Facebook Data Mining Scandal: An Ethical Perspective

This essay evaluates the Facebook data mining scandal from an ethical perspective by analysing the news article posted by ABC. The key ethical issues and concerns raised in the article are discussed, and the appropriateness of the ethical decisions made by aligning the decision with moral philosophies is evaluated.

Business Ethics
Facebook Data Mining Scandal

Introduction
In today’s competitive business world, corporations focus on gaining and maintaining a
competitive advantage by whatever means necessary. Many organisations take illegal or
unethical actions while performing their operations which resulted in negatively affecting
their customers and the society. The importance of business ethics has grown substantially,
and companies have to comply with these ethical principles to ensure that they make
business decisions in the interest of their shareholders (Alton, 2017). In this essay, the data
mining scandal of Facebook will be evaluated from an ethical perspective by analysing the
news article posted by ABC. The title of the article is “Facebook says up to 87m people
affected in Cambridge Analytica data-mining scandal” (ABC, 2018). It is given in the article
that data of Facebook users were collected by Cambridge Analytica which is a Trump
affiliated data mining company in an unethical way. The initial reports suggested that
Aleksandra Kogan obtains around 50 million Facebook profiles by using a personality test
application (ABC, 2018).
The information was leaked by Chris Wylie who provided that the data is used by the
company to create software which influenced the people’s voting decision in the
presidential elections of 2016 (ABC, 2018). It was revealed in the report data of over 87
million people were breached from which over 70 million individuals were from the United
States and moved then 300,000 were Australia. After this incident, Facebook sent a link to
all its users from which they can check the applications which they use, and they can delete
the applications which they do not want to use (Matsakis, 2018). Furthermore, the company
is restricting the applications which get information regarding users’ events and groups’
information such as content and members list. This essay will evaluate the arguments in the
article and key ethical issues and concerns raised in the article will be discussed in the essay.
This essay will evaluate the appropriateness of the ethical decisions which are made by
aligning the decision with moral philosophies. Lastly, a conclusion will be drawn based on
the ethical analysis.
Page 1

Ethical Issues raised in the article
The privacy of people is a key concern especially in case of online based company. In case of
social media sites, people share their personal information and companies must carefully
store such information and use it ethically. In the case of Facebook, the company collected a
large number of personal details about its users without their explicit permission (Marston,
2018). The key issue which rose, in this case, is a breach of privacy of users based on which
Facebook violated the principles of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The company
misused the fact that people avoid reading terms and conditions while giving permission on
their smartphone. They also failed to maintain the security of its users' data which resulted
in a breach of their privacy. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of the company, was called to testify
regarding the case in which many allegations were made on the company. The main concern
with this scandal was that only 270,000 users downloaded the application which collected
their private data however private data of over 87 million users were accessed (Carbone,
2018). This occurred due to one of the most controversial features of Facebook which is
available for developers called “Friends Permission” which enables developers to collect
personal data of users along with their friends.
It shows that the CSR policies of the company are not focused towards protecting the
privacy of its users. The company focuses on generating more profits by any means
necessary rather than focusing on the interest of its stakeholders. It is misusing its
monopoly position to violate the privacy of its users. After the incident, Facebook also shut
down its search feature based on which users can search others by entering their email
address or mobile number (Zuckerman, 2018). The company also unveiled a new privacy
policy which provides that it collects users’ texts, phone calls and address book details if
they choose to upload, sync or import their contents on the website. The corporation also
provided that there are many local laws which prohibit the firm from using the sensitive
data of public for various purposes and the data is subject to special protections. The data
include information about political view, trade union members, health, political views, race
or ethnicity. Moreover, subsidiaries of the company such as Whatsapp and Instagram also
collect the data of users without their explicit consent (Leetaru, 2018).
The article made a good argument that even after the incident Facebook did not stop
collecting the data of its users, instead, the company changes its privacy policies to be more
Page 2

open (ABC, 2018). Decisions of Facebook relating to the handling of its users’ data are
unethical because they resulted in a breach of their privacy. Currently, there are no legal
implications imposed on Facebook for this incident, however, the government is
investigating the matter to identify the laws violated by the company. Thus, the corporation
has breached its CSR policies by violating the privacy of its users. After finding about the
incident, a committee has been established by the Congress to judge the actions of
Facebook; however, the committee has not reached a decision yet. It is clear that Facebook
has breached it CSR policies, however, its actions are just within the legal limits based on
which no strict legal action can be taken against the company (Bauer, 2018). The
government is required to implement new security policies for organisations which collect
and harvest the data of their customers to protect the privacy of people.
Even after Mark Zuckerberg has admitted that the actions of Facebook are wrong still no
legal actions can be taken against the company for stopping the collection of its users; data.
Therefore, an ethical decision has not been made by the government and the company
because it is still collecting the data of its users. A good example is the data breach was “the
Craigslist experiment” incident in which a person, Jason Fortuny, posed as a woman on the
website, and he posted an advertisement for seeking sex on the website. Within 24 hours,
he received a response from over 178 people including their email addresses, names,
telephone numbers, photos and others (Schofield, 2006). Fortuny posted these responses
on a website which received huge media coverage, and it shows how easy it is to breach
users’ privacy through Craigslist. However, still, no legal action was taken against the
company for maintaining appropriate policies to protect the privacy of its users. Another
good example is a leak of search keywords of AOL in which over 650,000 users’ personal
information was leaked making it possible to identify the person who has searched on the
website (Barbaro and Zeller, 2006).
Decision making judgement process
Ethical problems in the case
The main ethical problem raised in the case is related to breach of data privacy of users
because Facebook has been collecting the private data of its users without their explicit
Page 3

permission. Another key issue is that due to lack of security guidelines third-party
developers collected and harvested the data of Facebook users along with their friends.
Relevant information
The initial report posted by the company provided that data of over 50 million people are
breached; whereas, it was later revealed that privacy of more than 87 million people is
breached. The company provides permission to its developers called ‘friend permission’
based on which they can collect the data of users along with their friends. The company did
not provide full disclosure to its users regarding the permission which company has to
collect their private data (Newton, 2018).
Evaluation of the information
Due to lack of effective CSR policies, the corporation failed to implement appropriate
policies to protect the privacy of its users. The quiz application which collected the data of
users was downloaded by only 270,000 users; however, due to ‘friend permission’ feature
the company was able to collect the data of 87 million users (Nakashima and Jesdanun,
2018).
Act or implement
Even after the incident, Facebook did not stop collecting its users’ data. The company
changed its privacy policies by making the process more transparent however no effective
step is taken by the enterprise to stop the data collection of its users.
Best solution
In this case, the corporation should take the initiative and implement a strict CSR structure
to protect the privacy of its users. It should avoid collection of private data of its users
without their explicit permission. The company should notify its users regarding the data it
is collecting from them, and they should have full control over granting of such data.
Alternative solutions
The government can take strict actions against Facebook to ensure that it is not violating the
privacy of its users. The government can also prohibit developers from collecting the private
data of users who did not give explicit permission to access their data.
Page 4

Review of actions based on the appropriate ethical theory
The principles of Deontology ethical theory applies in this case. This theory judges a
situation’s morality based on the rightness or wrongness of the actions taken by the parties.
In this case, Facebook misused its position to collect the private data of its users without
getting their explicit permission. As per CSR principles, a corporation has a duty to ensure
that it protects the privacy of its stakeholders and it should not misuse their data for
personal gain. Furthermore, the corporation allowed its developers to collect the data of its
users along with their friends without their knowledge. As per the Deontology ethics theory,
the actions of Facebook are wrong, and the company has breached its duty by violating the
privacy of its users. The corporation did not comply with its CSR policies, and it did not take
appropriate measures to protect the privacy of its users. Therefore, the actions of Facebook
are unethical as per the principle of deontology ethics theory.
Page 5

Conclusion
In conclusion, Facebook failed to implement effective CSR policies to protect the privacy of
its users which resulted in a breach of privacy of over 87 million users. The data of these
users are collected by Cambridge Analytica which is a Trump affiliate data mining firm. The
person who leaked the information provided that the data is used by the company to
influence the voting decision of people. This incident shows the failure of Facebook to
protect the privacy of its users. Due to features available for application developers such as
‘friend permission’, companies are able to collect information about people along with their
friends. No legal action has been taken against the company, and the decision of Facebook
to be more open about their data collection process is not ethical. By using a decision-
making process, the best decision for this case is that the company should not collect the
private data of its users and it should notify them regarding the data which the company is
collecting, and they should have control over the same. The actions of Facebook are
unethical as per the principles of deontology ethics theory, and the company is required to
change its CSR policies to focus on protecting the privacy of its users.
Page 6

References
ABC. (2018) Facebook says up to 87m people affected in Cambridge Analytica data-mining
scandal. [Online] ABC. Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-05/facebook-
raises-cambridge-analytica-estimates/9620652 [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Alton, L. (2017) How Much Do A Company's Ethics Matter In The Modern Professional
Climate?. [Online] Forbes. Available at:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2017/09/12/how-much-do-a-companys-ethics-
matter-in-the-modern-professional-climate/#1b3caa1b1c79 [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Barbaro, M. and Zeller, T. (2006) A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749. [Online]
The New York Times. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Bauer, S. (2018) Facebook data sweep raises legal and ethical issues. [Online] The Laywers
Daily. Available at: https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/6259/facebook-data-sweep-
raises-legal-and-ethical-issues [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Carbone, C. (2018) Facebook data scandal: Academics refused to carry out 'unethical'
Cambridge Analytica research. [Online] Fox News. Available at:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/03/26/facebook-data-scandal-academics-refused-to-
carry-out-unethical-cambridge-analytica-research.html [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Leetaru, K. (2018) The Problem Isn't Cambridge Analytica: It's Facebook. [Online] Forbes.
Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2018/03/19/the-problem-isnt-
cambridge-analytica-its-facebook/#7d2f9ed458a5 [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Marston, A. (2018) What leaders can learn from Facebook's data debacle. [Online] CNN.
Available at: http://money.cnn.com/2018/04/02/news/companies/facebook-leadership-
opinion/index.html [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Matsakis, L. (2018) What to look for in Your Facebook Data—And How to find it. [Online]
Wired. Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/download-facebook-data-how-to-read/
[Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Page 7

Nakashima, R. and Jesdanun, A. (2018) Cambridge Analytica: Facebook data breach scandal
is only the latest in a series of abuses. [Online] Independent. Available at:
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-cambridge-
analytica-latest-data-breach-scandal-election-fixing-russia-fake-news-bots-a8262791.html
[Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Newton, C. (2018) Mark Zuckerberg apologizes for the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
[Online] The Verge. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/21/17150158/mark-
zuckerberg-cnn-interview-cambridge-analytica [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Schofield, J. (2006) Craigslist sex-bait leaves men exposed. [Online] The Guardian. Available
at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2006/sep/09/craigslistsexb [Accessed
on 3rd June 2018].
Zuckerman, E. (2018) This Is So Much Bigger Than Facebook. [Online] The Atlantic. Available
at: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/data-misuse-bigger-than-
facebook/556310/ [Accessed on 3rd June 2018].
Page 8

Appendix
Page 9

Page 10

Page 11