Introduction

Information technology has helped to advance technology beyond its originally outlined objectives. This outcome is based on the efficiencies and benefits it provides more so, through the internet which is the major component of the technology. However, while it may provide many benefits, its widespread application and pervasiveness make it a convenient tool for spying on people’s privacy. Now, according to Julian Assange (renown whistleblower), the internet and particularly the social media websites such as Facebook enable governments to enact totalitarian regimes that continuously spy on the general public thus infringe on their security, privacy and intellectual property (SMH, 2011). In light of these events, this report analyses the ethical issues of the internet as outlined by Assange and based on the four classical ethical theories.

Analyses

This analysis is based on an article written by the SMH (Kingsley, 2011) which outlines the negative role of the internet, an outcome that even led to the great Arab uprising. Therefore, while information access is extensively provided, the users are subjected to environments that promote the sinister objectives of governments including collecting vital user information that is then used to interrogate suspects based on inconclusive evidence.

Classical ethical theories

Utilitarianism: At hand are actions whose results affect the general good of the public by infringing on their personal rights. This conclusion is based on the activities promoted by the internet where it’s used to spy on the general public. Utilitarian principles are based on the actions of individuals which should promote the greater good of the majority more so, by promoting their happiness. However, the article at hand depicts a contrary image where social media sites such as Facebook are used to interrogate and even torture suspects (Mill, 2015).

Furthermore, the internet while facilitating information access allows governments to snoop on people’s private affairs which inherently interfere with their privacy. Moreover, the public is generally unaware of the illicit actions conducted using the internet which intensifies the ethical issues at hand as there are few individuals who can keep the perpetrators in check. Therefore, although the internet may promote the information access, its pervasive and anonymous nature negatively affects the greater good of the people which contradicts the utilitarian principles (Mill, Utilitarianism, 2001). In addition to this, the internet promotes other sinister actions among the users such as cybercrime because of the nature of its environment.

Deontology: On the other hand, consider the duties of the parties involved, where governments are supposed to protect their citizens. This protection should include the rights to privacy and security, an outcome that is not exhibited by the existing conditions as outlined in the article. Therefore, even without considering the actions taken by the government, their roles and duties should propel moral conducts where the general good is practised. Now deontological theories are centred on the duties held by individuals which outlines the ethical issues at hand where governments through the internet fail to exercise their moral duties (Lacewing, 2015).

Furthermore, the same theories outline two core principles or duties; first prohibitory duties where parties involved are supposed to exercise some levels of restrictions e.g. they should not lie. However, the internet is used to further the course of governments without the knowledge of the public. Secondly, there are the social duties which are based on the promises made, particularly through the constitution. In any given country, the rights of the citizens are clearly stipulated in the general law of the constitution which includes their privacy and security. These laws should act as a guide to governance and therefore when broken will signal the moral failures of the parties involved (O’Neill, 2011).

Virtue: Based on the general characteristics of a virtuous agent, the virtue ethical theory claim that ethical virtues define the morality of individuals. Now, these virtues are based on the core values of the universe i.e. wisdom, courage, justice and humanity among many others (Hursthouse, 1999). Therefore, ethical issues and dilemmas will stem from practices that contradict these core values, an outcome that is seen in this case study. For one, the internet through social media sites is used to round up the participants of public revolts who are then beaten and tortured in order to conform to the accepted governmental conditions. Secondly, governments’ through the internet fail to consider the will of the people which contradicts justice a core value of the virtue principles.

Now, based on these actions the virtues of the participants are put into questions where the character of government officials are inclined towards immorality. Therefore, even without considering the actions or consequences of the said individuals, their personal attributes are unethical which promotes the ethical issues at hand (Grcic, 2013). Moreover, unlike the actions which can be changed or adjusted to fit a given moral code, these attributes are heavily cemented in the personality of the participants which further intensifies the ethical problems.

Contract: Finally, consider the ethical issues outlined in this article based on the social construct of the global community where certain laws or guidelines are used to maintain morality. In essence, a society will have certain inherent rules to govern the actions of the people involved. Now, these rules are undocumented and are not enforced as official laws but will act as constraints thus, will provide a natural basis for ethical conduct. In the article highlighted, the internet seems to have led to the failure of the social construct where its defining attributes contradict the general rules of a society (Browne).

Unlike other natural environments, the internet seems to promote many illicit actions because the participants exist as anonymous parties who are unknown to each other. Furthermore, its pervasive nature makes it difficult to contain the general governing factors of a society such as equality and altruism. Therefore, based on its social construct the internet helps to promote the immoral actions taken by the government as outlined by the article at hand, a clear violation of the contractual ethical theory (Benham, 2008).

Conclusion

While the internet offers many benefits its nature particularly pervasiveness promotes many sinister actions that as outlined by the article at hand as it’s used by governments to infringe on the rights of the general public. Furthermore, unlike other natural environments, the internet does not conform to the social construct which makes it difficult to manage and contain the behaviour of the participants. As a solution, the governing bodies should enact stringent laws to manage the actions of those involved. However, these laws will only work if the participants improve their personal attributes by exercising virtuous actions based on proper ethical values and conducts.

References

Benham, B. (2008). Ethics: Social contract theory. lecture 25, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://155.97.32.9/~bbenham/Phil%201000%20Fall%2008/1000Lecture25_EthicsSocContract.pdf.

Browne, K. (n.d.). Introduction to the social contract theory. Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ362/hallam/Readings/SocialContractHelium.pdf.

Grcic, J. (2013). Virtue Theory, Relativism and Survival. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://www.ijssh.org/papers/273-C10018.pdf.

Hursthouse, R. (1999). Virtue Ethics and Human Nature. HUME STUDIES, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v25n1-2/hursthouse/hursthouse-v25n1-2.pdf.

Kingsley, P. (2011). Julian Assange tells students that the web is the greatest spying machine ever . The Guardian, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/mar/15/web-spying-machine-julian-assange.

Lacewing, M. (2015). Kant’s deontological ethics. Routledge Taylor and Francis group, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://documents.routledge-interactive.s3.amazonaws.com/9781138793934/A22014/ethical_theories/Kant’s%20deontological%20ethics.pdf.

Mill, J. (2001). Utilitarianism. Batoche Books, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: socserv.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/utilitarianism.pdf.

Mill, J. (2015). Utilitarianism. Retrieved 21 September, 2011, from: https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/mill1863.pdf.

O’Neill, O. (2011). Kantean Ethics. Deontological Ethics, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://people.umass.edu/klement/160/kant_large.pdf.

SMH. (2011). Internet is world’s ‘greatest spying machine’: Assange . The Sydney Morning Herlad, Retrieved 21 September, 2017, from: https://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/internet-is-worlds-greatest-spying-machine-assange-20110316-1bwoz.html.