re both entitled our own opinions on this, and I really don’t think I’ve argued in bad faith here.