Search results

During the past decade, a fairly extensive literature on the digital divide has emerged. Many reports and studies have provided statistical data (Digital Divide Network, 2002; NTIA, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000) pertaining to sociological aspects of ‘the divide,’ while some studies have examined policy issues involving universal service (Camp and Tsong, 2001) and universal access (Brewer and Chuter, 2002). Other studies have suggested ways in which the digital divide could be better understood if it were ‘reconceptualized’ in terms of an alternative metaphor, e.g. a ‘divide’ having to do with literacy (Warschauer, 2002), power (Moss, 2002), content (Carvin, 2000), or the (information) environment (Floridi, 2001). However, with the exception of Johnson (2001) and Koehler (2002), authors have tended not to question ‐ at least not directly ‐ whether the digital divide is, at bottom, an ethical issue. Many authors seem to assume that because disparities involving access to computing technology exist, issues underlying the digital divide are necessarily moral in nature. Many further assume that because this particular ‘divide’ has to do with something that is digital or technological in nature, it is best understood as a computer ethical issue. The present study, which examines both assumptions, considers four questions: (1) What exactly is the digital divide? (2) Is this ‘divide’ ultimately an ethical issue? (3) Assuming that the answer to (2) is ‘yes,’ is the digital divide necessarily an issue for computer ethics? (4) If the answer to (3) is ‘yes,’ what can/should computer professionals do bridge the digital divide?

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of some issues and controversies surrounding arguments for regulating cyberspace.

The paper begins with a brief investigation of some background questions such as “What is cyberspace?” and “What is meant by ‘regulation’?” It then considers some distinctions between descriptive and normative aspects of questions involving internet regulation. Next, the paper examines Lawrence Lessig's model, which describes four modes of regulation that can be applied to cyberspace. The paper then considers some recent controversies that have emerged because of “regulation by code” and the “privatization of information policy.”

Cyberspace regulation raises ethical concerns.

Internet regulation is evolving.

The way cyberspace is viewed, either as a “place” or as a “medium,” affects how it will be regulated.

I consider the foundational issue of whether we have a right to information that is fundamental in being independent of other rights and general in protecting all information. To this end, I distinguish two kinds of morally relevant value an entity might have, i.e. intrinsic and instrumental value, and explain the role that each has in determining whether a person has a fundamental moral interest in that entity. Next, I argue that, by itself, the claim that some entity E has an informative nature does not justify believing that E has either intrinsic value or instrumental value. Accordingly, I conclude that whatever protection morality provides to our interests in information, such protection does not rise to the level of a right that is either general in the sense that it applies to all information or fundamental in the sense that it is not derived from other more basic rights.

The paper aims at a multi‐faceted review of scholarly work, analyzing the current state of empirical studies dealing with privacy and online social networking (OSN) as well as the theoretical “puzzle” of privacy approaches related to OSN usage from the background of diverse disciplines. Drawing on a more pragmatic and practical level, aspects of privacy management are presented as well.

Based on individual privacy concerns and also publicly communicated threats, information privacy has become an important topic of public and scholarly discussion. Beside diverse positive aspects of OSN sites for users, their information is for example also being used for data mining and profiling, pre‐recruiting information as well as economic espionage. This review highlights information privacy mainly from an individual point‐of‐view, focusing on the usage of OSN sites (OSNs).

This analysis of scholarly work shows the following findings: first, adults seem to be more concerned about potential privacy threats than younger users; second, policy makers should be alarmed by a large part of users who underestimate risks of their information privacy on OSNs; third, in the case of using OSNs and its services, traditional one‐dimensional privacy approaches fall short. Hence, findings of this paper further highlight the necessity to focus on multidimensional and multidisciplinary frameworks of privacy, for example considering a so‐called “privacy calculus paradigm” and rethinking “fair information practices” from a more and more ubiquitous environment of OSNs.

The results of the work presented in this paper give new opportunities for research as well as suggestions for privacy management issues for OSN providers and users.

Women as individuals experience subtle discrimination regarding career development opportunities as evidenced by research on the Glass Ceiling. This paper looks at the ramifications of technology, specifically the Internet, and how it affects women’s career opportunities.

This paper has three purposes: to identify and discuss values that should be promoted and respected in personal health monitoring, to formulate an ethical checklist that can be used by stakeholders, and to construct an ethical matrix that can be used for identifying values, among those in the ethical checklist, that are particularly important to various stakeholders.

On the basis of values that empirical studies have found important to various stakeholders in personal health monitoring, the author constructs an ethical checklist and an ethical matrix. The author carries out a brief conceptual analysis and discusses the implications.

The ethical checklist consists of three types of values: practical values that a technical product in personal health monitoring must have, quality of life values to be promoted by the development and use of the product, and moral values to be respected in this development and use. To give guidance in practice, the values in the checklist must be interpreted and balanced. The ethical matrix consists of the values in the checklist and a number of stakeholders.

The overall ambition is to suggest a way of categorizing values that can be useful for stakeholders in personal health monitoring. In order to achieve this, the study takes empirical studies as a starting-point and includes a conceptual analysis. This means that the proposals are founded on practice rather than mere abstract thinking, and this improves its usability.

This paper aims to illustrate how business ethics research is progressing in the tourism and hospitality (T/H) industries and suggest a research agenda.

This study applies bibliometric analysis to articles related to business ethics topics in the T/H fields published between 1995 and 2014 in six, nine and five leading hospitality-, tourism- and business ethics-oriented journals, respectively.

This study provides a broad view on business ethics research in the T/H fields based on leading authors, institutions, themes and methods used over the past two decades.

This study assesses the progress of business ethics research in the hospitality and tourism fields. Only articles published in select, prominent Social Sciences Citation Index journals were analyzed.

This analysis focuses on published articles related to business ethics in the T/H fields. As such, it facilitates researchers, academic scholars and professionals in contributing to the field more effectively and advancing scientific progress in the literature. It aids practitioners by evaluating the extent to which scholars have investigated key issues in the field.

This study is the first to utilize bibliometric analysis to assess business ethics research focusing on T/H activities published in leading tourism, hospitality and business ethics journals.

The purpose of this paper is to ask whether ethics can be taught? Can we teach how to make decisions in issues involving ethics? Preliminary results suggest we can.

The paper describes how managerial ethical decision making is taught using a tool called the JUSTICE framework. Each letter introduces a decision making criterion: J for Justice, U for Utilitarian, S for Spiritual Values, T for TV Rule, I for Influence, C for Core Values, and E for Emergency.

It is not known if ethics can be taught, but we now believed we can teach our students learn ways to face managerial ethical decisions. What the JUSTICE model lacks in theoretical underpinning it makes up for in pragmatic results. Students learned (memorized) all seven criteria, and learned to select their three favorites, and then to use the model to decide in numerous cases. It works.

The paper introduces the JUSTICE approach.

There are a lot of discussions about privacy in relation to contemporary communication systems (such as Facebook and other “social media” platforms), but discussions about privacy on the internet in most cases misses a profound understanding of the notion of privacy and where this notion is coming from. The purpose of this paper is to challenge the liberal notion of privacy and explore foundations of an alternative privacy conception.

A typology of privacy definitions is elaborated based on Giddens' theory of structuration. The concept of privacy fetishism that is based on critical political economy is introduced. Limits of the liberal concept of privacy are discussed. This discussion is connected to the theories of Marx, Arendt and Habermas. Some foundations of an alternative privacy concept are outlined.

The notion of privacy fetishism is introduced for criticizing naturalistic accounts of privacy. Marx and Engels have advanced four elements of the critique of the liberal privacy concept that were partly taken up by Arendt and Habermas: privacy as atomism that advances; possessive individualism that harms the public good; legitimizes and reproduces the capitalist class structure; and capitalist patriarchy.

Given the criticisms advanced in this paper, the need for an alternative, socialist privacy concept is ascertained and it is argued that privacy rights should be differentiated according to the position individuals occupy in the power structure, so that surveillance makes transparent wealth and income gaps and company's profits and privacy protects workers and consumers from capitalist domination.

The paper contributes to the establishment of a concept of privacy that is grounded in critical political economy. Owing to the liberal bias of the privacy concept, the theorization of privacy has thus far been largely ignored in critical political economy. The paper contributes to illuminating this blind spot.