The Circle by Dave Eggers questions whether the ends justify the means. The question of whether there is ever such a reason that would justify extreme measures to achieve such goals is wrangled within the novel. Some might argue that if the end goal is so just and acceptable, then the means should be allowed, but how might one characterize a valid end goal? Furthermore, to what extent is someone allowed to reach their goal, especially when it imposes harm on outside beings? Within the Circle, Eamon Bailey and Stenton portray their company as a massive firm working towards ending all evil in the world. They market their company as one that makes strides towards innovations that will end criminal activity and eradicate the unknowns that come …show more content…
Furthermore, as the first government official announced her transparency campaign, outside officials rallying against the Circle were caught in scandals, making going transparent seem like the most innovative option. Nevertheless, in these cases, blackmail and falsifying evidence may have played a role on the Circle's end. So, do these mean the ends? Is the benevolence of the goal strong enough to incite morally shaky behavior and total surveillance over an individual's life? The answer is no. On top of this, we now live in a future where SeeChange and going transparent is the expected norm. There are cameras everywhere, and everyone knows that they are being watched. Privacy is now a foreign concept. In this scenario, rights are still being infringed upon despite knowing they are being watched due to the lack of consent for this type of surveillance. However, ignoring this factor in a world where individuals are constantly being watched also imposes other ethical issues. With SeeChange, people will begin to change their daily …show more content…
The Circle manipulates its employees into thinking they are doing good by preying on the information they have gathered about them. Even with a character like Annie, Mae describes her as independent, intelligent, and well-rounded. Within the circle, she can quickly rise. However, unlike the others, she begins to accept the questionable measures taken within the Circle because she begins to break free from the manipulative nature of the corporation. The Circle was calculative in everything they did, and everyone there had so much information already owned by the Circle. This allowed them to appeal to specific demographics and manipulate them into thinking their work was for the greater good rather than questioning the different proposals and norms. To what extent are the ends justified? What is a good end goal? When looking at Scott Tucker and his payday lending business or Big Pharma price gouging, their goal is to be successful businesses that maximize profits while lowering costs. In both cases, the means do not justify the ends, and the ends are seemingly good goals that we feel are acceptable, just like we would say that wanting to end criminal behavior and reduce the unknown are "good
Penenberg closes his essay by mentioning that the surveillance is not only used to watch the citizens but also for citizens to keep an eye on the government. Through his organization, relevant information, and professional tone, Penenberg creates an effective
“With surveillance technology like closed-circuit television cameras and digital cameras now linked to the Internet, we now have the means to implement Bentham's inspection principle on a much vaster scale”(Singer) Bentham's inspection principle is a system that allows the collection, storing and dissemination of data on individuals, corporations, and the government. This collection of data has large implications in regard to privacy and security. “There is always danger that the information collected will be misused - whether by regimes seeking to silence opposition or by corporations seeking to profit from more detailed knowledge of their potential customers.”(Singer) What is done with the information collected is the main issue in terms of privacy. We do not want to be marketed to, or inundated with spam from third-party sources. We also do not want our private social circles and experiences to appear that they are being monetized or subjected to surveillance outside our control. In addition, surveillance has a large effect on the government that can beneficial or detrimental to democracy. Exposure of government secrets may make officials tread carefully when making decisions, ensuring that politicians are nothing but just and fair.“The crucial step in preventing a repressive government from
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Invasion of privacy is shown in the “Youth League”. Children who are young and persuading are being brainwashed into believing every single word Big Brother has to say. They are told to spy on their own family to assure their loyalty to the party. While the inner party is busy making propaganda and re-writing history, the proles are left like animals. Free.
The importance of profit is a central theme of the novel that demonstrates a disregard for morality. Corporations
1984, a novel by George Orwell, represents a dystopian society in which the people of Oceania are surveilled by the government almost all the time and have no freedoms. Today, citizens of the United States and other countries are watched in a similar way. Though different technological and personal ways of keeping watch on society than 1984, today’s government is also able to monitor most aspects of the people’s life. 1984 might be a dystopian society, but today’s condition seems to be moving towards that controlling state, where the citizens are surveilled by the government at all times.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
The constant eye of Big Brother invades the privacy of its members. The inevitable, looming screens at every turn, in every room, serve as a reminder that every move one makes is watched. Then when it is least expected, the voice behind the screen singles out a person and screams at them; the results lead to jumpiness and high levels of stress. A study shows that being watched “can change your behaviour and choices without you realising it.” (Goldman, “How Being Watched Changes You- Without You Knowing) insomuch, the telescreens work as a deterrent against breaking the rules. Everyone is far less likely to commit crimes since subconsciously they know that Big Brother is observant and they will have very little success in escaping should they be found guilty. This guarantees that the people will be wary of their speech, behaviour and facial expressions at all times. In fact the telescreens cannot be turned off, save for some special privileges given to the Inner Party which, turn into the catalysts for arrests for nothing but supposed delusions against the government. Taking away the privacy, makes the members feel vulnerable and therefore, easier to mold to Party
In business the primary focus is on maximizing returns to owners or shareholders. The manner in which a business conducts itself while attempting to make its profit can be considered ethical or not. For instance, a business that has a positive sense of social responsibility will make some effort to have a positive impact on society, contributing to the welfare of the community in which it operates in some way or another. Unethical practice in business could include the converse of this, where a business is solely concerned about its profit and does not attempt to mitigate the impact of its operations in that society. For example, a mining exploration company that does not attempt to ease discomfort and inconvenience of the people that are displaced by its operations could be considered unethical.
Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place. ”(“5 Myths about Privacy”). The fight for privacy rights is by no means a recent conflict.
James Madison once said “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” To gain a better understanding of a society, one must gain knowledge of the needs and wants the citizens’ demand from the country’s representatives. In every country the needed to protect its citizens is the same. In some nations, security is a higher priority which causes sacrifices to be made to obtain an indefinite protection against all rivals. In Peter Singer’s essay titled “Visible Man: Ethics in a World without Secrets” he states that there is a way that governments can collect information by using technology; to allow more ‘openness’ and exposure as an increase of unknown surveillance that the public is not aware of. Singer’s essay also talks about how also with the rise of secrecy within politics; organizations such as ‘WikiLeaks’ and ‘Anonymous’ reveal to the world what is really going on within their privacy. Benefits come from both sides in a world where surveillance exists to the highest priority with or without privacy.
The world erupted in outrage following revelations by Edward Snowden regarding the extent of surveillance perform by the National Security Agency. Privacy becomes one of the hottest topic of 2013 and was chosen by the world’s most popular online dictionary, Dictionary.com, as the Word of the Year. However, the government is not the only one that conduct data gathering and surveillance. Employers often monitor their employees, and businesses collect data on theirs customer. The morality of these practices is a topic that generates heated debate.
To conclude business organizations do not have the right to deceive individuals and consumers in specific because Albert Carr’s claim that business is a game cannot be justifiable and supported with reasons that may harm or the community and its people. However, I do believe that business organizations should be socially responsible and that would help them maximize profits in the long run (Lauren, 2011)
Privacy is not just a fundamental right, it is also important to maintain a truly democratic society where all citizens are able to exist with relative comfort. Therefore, “[Monitoring citizens without their knowledge] is a major threat to democracies all around the world.” (William Binney.) This is a logical opinion because without freedom of expression and privacy, every dictatorship in history has implemented some form of surveillance upon its citizens as a method of control.
Business nowadays encounter with a lot of moral challenges in today’s global economy. Everyone is thriving to be more successful than their competitors, to make their next profits, to keep their job, to earn a big bonus, or to compete effectively. There exists temptation to bend lines, omit information, and do whatever it takes to get ahead of their competition. Many business employees and executives succumb. Sadly, the theme becomes...