New Media Ethics and Law

From Baruchnewmedia

Jump to: navigation, search

What is New Media and how is it related to law?

New Media Ethics involves laws and moral thought that pertains to web 2.0 and New Media platforms. This simply means, new media ethics deals with ethical violations and issues regarding the internet and new media. Although ethical violations do not always mean legal violations, it is important for everyone to understand what is right and wrong since choosing to do the wrong thing has been made easier since the dawn of New Media. Ethical violations are enforced by different communities according to their judgement of right and wrong. But a legal violation is enforced by the legal system, namely,courts. Both violations are prevalent with web 2.0 and are significant for intellectual property law as well as ethics in society and community development.

New Media law is one of the newest and one of the most rapidly increasing tracks of the legal system. The advancement of New Media everyday through people writing new codes or finding a new use to the newest software, keeps legal systems all around the world racing with time to keep up with the rapid growing technological world. With every new media that is invented and used by the public, the legal systems of countries all over the world have to check it thoroughly and place some rules and restrictions on these media to protect their citizens from any harm these new technological advancements can cause.

New Media Ethics on the other hand is determined and chosen, by the person sitting in front of the computer and using the technology. These Ethics can be different in different countries and as a result can have many interpretations. New Media Ethics basically tries to answer the question, Is this moral even though it is not illegal? By using many different previously popularized philosphical theories, New Media Ethics tries to provide people with many different answers to chose from so that the right thing can happen.

Contents

Areas of Media Ethics

  • Journalism
  • Entertainment
  • Society

Media Ethics and Journalism

This is one of the most popular areas of media ethics with regards to web 2.0 because of its prevalence across various social and new media platforms. Through publishing platforms such as blogs, wikis, and more, journalistic practices are more widespread than ever and the internet is used widely as a means to propagate and receive information. There are many ethical and legal issues involved with journalism through new media as many people disregard ethics and laws under the guise of anonymity that they uphold using internet.

  • News manipulation. News can manipulate and be manipulated. Governments and corporations may attempt to manipulate news media; governments, for example, by censorship, and corporations by share ownership. The methods of manipulation are subtle and many. Manipulation may be voluntary or involuntary. Those being manipulated may not be aware of this.
  • Truth. Truth may conflict with many other values.
  • Public interest. Revelation of military secrets and other sensitive government information may be contrary to the public interest, even if it is true. The definition of public interest is hard.
  • Privacy. Salacious details of the lives of public figures is a central content element in many media. Publication is not necessarily justified simply because the information is true. Privacy is also a right, and one which conflicts with free speech. See: paparazzi.
  • Fantasy. Fantasy is an element of entertainment which is a legitimate goal of media content. Journalism may mix fantasy and truth, with resulting ethical dilemmas. See: National Enquirer, Jayson Blair scandal, Adnan Hajj photographs controversy.
  • Taste. Photo journalists who cover war and disasters confront situations which may shock the sensitivities of their audiences. For example, human remains are rarely screened. The ethical issue is how far should one risk shocking an audience's sensitivities in order to correctly and fully report the truth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ethics#Areas_of_media_ethics.


Journalism Ethics and Standards

Many news agencies and information organizations adhere to very specific code of ethics when it comes to journalism. Although it is up to the community to develop, foster, and enforce its ethical standards, violation of such standards may not result in jail time but can certainly result in a loss of job, damage to one's reputation, and can cause distrust among the intended audience.

  • Plagiarism and fabrication are two very common ethical violations in new media journalism. Plagiarism is passing off someone elses work as your own, and fabrication is completing making up a story, events, or specific details that are untrue or never actually occurred--basically trying to pass something that is untrue as the truth.
  1. Plagiarism and Fabrication are ethical violations because:
    1. Peers enforce it.
    2. Black/White issue, you either plagiarized or your didn’t.
    3. Avoid plagiarism by simply citing your work!

Plagiarism is not illegal, it is unethical so there is no jail time for this unless you plagiarized copyrighted material in which case you are committing a copyright violation, a legal violation. When someone is found guilty of plagiarism the punishment is usually monetary, and they are held accountable by their schools or their jobs http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1956333

Online Social Media outlets create perfect avenues for plagiarism and fabrication to occur. Users hide behind a certain condition of anonymity, there is an inclination to not uphold ethical standards. Blogs, MediaWikis, Online Journals are examples of new media sites that allow this


Legal Issues

New Media technologies (e.g. blogging) have truly taken journalism to a new level. The fast speed and vast reach of the internet form legal issues relating to journalism.

Cases

Blogger of popular tech blog Gizmodo, faces criminal charges after leaking information about a prototype of the next generation iPhone which an Apple engineer lost at a bar. http://gizmodo.com/5520471/the-tale-of-apples-next-iphone/

"What the Lost iPhone Case Could Mean for the Future of Media" http://mashable.com/2010/04/26/gizmodo-gawker-and-online-journalism/

The parent company of Gizmodo, Gawker, hired Thomas Burke, a First Amendment specialist, who argued that Chen's computers are protected under California journalism shield laws.

Importance of the case:

  • Test-Case The Business Insider's Henry Blodget calls this "one of the first major test-cases of whether employees of online news organizations are entitled to the same protections as mainstream media 'journalists' in the eyes of the law."
  • Did Search Violate Journalist Shield Laws? The parent company of Gizmodo, Gawker, hired Thomas Burke, a First Amendment specialist, who argued that Chen's computers are protected under California journalism shield laws. However it is unclear if bloggers count as journalists.
  • How Chen Could Have Committed a Felony If Chen knew that the goods were stolen by the source, or if found, inadequate efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, Chen would be guilty of receiving stolen property. However as described in several posts on Gizmodo, the individual who found the item attempted to contact Apple and return it.

Media Ethics and Entertainment

Although "news" organizations such as TMZ.com operate under the idea that they are exposing newsworthy information about celebrities and public figures, they too run the risk of ethical violations through new media entertainment. Ethical Issues in Media Entertainment can occur in these ways:

  1. The depiction of violence and sex, and the presence of strong language. Ethical guidelines and legislation in this area are common and many media (e.g. film, computer games) are subject to ratings systems and supervision by agencies. An extensive guide to international systems of enforcement can be found under motion picture rating system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_picture_rating_system
  2. Product placement. An increasingly common marketing tactic is the placement of products in entertainment media. The producers of such media may be paid high sums to display branded products. The practice is controversial and largely unregulated.
  3. Stereotypes. Both advertising and entertainment media make heavy use of stereotypes. Stereotypes may negatively affect people's perceptions of themselves or promote socially undesirable behaviour. The stereotypical portrayals of men, affluence and ethnic groups are examples of major areas of debate.
  4. Taste and taboos. Art is about the questioning of our values. Normative ethics is often about the enforcement and protection of our values. In media ethics, these two sides come into conflict. In the name of art, media may deliberately attempt to break with existing norms and shock the audience. The extent to which this is acceptable is always a hotbed of ethical controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ethics#Areas_of_media_ethics.

Media Ethics and Society

As ethics are fundamentally defined and enforced by the society or community that upholds it. Issues in this category include, but are not limited to:

  • Defamation
  • Privacy
  • False Light

With the use of the internet and mobile technology anyone can become a journalist. Blogging and online discussion forums assist with this. This may be good in cases where crimes or terrorism occur but when it comes to defamation of individuals it is a serious offense. In these online discussion forums editorial responsibility is mostly non existent. Anyone can say anything about anyone without the fear of punishment. Most of these forums in their terms of use usually release themselves from any responsibility but sometimes this does not hold up in court.

Rizzitelli v. Thompson 2010

In this case Sam Rizzitelli claims that Melvin Thompson made misrepresentations about him to the police claiming that he was an extortionist. This came about from comments on a blog. A search warrant was issued and the media coverage was extensive. Mr Rizzitelli claims invasion of privacy as well as emotional distress.

The article New Media and New Editorial Challenges: Lessons from Norway discusses some of the challenges that new media creates for editorial responsibility. The article says, "In the old media world there was no question that the editor-in-chief of a newspaper carried the full responsibility for every word printed, but in the new media world it is much less obvious who is responsible for the media content." The article goes on to discuss reasons for this by saying that the internet is limitless by nature, the content on some sites is so vast that it would be difficult for a single person to read it all and take personal responsibility for it and that the internet has no deadline. Stories and items are posted throughout the day and it would be very demanding for a single editor in chief to keep an eye on everything that is published.

Intellectual Property Law and New Media

Intellectual Property (IP) Law

  • Intellectual property (IP) is a number of distinct types of legal monopolies over creations of the mind, both artistic and commercial, and the corresponding fields of law. Under intellectual property law, owners are granted certain exclusive rights to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions; and words, phrases, symbols, and designs. Common types of intellectual property include copyrights, trademarks, patents, industrial design rights and trade secrets in some jurisdictions.

Although many of the legal principles governing intellectual property have evolved over centuries, it was not until the 19th century that the term intellectual property began to be used, and not until the late 20th century that it became commonplace in the United States[1].

Areas of Intellectual Property Law:

  • Copyright (Legal protection of expression of ideas.)
  • Trademark (Legal protection of value of a trade name.)
  • Patent (Legal protection of an invention.)


Federal Privacy Laws

After 1982, the US government start to realized the importance some new media based on the fast change in technology. Below are the current federal privacy laws:

Administrative Procedure Act. (5 U.S.C. §§ 551, 554-558)

Cable Communications Policy Act (47 U.S.C. § 551)

Census Confidentiality Statute (13 U.S.C. § 9)

Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (15 U.S.C. §§ 6501 et seq., 16 C.F.R. § 312) Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement (47 U.S.C. § 1001)

Computer Security Act (40 U.S.C. § 1441)

Criminal Justice Information Systems (42 U.S.C. § 3789g)

Customer Proprietary Network Information (47 U.S.C. § 222)

Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (18 U.S.C. § 2721)

Drug and Alcoholism Abuse Confidentiality Statutes (21 U.S.C. § 1175; 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-3) Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq.)

Electronic Funds Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. § 1693, 1693m)

Employee Polygraph Protection Act (29 U.S.C. § 2001, et seq.)

Employee Retirement Income Security Act (29 U.S.C. § 1025)

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. § 1691, et. seq.)

Equal Employment Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq.)

Fair Credit Billing Act (15 U.S.C. § 1666)

Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.)

Consumer Credit Reporting Reform Act of 1996 (Reform Act) Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.)

Fair Housing Statute (42 U.S,C. §§ 3604, 3605)

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (20 U.S.C. § 1232g)

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) (FOIA)

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 6801 et seq)

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (Pub. Law No. 104-191 §§ 262,264: 45 C.F.R. §§160-164) Health Research Data Statute (42 U.S.C. § 242m) Mail Privacy Statute (39 U.S.C. § 3623) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. § 3501, et seq.)

Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a)

Privacy Protection Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000aa)

Right to Financial Privacy Act (12 U.S.C. § 3401, et seq.)

Tax Reform Act (26 U.S.C. §§ 6103, 6108, 7609)

Telephone Consumer Protection Act (47 U.S.C. § 227)

Video Privacy Protection Act (18 U.S.C. § 2710)

Wiretap Statutes (18 U.S.C. § 2510, et seq.; 47 U.S.C. § 605)


http://www.bbbonline.org/understandingprivacy/library/fed_stateprivlaws.pdf

New Bill on the table

PROTECT IP Act (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011) Also known as United States Senate Bill S.968. Senator Patrick Leahy introduced it on May 12, 2011. This is bill is so controversial, it is basically give entertaining industry like Hollywood and government the power to shut down any website that contains contents that violate the rights of the original owner. It is true that if this law passes, it will protect more producers’ rights. However, on the other hand, this bill is way to general about how far it can go. A law should pass if it benefit the majority of the people, but in this case, it gives too much power to the producers and the government. Some people think passes this law will brings back the internet death penalty. The Consumer electronics Association sent a letter to congress asking them to hold on of signing the bill until listen to all the concerns 

“ The technology industry is leading America out of the recession, and inadvertent damage to the tech sector could not happen at a worse time.”

Meanwhile, there are many big technology companies are also against this bill such as Google, Ebay, Youtube and Yahoo etc. How far is this will go? The answer is very simple, as far as we let it.


http://leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BillText-PROTECTIPAct.pdf

COPYRIGHTS

What is a Copyright?

A copyright is one the main branches of intellectual property. It protects the “form of expression of ideas”, not the actual idea. In other words, it is the creative choice of content arrangement, words, musical notes that are protected. It gives an owner property rights to the original work and prevents others from copying it or using it the way the author had uniquely expressed it. Doing so without the owner’s authorization would be deemed illegal [2].

Protected Works

From Article 2 of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works [3] it states that artistic and literary work expressions include everything in the literary, scientific and artistic field. Expressions encompass a wide selection of forms or modes, some of which are listed below:

  • Books and pamphlets
  • Addresses and sermons
  • Dramatic works
  • Musical compositions
  • Drawings, paintings and sculptures
  • Computer programs
  • Multimedia productions

The last two were types of works that were not included in the Berne Convention [4]. However, they are still protected under copyright laws because they have “authors.”

Protected Rights

Copyrights entitle authors exclusive use of their work. Anyone who wants to use it must get authorization from the owner or else it is illegal. To name a few prohibitions or authorizations an owner can make, they are the reproduction of the work, copy distribution, public performance or adaptations to a screenplay.

Under this branch of intellectual property, are economic and moral rights. The monetary benefits of the owner by the use of his or her work are granted by economic rights. Moral rights enable an owner to take action to keep a link between self and artistic work.[5]

For further reading on the United States Copyright Law:

TRADEMARKS

What are trademarks?

Is a unique indicator expressed as a symbol or aesthetic that distinguishes a product/service to consumers and other entities. Such trademarks are expressed as symbols, signs, logos, and design, which can also be formed through a combination of these expressions.

Protected Works

Trademarks protect words, names, symbols, sounds, and/or colors that distinguishes a goods/products and services that can be renewed in perpetuity unlike patents. [6]

An example of a trademark is the McDonald’s golden arches.

Protected Rights

A trademark can be renewed in perpetuity so long as the owner of the right continues to use the symbols, signs, logos, and design associated with their products/services. Trademarks are however not valid outside of the United States, so one must seek an “international application” that may be used in other countries.[7]

PATENTS

What are patents?

Unlike copyrights, patents are used to attain protection for physical objects such as physical machines, computers and inventions. The processes used to produce one of these physical objects can also be patented.

Protected Works

Works that are protected under the Patent law are the ones that have never been recorded in any print or any publication. It should be something that is unique in iteself. Also, unlike the copyright law, a Patent has a "non-obviousness" requirement. That is, the patented work can not be something that is very obvious to an artist in that particular field at a first glance. Since its not supposed to have an obvious factor to it, all the mathematical formulations, laws of physics, universal concepts and everything that can be called "social knowledge" can not be patented. Since a process of producing something falls under the things that can be patented, that is where New Media comes in. The software codes to produce something which in turn can be used by many other people in the world can be patented. A good example of this kind of patent is Amazon.com's one-click checkout patent. Basically, Amazon.com came up with the software that allows its customers to checkout online in one-click by saving their credit card and address information on cookies stored in the clients computer. This "one-click" software was patented by Amazon.com. So, when Barnes and Noble, a rival store to Amazon.com tries to use this strategy it was slammed with patent laws. So it had to come up with a "two-click" software and patent that so that noone else can use it. This basically shows how laws have evolved around the constant developing New Media, by trying to include all the possible solutions to all the possible problems it is presented with.

For further information on Amazon.com's one-click patent - [8]

Protected Rights

When a work is patented, it is protected up to a maximum of 20 years after which the petetion has to go through the whole patenting process again and they have a chance to repatent it. During this period of 20 years, the patented invention, object or software can not be used by any other company or individual with out buying the rights to do so from the individual or company that owns the patent rights. So basically, when an invention or an object is patented, if one wants to use it, they have to pay a price to the patent owner as a way of paying them for all the reasearch and developing time and resources they spent on the patented inventioon.

Issues in New Media related to IPL(Intellectual Property Law)

New media involves technologies that enable information to disperse faster and easier. The use of the internet is a great example of that. Blogs allows individuals to post their thoughts and opinions about issues, news or basically on any topic. Sites such as YouTube.com give users freedom, to put up videos of sports fights, pets, clips of television shows or even a how-to video that can be seen all over the world.

Of course, with something great, there’s always an issue. Freedom to put anything on the web is limited to an extent that it doesn’t violate laws, in particular intellectual property. Videos have been taken down or the audio shut off because of user violation of protected works. For example [9] a young high school girl from California posted a video of herself singing “Winter Wonderland” while playing the tune on the piano on YouTube. However, her posting was taken down because Warner Music Group, who owns the copyright to “Winter Wonderland,” saw it as a violation of the law. No authorization or license was given to her. This is just one many cases of amateurs’ works taken down. For Warner Music Group, as well as many other copyright owners, the issue centers on receiving money for use of materials. However, to further complicate the issue, a company may choose to put up with an unauthorized use of its copyrighted work. So, why do some get away with using the work without consent? In 2007, YouTube videos containing bits of Disney characters clips from shows and movies edited to be like a music video of “Crank That (Soulja Boy)” by rap artist Soulja Boy were posted. Although Disney saw this as unlawful, they chose not to take legal action. Back in the 1970’s a group of cartoonist published a comic with “Mickey Mouse as a sadomasochistic smoker” and they definitely took that to court. As the article goes, the company cautiously picks and choose its battles. [10]

This issue of copyrights and the music industry in particular has been around even before the emergence of massive internet use. Piracy of music was and still is very popular. Unauthorized copies of copyrighted works is piracy [11]. Examples of pirated products are music albums, movies, dvds and computer software.

Advancing technologies of new media can be seen as contributing to this problem as well as providing solutions for it. In the WIPO report on Intellectual Property on the Internet: A Survey of Issues, chapter III #59 states that the threat of piracy is increased because of digital technologies and copyright owners turn to technology to find protection against it such as anti–copy devices, electronic envelopes, water marking and proprietary viewer software. The next item gave an example of the music industry developing a compact disc (CD) that is copyproof, preventing a user from playing in a CD-ROM. It can only be played in a standard CD player [12]. --Mjacela803 19:07, 4 December 2009 (CST)

Ebooks are a new form of media that is growing rapidly. There are currently several popular devices for reading ebooks, including the Nook, Kindle series, Sony Reader, and Apple iPad. The issue arises when people want to get electronic versions of books they alrady own. Is it ethical to download free versions if they can? Randy Cohen, a ethical New York Times writer says if you already own the real, tree-killing version, then go right ahead. When he said that in an answer about whether it was ok to pirate a book that was unavailable as an official ebook of the paper book, the piracy was not an issue. Regardless if there is a pay-for version of the ebook, it is still ethical to download a version for free. It may not be legal, but it just like buying a CD, then copying it to your iPod.


if you already own the real, tree-killing version, then go right ahead

In article "Why Facebook Is After Your Kids" by EMILY BAZELON, it mentioned "In May, Consumer Reports announced that 7.5 million kids age 12 and younger are on Facebook. The magazine called this “troubling news,” in no small part because their presence is at odds with federal law, which bars Web sites from collecting personal data about kids under 13 without permission from their parents. “Clearly, using Facebook presents children and their friends and families with safety, security and privacy risks,” Consumer Reports concluded.We don’t really know yet how joining Facebook at a tender age affects kids socially and emotionally. There’s the fun and freedom of Facebook, and then there’s the Consumer Reports finding that the site exposed a million teenagers to bullying and harassment last year. What is clear is that Facebook thinks it needs access to kids’ lives in order to continue to dominate its industry. The younger the child, the greater the opportunity to build brand loyalty that might transcend the next social-media trend. And crucially, signing up kids early can accustom them to “sharing” with the big audiences that are at their small fingertips."

Defamation and New Media

In law, defamation—also called calumny, vilification, slander (for spoken words), and libel (for written or otherwise published words)—is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. It is usually, but not always,a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant).

In common law jurisdictions, slander refers to a malicious, false and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. Related to defamation is public disclosure of private facts, which arises where one person reveals information that is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person. "Unlike [with] libel, truth is not a defense for invasion of privacy."

False light laws are "intended primarily to protect the plaintiff's mental or emotional well-being."[3] If a publication of information is false, then a tort of defamation might have occurred. If that communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light might have occurred.[13]

Areas of Defamation

  • Libel (Written)
  • Slander (Spoken)

LIBEL

Civil Case, meaning you cannot go to jail for libel, but you can be sued. Libel is the written form of defamation. It is injury of reputation caused by the publication of falsehoods. The Statement must harm the persons reputation, image, likeness, and business or corporation. To win a libel claim in the United States the plaintiff must prove:

  1. That there is an identifiable plaintiff: the plaintiff must have proof that the libelous information was in fact about that plaintiff.
    1. The statements published were false statements of fact. Not Opinion or hyperbole.
  • An Example False statement of fact in new media is this:
      • You run a blog about food in which you go to local restaurants and blog about their food, you are a food critique. Posting a blog about the local Tavern Caesar salads. To didn't enjoy the salad so you write, "Eat the Caesar salad at the Tavern and you will walk away with Salmonella.
    • An opinion is: The salads at the Tavern are gross and I hate them.
    1. The difference between the two is that the false statement of fact is a statement that could be factual, but is actually false. You could essentially prove it to be a fact. As the blogger didn't get salmonella and didn't test the salad at the restaurant, blogging about one getting salmonella from eating a salad there is false and libelous.
  2. Damaging to the plaintiffs reputation.
  3. Published to at least one other person.
  4. Intent or fault (scienter) must prove at least negligence or actual malice (complete reckless disregard for the truth):
    1. Plaintiff must show that defendant was sloppy in their reporting.

(Criminal Libel is on the books in some states!)

SLANDER

The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, especially speech)[14]

Rights and Responsibilities In order to win a defamation case in the United States the plaintiff must prove:

  1. The information published or spoken is wrong
  2. carelessness/ recklessness or knowledge of falsity is present or that there is some degree of this.
  3. Fair Reporting Privilege:
  • Quoting someones testimony protects you from defamation.
    • You are in court and quote a testimony that is being given or you repeat what was said in an official hearing or document.
  1. Third party permission can protect too.
  2. Fair Use: repeating or using information for education, newsworthy and enlightening purposes.
  3. Opinions are protected/hyperbole too! Parody and generalizations in numbers help.
  4. People can be libel-proof meaning their reputations are so damaged that nothing you say can really bring down any further. Blogging about how Bernie Madoff is an alcoholic (even if you know he isn't) won't hurt his reputation any more than he already has. So you are safe.
  5. In the United States, unlike the UK for example, Malice/ negligence must be proven by the plaintiff which is very difficult to do. This is why it is hard to win defamation cases in the United States. In the UK however, the defendant must prove that actual malice/ negligence didn't occur which is why it is easier for plaintiffs there to win. It is much harder for the plaintiff to prove that a blogger or reporter knowingly disregarded the truth than it is for a defendant to prove that he or she did not knowingly disregard the truth.
  6. CHECK YOUR FACTS Always err on the side of caution.
  7. Avoid virtual vendettas! NEVER BLOG WHILE ANGRY.
  8. Repetition is no defense so just becuase someone else blogged about something so you did too, doesn't spare you! In fact, you in fact, you are both subject to legal action.
  9. TRUTH IS A COMPLETE DEFENSE, ALWAYS
  10. On the internet you could be protected by Section 230 of the Federal Communications Decency Act:
    1. This act protects a user or site owner from the potentially defamatory comments on their comments section.
    2. For example: You have a celebrity gossip blog. Each day hundreds of people comment on your blog posts. Even if someone comments with libelous information about another person on your site, and your blog you are not culpable and cannot be subjected to any defamation lawsuit because of Section 230. It protects the blog site company, you the blogger, but DOES NOT protect the person who wrote the comment or any people who reproduce his/her comment in another site or place. Only the owner is protected from the potentially libelous acts of commentators.

New Media and Privacy Issues

What is privacy?

According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, privacy is:

1) the the quality or state of being apart from company or observation,

2) seclusion, freedom from unauthorized intrusion one's right to privacy and

3)the state of privacy is simply described as a place of seclusion.

Upon reading this, the definition sounds clear and concise but unfortunately the traditional meaning of privacy is changing when we apply it to our use of new media. There appears to be no real definition of online privacy.

Privacy Amongst Families

In December 2010, the news broke about a husband, Leon Walker who had suspected his wife of cheating on him. Mr Walker who works as a computer technician was able to hack into his wife's email account to confirm his suspicions. After the wife realized her account was hacked into by her husband she went to the authorities and pressed charges. He was charged under his home state of Michigan's anti-hacking laws which were aimed at stopping identity theft and used to prosecute people who hack into Government computers. HE is facing five years prison time for his actions. Privacy amongst families is a touch subject as individuals who we love and share so much with believe its okay to access our emails, Facebook and bank accounts. Privacy is a leading cause as to why couples get a divorce.

Privacy and children is a touchy subject because most parents are of the strong belief that children have no privacy. While this can be true for younger children, preteens and teenagers disagree. Pre teens and teenagers want and need independence, gain more information, gain or change their world view and of course acquire possessions. They enforce privacy rules as well as change them which goes against parents wishes. Privacy issues amongst parents and teenagers usually happens when parents claim ownership over spaces or information they may posses for example their rooms. Teenagers usually think that their parents should not enter their rooms. They also believe that their computers, ipads and phones are all not accessible by their parents but with security concerns about children's welfare both parents and teenagers may want to rethink their stance perhaps coming to some common ground where parents respect their children's privacy and children allowing their parents a little access to their lives.

Another security concern when it comes to children is that of them giving up to much information for e-marketing purposes. Teenagers are always on the internet as a recent poll by the Pew Internet Project reported that 93% of American children between the ages of 12- 17 use the internet. A lot of companies have realized this fact and have been using social networking sites to gain entrance to this market. This age groups is not careful when it comes to giving out information over the internet because they believe themselves to be invincible and no harm will be fall them. However, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)received 10,835 identity theft complaints in 2006 from teens aged eighteen and younger. A study done by The Annenberg Public Policy Center reported that 74 percent of parents worry that their child gives out personal information through Web sites or chat rooms (Turow and Nir 2000). In the same study, 96 percent of parents agreed that teens older than thirteen years should be required to obtain parental consent before disclosing their information online.

While teenagers are constantly fighting for their privacy their parents have valid reasons for protecting them. Sexual predators are a major problem in today's society. This is evidenced in NBC hit show, To Catch A Predator. Sexual Predators who believe they are talking to underage children in online chat rooms are lured to a home where they believe they will have sex with these children. Instead they meet the host of the show who talks with them and asks them if they see the errors of their ways. They are arrested and embarrassed and probably face negative consequences with their families and jobs. All this is to say that parents do have the right to protect their children. Child Friendly chat rooms are lurking with those who which to harm children. Pre teens and Teenagers are extremely gullible and most times believe what someone tells them. For example if they are in chat room and someone who they think is their age, says they live in their city and has the same interest as them and ask that they meet up, that teen will probably go. This can result in a number of things which include kidnapping, murder and sexual harm. Most social networks state that you must be 13 and above to use their site but is there any way to actually check for accuracy in this? The answer is no and so most 10- 12 year olds and possibly younger are logging onto to sites that they have no business knowing about.

Privacy in the Business World

As new media progresses privacy issues amongst businesses are becoming more and more of a reality. Consumers of new media as well as producers of new media have to be concerned about this. Just recently many companies were hit with a major hack. Epsilon, a company that sends out mass email to consumers for different companies was hacked. Over 50 businesses were affected which include CitiBank, JPMorgan and Chase, New York and Company and Best Buy. Millions of names and email addresses were accessed. While this may not seem to be such a big deal the repercussions are. Let's say for example you signed up to receive emails from Target, a scammer can then produce a mass email that looks like it is coming from Target. Information such as bank account numbers, social security numbers and addresses can be asked for, also donations for fake charities.


Another hack that took place was with the sony playstation. Three of their gaming systems were hacked into where 77 million users information may have been stiolen including credit card information. Below are some links concerning the Epsilon and Sony hacks.

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-04/tech/epsilon.stolen.emails_1_fake-e-mail-phishing-security-breach?_s=PM:TECH http://www.computerandvideogames.com/300744/news/playstation-network-hack-down-time-may-cost-sony-billions/ http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/10/technology/sony_hack_fallout/?section=money_latest

Privacy and Social Networking Sites

Does Privacy Exist with Social Networking Sites?

There is no privacy when it comes to social networking sites. These sites may let you feel your information is secure but there is always a back door. For example, Facebook can use your pictures that you have uploaded to their site for the purpose of making ads, there is an option to change that but obviously not of Facebook users will know this, so don't be surprised when you see one of your pictures being used in an ad form on Facebook!

Below are some Terms of Use for Some Social Networking Sites:

Terms of Use, Notices and Revisions of LinkedIn: "LinkedIn may update this privacy policy at any time, with or without advance notice. In the event there are significant changes in the way we treat your personally identifiable information, we will display a notice on the LinkedIn website or send you an email, as provided for above. Unless stated otherwise, our current Privacy Policy applies to all information that we have about you and your account. If you use the LinkedIn service after notice of changes have been sent to you or published on our site, you hereby provide your consent to the changed practices."


Terms of Use, Notices and Revisions of Facebook: "Your use of Facebook, and any disputes arising from it, is subject to this Privacy Policy as well as our Terms of Use and all of its dispute resolution provisions including arbitration, limitation on damages and choice of law. We reserve the right to change our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use at any time. Non-material changes and clarifications will take effect immediately, and material changes will take effect within 30 days of their posting on this site. If we make changes, we will post them and will indicate at the top of this page the policy's new effective date. If we make material changes to this policy, we will notify you here, by email, or through notice on our home page. We encourage you to refer to this policy on an ongoing basis so that you understand our current privacy policy. Unless stated otherwise, our current privacy policy applies to all information that we have about you and your account."


Privacy Rights of Ryze: "Notices to you may be made via posting on the RYZE website, email or regular mail. The Service may also provide notices of changes to the TOS or other matters by displaying notices or links to notices to you generally on the Service."


Most social networking sites always secure your private information from others, but recently facebook is having problems with phishers, that's one great example of a problem in our privacy.Also, spams and other irrelevant messages from other people.

In addition to the above, since sites like Facebook have loads of personal information, many users come across awkward situations while adding acquaintances or people who you have just had a small chat once and want to know more about you. Here's an interesting article discussing this sort of an ethical dilemma (the comments are worth reading as well!):

http://www.scu.edu/ethics-center/ethicsblog/atthecenter.cfm?action=viewpost&c=73483


WHAT IMPRESSION DID YOU LEAVE? Social networking websites contain loads of personal information which allows our contacts on these sites to get to know us better. In essence, your profile and whatever is on it is the primary impression you leave on whoever views it, be it an employer, mentor, teacher or stranger. Someone could actually create an impression just by seeing the kind of friends you have on Facebook, their wall posts, pictures and comments on your profile. Any inappropriate picture/comment could cost you a job.

New Media and the Workplace

Job Security

Social networking users tend to run to their profiles to unload what they please. Whether it be pictures, videos, poetry or rants about their everyday lives. Recently the freedom an individual has say or do as they please has been a controversial issue highlighted in the media. The issue is allowing people the freedom to speak and involve themselves in activities regarding their place of employment. In many cases social networking site users have been terminated, suspended, and even dropped as a candidate for new employment, following their employer looking at their social networking pages. What makes this so controversial is that it can seem like an invasion of privacy and a hinderance on one's freedom of speech.

In much of the scenarios where employees were terminated due to their social networking pages, the activities or comments by the employee were conflicting with the image of the employer and employee. Some examples of this are:

  • In 2006, Jeff Crouse, a teacher at a Las Vegas Catholic school was fired after announcing himself to be gay on his Myspace page.
  • In 2008, A Florida Sheriff was handed his badge for posting pictures of him drinking heavily and showing his obsession for the female anatomy on his Myspace page.
  • In 2011, A New Jersey elementary school teacher was suspended for calling her six year old students future criminals, and titling herself a warden on her Facebook profile.

These are just a few cases of the thousands where individuals lost their job security due to their social networking sites.

Many people in the work field already have the notion that there in a possibility that an employer can and sometimes will look up our names in google to find any negative and positive information on prospective hires. Because of this notion, people have found ways to make any incriminating information that can be found online unavailable for certain people. In 2009, the employers in the City of Bozeman, Montana, requested account usernames and passwords to email addresses and social networking sites from job applicants, in an effort to view information that they could not find by just googling the applicant's name. This caused a big uproar from applicants and others who heard of it because it was considered a clear disregard of the privacy people are allowed.

The big question is: Are our social networking sites profiles considered private from our employers viewing? In many of the states where the issue has risen, the courts have ruled that what people say on their social networking sites is NOT considered private from their employer. Employers have the legal right to protect themselves from activities and words that can be a negative representation of their company. If this means they can terminate employees who partake in causing negative attention to their employer. For instance, someone who works at a hospital or medical treatment facility is consistently around sensitive and private information. An employee after a bad day cannot decide to rant about anything specifying a patient, their employer's location, the employer itself or any other job sensitive information. Shedding a negative light on an employer can be considered slander and are grounds for termination.

Many employers who have been changing employee handbooks according rise in new media, also include clauses where employees can be terminated due to making negative comments regarding employers or employees.

Cyber Bullying


CyberBullying is a major problem amongst teenagers and with the help of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter it has recently been in the news. In the article CyberBullying, the author Jennifer Holladay defines Cyberbullying as “the repeated use of technology to harass, humiliate, or threaten … and unlike traditional bullying it comes with a wide audience.” Cyberbullying has become more popular as technology increases and many victims of cyberbullying have taken their own lives as is the case for Tyler Clementi.


Tyler Clementi was an 18 year old freshman student at Rutgers University. Tyler committed suicide by jumping from the George Washington bridge on September 22, 2010. This was done after a sexual encounter between himself and another young man was streamed over the internet by his roommate Dharun Ravi and his friend Molly Wei without his consent. A second attempt to stream both men having sex was done two days later after the first. Clementi made numerous complaints before taking his life. He went to his resident assistant about not sharing a room with Dharun. He also made complaints to senior officials at the college

Dharun and Molly have been both charged with invasion of privacy. Molly has struck a plea deal where she will not serve any prison time. She will testify against Dharun, serve 300 hours of community service and participate in a sensitivity training program. Dharun faces up to 10 years in prison.

In the above mentioned article Jennifer Holladay says, “anywhere from one-third to one-half youths have been targeted by cyberbullies. And those experiences produce damaging consequences-from a decline in academic performance to suicide…cyberbullying victims were nearly twice as likely to attempt suicide compared with students not targeted with online abuse.” Cyberbullying occurs because parents believe their children only use the internet for homework purposes. In the article by Jennifer Holladay a 2009 study from Common Sense Media was mentioned. It said that, “parents nationally underestimate children’s use of social networking sites and often are unaware of how they are used. Thirty seven percent of students, for example, admitted they’d made fun of a peer online, but only 18% of parents thought their child would do so.

Other Violations of Privacy Found on the Internet

Online Sexual Predators

Many times people include so much information on social networking sites, in which it may seem like they live in a glass house. There are people who search on social networking sites for people who have personal information that will make it easy for them to find them. Some online sexual predators can use the information found on new media devices such as 4suare.com where people can check into, and share with the world where exactly they are. People also have information such as their place of employment, school and frequented places on social networking sites. An online predator can use this information to create a schedule to track your daily movements and possibly find you, and sexually assualt you.

For younger people using social networking sites, they underestimate the dangers that can be lurking on social networking sites. Vulnerable teens can be seduced by adults expecting a friendship or romantic relationship to find that that is far from the intentions the adult has. In 2010, a 14 year old girl was convinced by a 26 year old man she met via Myspace, who allegedly held her captive for 2 days before finally letting her free.

Internet Scams

People do not realize how little information identity theives need in order to steal a person's identity. Hackers can even retrieve the information themselves, by simply hacking social networking site users. Identity theives can use your name, age, and location, which are commonly on social networking sites, in order to create fake documents in the name of someone else.

Another common internet scam that breaches social networking site users are phishing scams. Phishing scams can come to someone in the form of an email, seemingly from a friend or passed off as an email from the site itself, where if the user clicks on any links within the email, their personal information on the social networking sites used, are exposed to the scammer.

Online predators can also partake in malicious impersonation where the predator pretends to be someone else and post information seeming to be from the real person themselves. They can use this tactic to retrieve personal information from people close to the real person. This can also be a tactic used in cyberbullying where the impersonator posts imformation that would make the real person be reflected in a negative light.


Sources

Important Links

Retrieved from "http://www.baruchnewmedia.com/wiki/New_Media_Ethics_and_Law"
Personal tools