Blog Post 9
Last week in class we completed Socratic seminars to help us see how book clubs can help people to understand readings and discuss what they think is essential. We broke into groups, and our group had to complete four different readings, or short stories, including Eleven, The Hitchhiker, and The Lottery, in addition to our choice of A Modest Proposal. Many of the authors I was unfamiliar with, and I feel really fortunate to have read them, especially The Hitchiker. It was an incredible read that prompted discussions in our group about how control can play a role in developing a narrative. I was also happy to hear the group speaking about the use of reason in A Modest Proposal to show how satire can be more than just a quick laugh. The class was relaxed, had detailed discussions about the material, and went smoothly overall. I had a good time, and now I’m much more likely to attend a local book club on my own.
This week I read two articles about ethics in Silicon Valley, an area I’ll be moving to in June! Coran (2017) discusses how executives in the Valley are creating their own ethics and values that will potentially be used as a way for potential employees to see if they want to work there. With the recent political turmoil in the White House, they are seeking to answer questions like how to protect immigrants, offer fair pay, and prevent technology from being used against free citizens. One significant problem however with their plan is that the White House doesn’t seem to care. There are few, if any, people left on Trump’s technology advisory board to help Trump see the value. Despite the opposition from the White House, companies continue to look at why this might be important to them. Technology continues to grow more powerful, and it can enable unethical power from government and individuals seeking to hurt democracy and protect authoritarian regimes. I am both fortunate and unfortunate to be working for a company out of the political spotlight. On the one hand, my priorities as a researcher will not be collecting personal information to make a profit off of and worrying about how much information is too much. On the other hand, this is a persistent problem that needs to be dealt with, and user researchers may provide valuable insights into how technology can protect individuals.
Klein (2018) interviews Tristan Harris, co-founder of Center for Humane Technology, about the recent presidential elections and its effect on Silicon Valley. Harris says that the election really shed light on how addicting technology and social media is. He takes the approach of persuasion when looking at technology, by asking questions like how the repeated viewing of outrageous news may influence us on a deeper level than just becoming momentarily outraged. To solve issues like this, Silicon Valley companies like Google push out programs, like meditation, but this really does not change the way people share the world with us. It may help us to overcome current stress, but if we continue sharing information the way we are, we’ll never solve the underlying problem.
You make a good point about the importance of politics and the White House when it comes to Silicon Valley and corporate ethics. Hearing about Cambridge Analytica's use of Facebook's personal profile information and the impact this had on the election shows how timely these issues are and how disastrous the consequences can be. I have no idea what's going to happen in the future. On the one hand, once Trump is out of the White House, things should get better, but these issues are bigger than just the president, so I don't know what's going to change, if anything will.
ReplyDeleteYou took away many more specifics about the potential code of ethics mentioned in the Coran article than I did, I thought it was extremely vague, so I'm glad to see that there were actual line items that were considered for inclusion. We also differed on our interpretation of the relationship between Silicon Valley and the White House. You note that current administration will not enforce any kind of regulations against tech firms, which we can already see with the repeal of Net Neutrality. My take away was kind of the opposite - I thought that the ethics discussion was only happening because of the results of the 2016 election and the policies that have followed. I felt that this was an attempt by Silicon Valley to appeal to their more liberal consumers -- it was like they were saying "Yes, the administration is doing evil things, but look at us! We're sweet and innocent and we're going to be fair to immigrants even in the face of backlash from the government! We're nice and not doing anything corrupt with your personal data!" Regardless of the reasoning, a code of ethics is definitely needed for info-tech companies.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your takeaways from the Coran article. Much like Kelsey, I had a pretty negative view of what companies were trying to do. I somewhat sided with the writer of the article, in that I believed the initiatives and attempts at the code of ethics were too vague to be particularly effective. When I looked up the progress of the group in Silicon Valley, nothing official had been codified. However, you bring in some excellent points that change is very unlikely to come from the White House at this time, meaning it will be up to the executives of Silicon Valley to make choices regarding the usage of people's data. Sadly, I don't see that happening unless there is a considerable public backlash that results in the heavy hitter companies like Facebook and Google loosing a considerable amount of money.
ReplyDeleteI too find the idea of looking at ethics as a way to determine if one wants to work there. I personally have done this by looking at mission statements and core values employers list on their websites. While not the same as ethics, both mission statements and codes of ethics represent values of companies and give a sense of the company culture.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I also am in agreement with Kelsey and Student of the Library. It feels very reactionary. That being said we would be critical if they didn't do something. Another part of me wonders if a piece of the problem is the rate at which ideas flow and technology advances. We see it in terms of law; the law often doesn't quite catch up with technology all the time. Could it be that Silicon Valley can't keep up with themselves?