Week 7 Lecture 12 Tuesday, November 8, 2016 Group presentations Chapter 4 : Friendship, democracy and citizen journalism Friendships as they relate to social media (social network sites SNS) ∙ Easier for peo9ple to connect each other as well as to isolate someone ∙ Self- commodification ∙ IndivIf you want to learn more check out rel 108 uiuc
Don't forget about the age old question of What are the challenges of a parole officer?
Don't forget about the age old question of rel 108 uiuc
If you want to learn more check out rel 108 uiuc
If you want to learn more check out nxiem
If you want to learn more check out What is the main function of the digestive system?
idual emphases toward relational emphases ∙ Ethics virtue ∙ The impact of secondary orality- textuality on people ∙ How far the relational self as work in SNS can be dependent on the affirmation and assurance of others ∙ Redesign friendship online Democracy: the importance of dialogue and devote shaped by rational argument, diver narratives, and ethical commitments to equality, freedom, solidarity, and perspective-taking Citizen journalism New sources have changed The rest of us has the chance to receive different news as well as to generate news Ethical rights, responsibilities, and perhaps virtues Chapter summary How friendship is dramatically amplified by SNS and perhaps threatened by affordances of SNS Ethics of forms of journalism have changed and been shaped democratic ends Early confidence in democratizing powers of digital media has been diminished Facts of the case 2009 Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad was re elected into office in what many believed to be an illegitimate election On June 20, 2009 Neda Agha Soltan, a young iranian philosophy student was shot in the chest during clashes between anti-government demonstrators and government security forces Her death was captured on video and posted to you tube, where it eventually went viral The twitter hashtag #neda was created Time magazine said that it was probably the most witnessed death in human history Neda was lifted up as a martyr in the cause of the opposition to the Iranian regime . Demonstrators carried photographs of her Unfortunately for university English professor. Neda Soltani several western news outlets including Fox news and CNN pulled her Facebook profile photo to use in coverage of the event Which lead to a massive number of friend requests to her Facebook and arrest and detention by the Iranian government which wanted her to help in their efforts to smear the video as a hoax When she refused she was accused of spying for the west She has since escaped iran and is struggling to rebuild her life Citizen journalism vs major news outlets ∙ Ethics of sharing the photo vs publishing the photo by the outlet Values ∙ Empathy sympathy - ∙ Respect for others ∙ Res citizen Principles ∙ Golden rule ∙ Ethical teachings of Jesus ∙ Prophetic journalism ∙ Laws of nation ∙ Milton- self-righting principle- truth will prevail ∙ Locke - right of revolution, natural rights - right to opinion - ethics is balancing individual and social concerns ∙ Hobbes - humans are selfish brutish and violent ∙ James - violence could possibly be the most effective in reaction and action ∙ Marx - ends justify the means Loyalties ∙ Society - connected by social media and more aware of events around the world ∙ Self - feels good to be informed and share info ∙ Public's right to know ∙ Feelings of audience - invoke sympathy and empathy- shock factor Citizens have Less loyalties than journalists ∙ More anonymity Decision ∙ Ethical - see continued photo ∙ 1st amendment rights grans us freedom of speech and one important reason why we have legal protection here is because is it imperative that as citizens we are able to evaluate and criticize government ∙ The sedition act of 1798 made it a crime to publish anything scandalous or malicious about the government. Truth was not a defense, as truth is often more damaging ∙ Protection even covers falsehoods so that we do not self-censor out of fear of facing imprisonment or fines just because of inaccuracy. Give voice to the voiceless ∙ No actual mallice- meaning both news organizations and the citizen journalists would have had to have published the information knowing that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth ∙ We do and we should hold professional media organizations to higher fact checking and accuracy standards. SPJ stresses correction of mistakes. Bloggers code of ethics stresses transparency ∙ This may have been an honest mistake made by misinformation, likely not helped by the fact that the event took place in Iran making it difficult to ge the story ∙ Intentions were arguably good- raise awareness. News outlets did not share the graphic video Professor notes Reckless disregard- people post the photo of someone they thought had been shot but not the right person- Common names - beware Rolling stone- Jury ruled against them for actual malice (professional mistakes) - reposted the story on the website without changing- just said there was issues about truth (story about sexual assault) Free speech issues in the US vs other countries 1st amendment - privileges in the US and not in other countries even if you're from the US "Internet can be in itself a weapon"- Underwood Do no harm balance that we try to bring to free speech and free press Internet now has much more consequences now for false information and harm Potential for using the internet for fear and make people self-censor Doctrine of unintended consequences Things happen for one heroic and ethical reason and they turn out in a different way When we do things in the US they may not have the same outcome in other countries Chapter 3 copying and distributing To get us thinking All of us have probably downloaded illegal music or videos but the question is to what extend if any is it acceptable? How do we justify it? In what situations? Imagine this: Your friend is starting a band that's struggling to gain an audience and doesn't make enough money to support its members. They released a CD on their website priced at $10. You're no stranger to illegally downloading music but you want to support the band so you pay full price for your legal copy of the CD Now imagine this: Another friend who likes the band's sample track offered free on the website asks if you'd mind making a CD of your copy of the album so that he can either: 1. Highlight the band's music at an upcoming party where he's going to provide music- in part so that the album might generate a few more sales 2. Make copies of the album to give to friends of his who are also interested in the music 3. Put a copy of the album on his computer so that it is available to others on the internet. Using one of the current P2P file sharing networks 4. All of the above Intellectual property Who has rights to what? Three main schools of thought: 1. United states and Europe 2. Copyleft/ FLOSS 3. Confucian/ Ubuntu US/ Europe: Greater stress on individual and exclusive property rights FLOSS/ Copyleft in the middle Confucian/ Ubuntu : greater stress on community inclusive property rights Western Thought: United States ∙ A utilitarian ethic is applied to intellectual property law ∙ Protecting intellectual property encourages artists to keep creating products that benefit the larger public good over the long run ∙ Because of these laws about rights, a strong financial eward encourages authors, artists, software engineers, etc to innovate ∙ However, those rights should not extend further than what is good for the public ∙ The outcome is often that industries have the most at stake and the interests of the individual agent become secondary Western thought: Europe ∙ Copyright is an intrinsic right of the individual and recognition of that person's identity or personhood ∙ Creative work is an artifact that has been invested with some measure of the author's personality or that reflects individuality ∙ Out of respect for the autonomy and humanity of the artist, that artifact deserves legal recognition ∙ On the international stage, US and Europe compete in these approaches; right now US dominates An Example: Taylor Swift Her views on Spotify and streaming music She believes that valuable things like music should be paid for and not free and have protection as an individual artist Taylor Swift has trade marked some of her lyrics Western Thought: Copyleft and Free Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) ∙ Both open sourrce and fee software movemtns support the development of software to be made freely available for others to copy, use, modify, and redistribute ∙ The justification for this freedom is that the benefits of computer software and information shared broadly and equitably over the entire community are wide-reaching ∙ These approaches ae focused on ideas of inclusive property rights (as opposed to exclusive rights) ∙ Even though an individual maintains owner rights, those rights are inclusive Ubuntu/ Confucian Some shared characteristics ∙ Individuals are relational and centrally independent. These traditions downplay the importance of the individual in favor of contributing to the larger community ∙ What counts as property is inclusive - the rights belong to the community Confucian ∙ Emphasizes the emulation of revered classics ∙ Copying is an activity that expresses respect for the work of the artist/ author ∙ A master artist is motivated mostly by the desire to benefit others with their work rather than personally profit ∙ A focus on personal benefits would mean restricting access to your work ( perhaps for people who could not afford to pay) rather than seeing your work widely distributed Ubuntu ∙ An actual software created by open sources of developers with the belief that everyone should have access to the best technologies ∙ It gets its name from the African concept of Ubuntu 'humanity towards others' and the belief in a universal bond of sharing that connects humanity ∙ Emphasis on inclusive rather than exclusive property rights for the sake of the well being of the community which is the underlying characteristic of African cultures and confucian and buddhist traditions ∙ It does not mean the complete loss of individual- still retain significance exactly because of their potential to interact with others in ways that contribute to community harmony Case notes ∙ In July of 2009 Joel Tenenbaum was charged with a civil lawsuit from the RIAA (recording industry association of america) for illegally downloading and distributing 30 songs (Copyright infringement) ∙ Joel tenenbaum was a 25 year old grad student at the time of the start of the case and pled that he did not understand the magnitude of copyright laws ∙ Originally approached in 2003 for similar charges, amounting in a $3,500 fine which escalated over the years as Tenenbaum refused to pay and tried to work out a less expensive deal ∙ He lost the trial in 2009 and was fined $675,000 ∙ The fine was reduced to $67,000 by the judge in 2010 ∙ Appealed by both sides ∙ Erinstated to a $675,000 fine in 2012∙ Tenenbaum filed for bankrupcy in 2015 and the court discharged the $657,000 fine in March of 2016 Values Respect for others Fairness Accountability Empathy/sympathy Responsible citizenship Balance Honest Loyalties Shareholders of the media company Professional reputation Self/career Society Industry Publc right to know Principles Locke - property rights and responsible citizens Rousseau - good of the community over property rigts is good of community Mil utilitaianism Karma Machiavelli - ends justify the means Laws of nation Hebrew scriptures Aristotle - individual over collective Confucious Mideval teachings of christiantity - fear of god, fear of law Teachings of jesus Conclusion: Was the $675,000 amount sought by the RIAA justifiable? We do not believe it was justifiable because as a college student, there was no way he could pay it; they could have sought a reformative approach rather than a punitive one- for ex" having him educate others Since the RIAA couldn't possibly track down and pursue everyone, was it fair to only seek out and sue a few individuals We decided that it was not fair for a few "sacrificial lambs' to bear the brrunt of the consequences when millions of other people were doing the same thing. It might have made more sense for the RIAA to go after the file-sharing companies, not individual users Rergardless of the law, do you think it is ethical or unethical to copy and distribute music? There is no right answer, ethical values aere not absolute, they ae ingrained in our culture. Even within a culture, there can be differences of belief from person to person and between generations with regarrds to who has which rights and who should benefit in which ways. Week 7 Lecture 13 Thursday, November 10, 2016 Chapter 6 Ethical frameworks ∙ Utilitarianism ∙ Deontology - western religious- quality to promise keeping and basic human rights to be sacrificed ∙ Meta-theoretical frameworks - relativism, absolutism ∙ Feminist ethics - comprehensive and inclusive way- Carol Gillian, ethics of care- prioritizes emotional bonds and take responsibility of themselves ∙ Virtue ethics - make the good decision ∙ Confucian ethics ∙ African tradition: ubuntu Potter box- case 7 media's foul ball ∙ 2003 Chicago cubs were five outs from advancing to the world series ∙ 26 year old fan, Steve Bartman, tried to grab a foul ball, preventing outfileder Moises Alou from catching it ∙ Within minutes Steve Bartman's name appeared online ∙ At the game there was no mega tron or giant screen to identify Bartman however the media made his name and face known to the pubilc by playing the video over and over again ∙ Some of the first media outlets to identify him was the Chiago sun and tribune ∙ Within minuets of the game being over all of Bartman's personal information was online- name addrress ∙ The media swarmed his house ∙ Bartman changed his identity and went under witness protection ∙ He was traumatized Discussion questions Given the potential danger to the man, should he be id by mediaDo you think it was ethical for the media to replay the clip over and over again Do you think it is ethical for the MLB to all ow Bartman's personal address and other personal information to be leaked in chatrooms Values ∙ Respect for others - privacy ∙ Fairness: is it fair for the media to blame the loss of the game on Bartman? ∙ Accountability: the media is now accountable for Bartman's need to go into witness protection ∙ Empathy/sympathy: Bartman is still traumatized and did not want any involvement in the recent win of the Cubs world series Principles ∙ Do no harm- journalists should always consider possible harm and minimize harm ∙ Golden rule- anyone could have been Bartman, other people's hands ∙ Golden mean - there is a way to cover what happened without causing as much harm ∙ Kant - despite the buzz of the game, id him for the sake of replays, the harm is not justified Loyalties ∙ Feelings of audience -game attendees, public ∙ Industry ∙ Public's right to know ∙ Professional reputation Ethical frameworks ∙ Virtue ethics- importance of other people , don’t undermine values for fame or fortune ∙ Deontology - basic human rights and promise keeping not overlooked Discussion What is your decision in the case? Do you think that in today's world of social media, if this incident were to happen again would this be such a big issue, and would it have a lasting effect? The case occurred in 2003, no Facebook yet Our conclusion ∙ Unethical ∙ Media replayed the clip multiple times, zoomed in on his face, and published his name - conscious decision ∙ Story could have been reported in other ways ∙ Had to take major precautions to protect himself- victims need to be protected Chapter 5 digital sex and games Porn reaches all corners of the internet If you have a fetish, there web has it The scope of porn has expanded in scope from 70 s beaver films to virtual reality porn Different countries have different standards for what is sexually explicit Denmark vs India Porn has clashed with feminist ideals since the 60s Women are often the target and tools for heterosexual male pleasure Porn has made its way to video games Opportunities to live out fantasies solo or with others Freedom from ostracism for having unusual tastes But there is also a potential for harmful practices for force their way in Custer's revenge, and "RapeLay" allow players to rape Native American women and perpetuate the idea that victims enjoy being attacked Where is the line- just a game? Virtual sex Is it cheating No risk of pregnancy or STDs Could be used to strengthen bonds between actual couples Virtual child porn A victimless crime? No actual child involved - virtual Could provide an outlet for people with pedophilic feelings without harming a real child Could this help lower rates of violence against children Or could it encourage perpetrators to seek out real children? Case study virtual sex- ∙ A Tennessee man is charged with aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor upon discovering 3 pictures depicted as virtual pornography- the faces of two local girls aged 10 and 12. the third is Miley Cyrus from Hannah Montana - the faces were photo shopped on nude women's bodies ∙ Investigators states that the man had no contact with any of these girls Values Honesty Integrity - how to we treat children in society Empathy/sympathy Respect for others Responsible citizenship Loyalties Society Public's right to know Feelings of audience Religious sensibilities of audience Self Principles Mill/utilitarian - greatest good for the greatest number Machiavelli- ends justify the means. Does allowing virtual child porn to exist really protect children? Christianity- be fearful of God's punishment, consequences of heaven and hell Golden rule- do unto others as you would have them do unto you Hobbes- Desire vs aversion "all humans possess certain appetites or aversions" is virtual child porn a way of satisfying those appetites? Do no harm- ae they really harming anyone or is it preventing children from being harmed? Discussion questions ∙ What are you initial reactions to the video ∙ Do you feel completely computer generated images of children in porn are a safe alternative to exploiting children? ∙ Do you feel that the photo shopped images of children and adults are a safe alternative? ∙ How can we relate the case to the chapter? ∙ Permits those persons whose sexual identities do not align with the preferences and identities dominant in their culture ∙ Paternalism: the view that society has an interest in prohibiting acts that may lead to harm of others ∙ Utilitarianism: if producing VCP results in more pleasure for those who consume it, but no direct bodily harm to real children, then we have no ethical justification for criminalizing such materials Conclusion Even though the child is not real, its still harmful emotionally and psychologically The production, distribution and consumption of virtual child pornography is detrimental to children as it causes them to be seen as inferior to others Although VCP is not physically harmful, maybe the public should still have a right to know that these people exist due to safety reasons Is it ever really safe? How can you know if a person who is walking among you and has those urges is staring at your children- will virtual porn make it worse or help?