Module 1: Blog Post
As we continue to navigate the theme of ethical issues in the digital age, this week’s supportive research was completed after reading the text by Carrie James (2012), entitled “Disconnected: Youth, New Media, and the Ethics Gap”, and the works by three distinct researchers. 1. The theoretical analysis of controversial issues in digital media by Menses (2021). 2. A literature review of the concept of a “Digital Diaspora” as it pertains to migrants and new media was conducted by Andersson (2019). And 3. A research study into “Identifying and Defining Values in Media Code of Ethics, was completed by Roberts (2012).
According to James (2012) “ethical, thinking requires a capacity for abstract, thinking, which typically develops in late childhood or adolescence”, and this era of digital freedom and exposure to society on a much larger scale for these adolescents is ethically irresponsible.
Unfortunately, this age group/population lacks the overall capacity to engage in unfettered digital interactions, without encountering adverse, if not harmful effects of an online presence in today’s society. The author acknowledges that youth tend to lose sight of how public and far-reaching a forum the online system can be, and that with this lack of awareness, information may reach a larger unintended audience. Many excellent concepts are disseminated within this chapter such as “Ethical Blind Spots”, “Disconnects”, “Scalability”, and “Constant Connectivity”. Ethical blind spots occur when the individual, in this instance an adolescent acts in a questionable ethical manner unconsciously due to naivete and is typically unintentional. “Whereas disconnects are consciously and purposefully done in favor of self-serving reasons”. The most seminal concept is that of scalability and constant connectivity in relation to the dangers of “the web”. “Scalability is the potential for content to reach a wide range of audiences, including those who are not the intended target audience which can become a safety concern”. Constant connectivity is the ability to connect to others via mobile devices, gaming consoles, etc. to maintain contact with others. Unfortunately, this constant connectivity entails the user to always be on or digitally active, which diminishes actual human interactions since contact is being made digitally (artificially).
Roberts (2012), postulates that a code of ethics can be used to define and clarify the values of practitioners, or the agents of media. Roberts’s research study was formulated utilizing “Schwartz’s social psychology typology to identify and compare 216 values stated or implied in 15 codes of ethics for associations of journalists, bloggers, advertising/marketing practitioners, and public relations practitioners” According to Roberts (2012) the term “value” can be seen as foundational and sometimes abstract principles that are established when groups of individuals create a “hierarchical ranks of the representative values inside their values system. Those values, once stated and sorted by an individual or group, ultimately influence goals, attitudes, and behaviors”. Ultimately codes of ethics are essential in today’s media where misinformation is running rampant. Thus, it is necessary that trust is built, and credibility is maintained with the public, as a means of ensuring all media platforms remain a safe space for all its participants.
This segues into Meneses’s (2021) theoretical analysis of controversies in media when ethics are not adhered to. Meneses hypothesizes that the almost unfettered access that individuals are privy to, to the internet and social media platforms, has caused an increase in “a vast flow of information of varying quality”. Meneses argues that providing information and being able to access information is vital for humanity and its continued existence, but the necessary due diligence, fact-finding, and verification of information is what will help dispel misinformation, that can negatively influence individuals’ decision-making. Meneses also states that broadcasting bias does exist, and the only way informed decisions can be made is through the use of critical thinking when faced with digital controversies.
Lastly, the most difficult concept for me to synthesize was the literature review by Andersson (2019). To my understanding, the concept of a digital diaspora entails virtual interactions amongst a community of people who share cultures, similar backgrounds, and histories. According to Andersson (2019), “digital diasporas have been described alternatively as new forms of coexistence, a technologically mediated diaspora, a diaspora organized on the Internet, an electronic migrant community, and an immigrant group that uses ICT connectivity to participate in virtual networks” for various means of communication. Andersson further states that the term digital diaspora will encompass a new configuration that will bridge the intersection between two entities: migration studies and new media studies. These two related fields are “the field of migration, transnationalism, mobility and diaspora on the one hand, and the field of ICTs, new media, social media and Web 2.0, on the other hand”.
In conclusion, these authors’ approach to their style of academic writing differs vastly. Meseses article was standard in its presentation and formatted in familiar manner, thus easily synthesized by me. Although Anderson’s text was a narrative literature review, due to the various interpretations of migration, culture, and identity constructs, I was left with a very limited understanding of the overarching concept that was being discussed. The most well-constructed piece of research would have to be Roberts’s research as it pertained to media and their codes of ethics. The research was clear, concise, and academically stimulating.
References
Andersson. (2019). Digital diaspora: An overview of the research areas of migration and new media through a narrative literature review. Human Technology, 15(2), 142–. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201906123154
James, Carrie. Disconnected : Youth, New Media, and the Ethics Gap, MIT Press, 2014. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/empire-ebooks/detail.action?docID=3339864.
Meneses, L. F. (2021). Thinking critically through controversial issues on digital media: Dispositions and key criteria for content evaluation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100927
Roberts, C. (2012). Identifying and Defining Values in Media Codes of Ethics. Journal Of Mass Media Ethics, 27(2), 115-129.
Comments
Post a Comment