What Is The Digital Divide?
The phrase ―the digital divide‖ was coined in the 1990s.
It is a new label for an old concept involving information ―haves‖ and ―have-nots.‖
The digital divide is now used to
describe the disparity between those who have access to Internet technology and those who do not.
Digital Divide (Continued)
Benjamin Compaine (2001) defines the digital divide as the perceived gap between those who have and those who do not have either:
(a) access to cybertechnology, (b) the knowledge and ability to use that technology.
Digital Divide (Continued)
Discussions about the digital divide might suggest that there is one overall divide—that is, a single divide as opposed to many ―divides,‖ or divisions. But there are multiple divisions involving access to cybertechnology. O‘Hara and Stevens (2006) describe three ―divides,‖ involving: rich and poor people, rich and poor regions, rich and poor nations.
Digital Divide (Continued)
Four our purposes, we examine the digital divide as it exists at two distinct levels:
(i) a ―global digital divide‖ between developed and developing nations. (ii) a divide between groups within developed nations, based on factors such as income and education.
The Global Digital Divide
In 2000, it was estimated that 429 million people (approximately 6% of the world's population) were online globally.
68% of those online in 2000 lived in North America and Europe.
Two billion people in the world didn‘t even have electricity, and in developing countries, there were roughly 69 phones for every 1000 people (2000 Human Development Report).
Some Statistics from the 2000
Human Development Report
In 2000, the developing nation of Nepal had
approximately 35,000 Internet users in a population of 21 million people; only 15% of houses with electricity (2000 Human Development Report).
Some Statistics Noting Growth Between 2000 and 2005
Global Internet usage more than doubled between 2000 and 2005. In late 2005, it was estimated that there were more than 972 million Internet users (Internet World Stats News, 2005).
2000-2005 Statistics (Continued)
Also, between 2000 and 2005, the list of countries or regions where more than 50% of the population used the Internet had grown to 30. Seven nations had an Internet penetration rate of higher than 60% (Internet World Stats News, 2005).
2000-2005 Statistics (Continued)
The disparity between the percentage of Internet users in developed and developing countries was still significant in 2005:
E.g., in Africa, which includes 14.1% of the world‘s population, the Internet penetration rate was 2.5%. In North America, which includes only 5.1% of the world‘s population, the Internet penetration rate was 68.1% (World Internet Usage Statistics and Populations Stats, 2005).
Some Statistics as of 2008
In 2008, the disparity between the percentage of Internet users in developed and developing countries was still significant. In countries such as Niger, Ethiopia, and the Congo, approximately two people per thousand use the Internet, while the percentage of Internet users in countries such as Iceland and Norway is greater than 700 persons per thousand.
2008 Statistics (Continued)
The disparity is especially apparent when viewed from the perspective of continents or world regions.
E.g., in Africa (which includes approximately 14% of the world‘s population) the Internet penetration rate is 5.3%, while in North America, the Internet penetration
rate is 73.6% (Internet World Stats, 2008).
On a positive note, the Internet usage growth in Africa was 1,031.2% between 2000 and 2008.
The Digital Divide Within Nations
Surprisingly, there are still significant discrepancies involving access to cybertechnology within developed nations. O‘Hara and Stevens (2006) point out a discrepancy in the UK.
E.g., they note that in 2004, approximately one half of all the households were online, while only 3% of the poorest households were included in this number.
The Digital Divide Within Nations
There are also significant disparities within some developing nations as well. In India, for example, the divide appears to be exacerbated because:
(1) a growing segment of the population who are fluent in English and who have the technical literacy required to be able to work in many of the skilled jobs outsourced there are doing very well. (2) those on the other side of the divide – the majority of the population – have a low level of literacy and little or no access cyberterchnology, are not doing very well.
The Digital Divide in the U.S.
In the U.S., discussions about the digital divide have focused on factors such as:
income, education, race, gender.
The Digital Divide in the U.S. (Continued)
In the 1990s, a National Information Infrastructure (NII) was proposed to ensure that all Americans would have access to information technology. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) conducted a series of studies on computer use among various groups.
The Digital Divide in the U.S. (Continued)
Early NTIA reports confirmed that access to cybertechnology was related to socio-demographic factors. Later NTIA reports have noted that:
(a) the rate of access to cybertechnology in the U.S. had increased overall; (b) significant disparities still existed with respect to socio-demographic factors involving race, education, income, and marital status.
Digital Divide in the US: Universal Service vs. Universal Access
The US Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934, distributing the cost for telephone service to be affordable to all Americans (i.e., providing universal service). Telephone users still pay a universal connectivity fee, or surcharge, on their telephone bills to support universal service.
Universal Service vs. Universal Access (Continued)
Should a universal service policy for the Internet also be subsidized in a similar manner? In the case of telephone technology, it was argued that having a telephone was necessary for one‘s well being. Can the same argument be made for cybertechnology?
Universal Service vs. Universal Access (Continued)
Universal service policies are controversial because they require subsidies, often resulting either in user fees or higher taxes. Advocates of a universal service policy for the Internet note that without a government subsidy, people living in less-populated rural areas would not have been able to afford telephone service. Critics of universal service argue that Americans already have universal access to cybertechnology (e.g., public points of access such as in libraries).
The ―Analog Divide‖ and the Public Education System in the U.S.
The analog divide refers to the social inequities involving haves and have-nots that underlie the digital divide. Torin Monahan (2005) believes that in the U.S., an analog divide exists independently of digital technology. He argues that the ―divide‖ in the U.S. is reinforced through the system of public education (and is not simply about access to digital technology).
―Reconceptualizing‖ the Digital Divide
Like Monahan, Adams (2001) and Warschauer (2003) also argue that the problems creating the digital divide cannot be understood simply in terms of material resources, numbers, and other modes of quantitative measurement.
Adams believes that focusing merely on numbers can actually mask other ongoing social inequalities relevant to understanding how the divide arises and is sustained. Warschauer notes that technology projects around the world, which have focused on providing hardware and software, have failed to pay sufficient attention to the human and social systems that must also change for technology to make a difference.
So, they believe that the ―digital‖ divide needs to be ―reconceptualized‖ to be better understood.
Reconceptionalizing the Digital Divide (Continued)
Arguments for reconceptualizing the digital divide might initially seem appealing. But they also tend to underestimate the significant role that technology itself plays in understanding (and potentially resolving) problems associated with unequal access to cybertechnology. So, there may be are good reasons for retaining a technological metaphor.
The Digital Divide as an Ethical Issue
Is the digital divide is an ethical issue? Is every kind of divide regarding unequal access to goods necessarily an ethical issue? Skeptics might note the divide between those who have and do not have Mercedes-Benz automobiles, and that many of us fall on the ―wrong side‖ of the ―Mercedez-Benz Divide.‖
The Digital Divide as an Ethical Issue (Continued)
Is unequal access to cybertechnology similar to the ―Mercedes-Benz divide‖? Or is it closer to divisions involving access to vital human resources such as food and healthcare?
The Digital Divide as an Ethical Issue (Continued)
Many ethicists believe that divisions between those who do and do not have access to vital resources, such as food and healthcare, raise questions of distributive justice. Distributive justice refers to the ―just distribution‖ of primary goods and resources in populations.
Distributive Justice
What, exactly, do we mean by ―distributive justice‖ in the context of cybertechnology? According to Jeroen van den Hoven and Emma Rooksby (2008): Distributive justice in contemporary information societies concerns, among other issues, the
distribution of information, information services, and information infrastructures. [Italics Added]
Van den Hoven and Rooksby are influenced by John Rawls‘ theory of justice and ―primary social goods.‖
Distributive Justice and Rawls
In his classic work, A Theory of Justice, Rawls describes primary social goods as ―resources that satisfy basic human needs and thus have a special value or moral weight in society.‖
Rawls notes that with these goods, humans ―can generally be assured of greater success in carrying out their intentions and in advancing their needs.‖
Van den Hoven and Rooksby extend Rawls‘ notion of primary social goods to include ―information goods.‖
Bridging the Digital Divide
Jeremy Moss (2002) argues that people in developing countries who do not have access to cybertechnology are unfairly disadvantaged because:
(i) they are denied access to knowledge; (ii) they are unable to participate fully in democratic decision making processes; (iii) their prospects for economic growth are hindered.
Bridging the Digital Divide (Continued)
Pippa Norris (2001) believes that ―the underclass of the ―information poor‖ may become ―further marginalized in societies where basic computer skills are becoming essential for economic success and personal advancement.‖
She notes that these skills are necessary for ―entry to good career and educational opportunities,‖ as well as ―full access to social networks… and opportunities for civic engagement.‖
Do We Have a Moral Obligation to Bridge the Digital Divide?
If Moss and Norris are correct, it would seem that we have a moral obligation to provide access to those who are disadvantaged? However, some argue that we are morally obligated only to ―do no harm‖
E.g., they believe we have no explicit ―obligation to do good‖ — in this case, no obligation to provide Internet access to disadvantaged groups.
But we can question whether a ―minimalist‖ view of morality is adequate (see Chap. 2).
Do We Have a Moral Obligation to Bridge the Digital Divide?
Bottis and Himma (2008) note that some important points of clarification are needed to make the case that ―affluent nations‖ have a moral obligation to do bridge the divide.
E.g., they point out that we need to draw an important distinction between saying that: ―X is a good thing to do.‖ and ―We are obligated to do X.‖
Do We Have a Moral Obligation to Bridge the Divide (Continued)?
Bottis and Himma believe that most people would likely agree that eliminating the digital divide would be ―a good thing to do.‖ But they also note that there would likely be far less consensus as to whether we – i.e., some affluent nation – have an obligation to do it.
Do We Have a Moral Obligation to Bridge the Divide (Continued)?
Himma (2007) points out that because many people believe that we are morally obligated only to do no harm, they infer that we have
no moral obligation to bridge the digital divide.
But Himma also argues that this view is ―inconsistent with the ethics of every classically theistic religion as well as our ordinary intuitions, as well as classic theories of deontology and consequentialism.‖
E.g., Himma notes that deontological theories ―almost universally hold that we have an obligation to help the poor.‖
Cybertechnology and the Disabled
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) was formed to promote standards that ensure universal Web access. It established a Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), which has produced guidelines and protocols for developing software applications that improve access for disabled persons.
Cybertechnology and the Disabled (Continued)
WAI applications range from software used in speech synthesizers and screen magnifiers to proposed applications that will benefit disabilities that are:
visual, hearing, physical, cognitive, neurological.
Cybertechnology and the Disabled (Continued)
WAI has established guidelines for developing ―user agents‖ that are:
intended to lower barriers to Web access for people with disabilities. designed to conform and communicate with ―assistive technologies‖ such as screen readers (which perform a function similar to Braille applications in off-line contexts).
Cybertechnology and the Disabled (Continued)
Frances Grodzinsky (2000) argues that computers equipped with assistive technologies and ―adaptive devices‖ can be an ―equalizer‖ in the era of information technology because they
enable people with disabilities to participate in and compete for jobs that require computer access.
Cybertechnology and the Disabled (Continued)
WAI‘s advocates point out that measures taken for the disabled have had positive outcomes for other groups – for example:
poor people who often are forced to deal with literacy problems have benefited; ramps designed for wheelchair accessibility not only benefit people in wheelchairs, but also nondisabled persons as well (such as parents pushing baby carriages).
Cybertechnology and the Disabled (Continued)
Some argue, by analogy, that ordinary users will benefit from design enhancements to user interfaces intended to assist disabled persons. There is a danger in using this kind of utilitarian argument as the main rationale, because not all enhancements may benefit non-disabled persons.
Race and Cybertechnology
Three kinds of issues affecting race and cybertechnology can be distinguished:
Internet usage patterns among minority groups; technology policies affecting African Americans and racial minorities; how the Internet has been used as a medium to spread racial prejudice.
Race and Cybertechnology Issues Affecting Usage Patterns
Kretchmer and Karveth (2001) note that in studies involving African-Americans:
the average age for African-American users tends to be younger than for whites whouse the Internet; African Americans typically tend to access the Internet less frequently than whites; adult African American Internet users are much more likely than their white counterparts to have modest incomes, no college degrees, and children under eighteen.
Race and Cybertechnology Issues Affecting Usage Patterns (Continued)
Kretchmer and Karveth also claim that African-American Internet users are: more likely to use the Internet for entertainment and
for locating information about quality-of-life activities, such as job training, school, health care, and hobbies; less likely to participate in Web-based auctions, and to use e-mail to develop and sustain friendships.
Race, Technology, and Public Policy
Robert Johnson (1997) believes that African American need to view themselves as ―stakeholders‖ in policy issues affecting technology. He examined the impact of automobile technology, or ―automobility,‖ in the U.S. on African Americans (following World War II). The construction of urban highway systems broke up inner-city neighborhoods and introduced health and safety risks.
Racism and Rhetoric on the Internet
Lynn Theismeyer (1999) believes that two kinds of racist speech apply to the Internet:
(a) hate speech itself, which can include text, music, online broadcast, and images that exhort users to act against targeted groups; (b) persuasive rhetoric that does not directly enunciate racism and corresponding violence, but which ultimately promotes or justifies it.
Racism and Rhetoric on the Internet (Continued)
In her analysis of Racist Rhetoric, Theismyer examines two questions:
(i) Does cybertechnology (or what she calls ―information technology‖ make the reemergence of prejudicial messages and attitudes swifter and more likely? (ii) Does the Internet's wide range of distribution make for more followers of racial prejudice, and finally more persuasion?
Gender and Cybertechnology
Three distinct kinds of issues affecting gender that we consider are:
1. access issues (i.e., access to jobs for women in the computing/engineering fields); 2. gender bias in software applications, including video-games; 3. theoretical frameworks needed for understanding gender issues affecting cybertechnology.
Gender and Access Issues
Access-related issues affecting computing include the ―pipeline‖ for women entering the field of computer science (CS). In a classic study, Tracy Camp (1997) noted that the number of women getting PhDs in CS had increased slightly. However, Camp also noted that the number of women getting BS degrees in CS had decreased.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
Kirlidog, Aykol, and Gulscecen (2009) cite more recent evidence to support the ongoing concerns about the ―pipeline.‖ They argue that computer science is still typically regarded as a ―male profession,‖ both in industry and academia. They also believe that women remain in the ―margins‖ of a male-dominated profession, which is filled with highly gendered expressions such as
―killing or aborting programs,‖ ―workbench,‖ ―toolkit,‖ etc., that reflect the masculine culture of the field.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
1. 2.
3.
Kirlidog, Aykol, and Gulscecen identify three ―net results‖ of the male-dominated computing profession in which women are: under-represented in computer-related jobs; more under-represented in the managerial ranks in the computing field because of the ‗glass ceiling‘; earn less than men for doing the same jobs.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
One question that has baffled researchers is:
Why don‘t more women enter college degree programs in Computer Science (CS)?
Paul De Palma (2005) considers and dismisses the view that women do not pursue CS careers because of ―math anxiety.‖
He notes that many women pursued degrees in mathematics, long before fields such as medicine and law were available to them.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
De Palma infers that mathematics programs must have been doing something right in attracting and graduating women. He suggests that if CS programs were more like mathematics programs than they currently are, perhaps more women would be attracted to them.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
De Palma also notes that much of the hightech culture associated with the early days of computing was dominated by males, who:
tended to be fascinated with gadgetry and devices, as opposed to mathematics per se; affected how programming courses were conceived of and taught.
Gender and Access to High-Tech Jobs (Continued)
De Palma speculates that if course instruction in programming were designed to be as close as possible to logic and mathematics, women might find CS programs more attractive. This would seem like an interesting hypothesis to test.
Gender Bias in Video Games
Does gender bias exist in software development for video games technology? Elizabeth Buchanan (2000) argues that video games contribute to gender bias because many of them tend to:
(1) misrepresent or to exclude female characters; (2) perpetuate traditional sexist stereotypes.
Gender Bias in Video Games (Continued)
Initially, we might be inclined to dismiss concerns about gender bias in video games on the grounds that many women aren‘t interested in these applications. But Philip Brey (2008) argues that the question of gender bias in video games is ―morally significant‖ because: if computer games tend to be designed and marketed for men, then women are at an unfair advantage, as they consequently have less opportunity to enjoy computer games and their possible benefits. The ―benefits,‖ for which women would have less opportunity include greater ―computer literacy,‖ which Brey notes is an important quality in today‘s market place.
Gender Bias in Video Games (Continued)
Brey also notes that many critics argue that the computer industry is mainly to blame for the gender gap that exists. E.g., critics point out that most game developers are male;
Also, there may be little interest on the part of software developers to design appropriate video games for women.
Gender Bias in Video Games (Continued)
Brey notes that very few computer games include ―decent role models‖ for women, since ―a disproportionate number of the female characters in these games are strippers or prostitutes and that these characters tend to have ―unrealistic body images.‖
It would seem that both Brey and Buchanan make plausible cases for: how the assumptions of developers designing video games can contribute to gender bias; Why gender bias is morally significant.
Methodological Frameworks for Understanding Gender
Alison Adam (2004) argues for the need for a ―gender informed‖ approach to ethical issues affecting cybertechnology. She notes that most gender studies involving computers have focused on access (e.g., ―pipeline‖) issues and on differences between men and women. Adam endorses an alternative scheme based on a ―feminist ethic of care.‖
Methodological Frameworks and Gender (Continued)
Adam believes that a theoretical framework built on an ethic of care can help us to improve ourunderstanding of gender issues affecting computing, because it:
shows why gender issues cannot be reduced to access issues based merely, or even primarily, on quantitative analyses; helps us to see that key concepts in computer ethics, such as the concept of privacy, can be different for men and women.
Methodological Frameworks and Gender (Continued)
Adam (2005) also argues that a genderbased ethics helps us to better understand issues such as
cyberstalking, and Internet pornography
in ways that traditional ethical theories cannot. She concludes that we need a ―genderinformed theory‖ for cyberethics.
Employment and Work
Issues affecting the impact of cybertechnology on employment and work can be examined in terms of two broadly different kinds of concerns:
1. quantity of jobs; 2. quality of work.
Cybertechnology and the Transformation of Work
Some social theorists suggest that because of cybertechnology, work has been transformed. In transforming the nature of work, cybertechnology has also raised social and ethical issues involving:
job displacement and remote work, globalization and outsourcing.
Cybertechnology and Job Displacement
Has cybertechnology created more jobs, or has eliminated more of them?
Those who argue that it has reduced jobs, often point to the number of factory and assembly jobs that have been automated (and thus eliminated) by cybertechnology. Those who claim that it has created jobs, note that cybertechnology has introduced newer industries, such as computer support companies.
This shift in jobs, overall, is sometimes analyzed in terms of job displacement.
Job Displacement and Automation
Job displacement can be measured in terms
of the net result of jobs gained and lost. Job displacement involving workers has been significantly affected by automation, which began during the Industrial Revolution.
―Luddites‖ (followers of Ned Ludd in the 19th century) reacted to automation in the textile industry by smashing machinery. People who oppose cybertechnology are sometimes now refererred to ―NeoLuddites.‖
Job Displacement, Robotics, and Expert Systems
Robots and robotic arms have replaced
many factory and ―blue collar‖ workers. Expert systems (ES programs) have replaced some professional workers. Both have also raised ethical issues.
Examine the scenario by Forester and Morrison (in the textbook) on designing an ―expert administrator‖ to ―lie‖ or to mislead people in order to be an expert in its task.
Job Displacement and Remote Work
Remote Work has raised social and ethical
questions, including concerns about whether workers benefit from telework.
E.g., are white-collar employees affected in the same way as those less-educated and less-skilled employees who also perform remote work? Many white-collar professional workers have an option to work at home at their discretion and convenience. But some clerical, or ―pink collar,‖ workers are required to work remotely, out of their homes.
Some of these workers could be disadvantaged re career opportunities, because they are not in the physical workplace.
Remote Work (Continued)
Fairweather (1998) notes that disabled workers can be negatively affected by remote work. On the one hand, remote work has provided opportunities to some disabled workers who otherwise would be denied access to a job. But Fairweather worries that for some disabled employees, especially those who are capable of working in both conventional and remote workplace settings, remote work can also have unfortunate consequences for them.
Remote Work (Continued)
Fairweather worries that a company‘s remote-work policies might provide employers with a convenient scheme for keeping disabled workers out of the physical workplace, which is problematic for three reasons:
(1) it affects worker autonomy because it denies those disabled workers who could work either remotely or in a conventional workplace setting the choice of determining where they will work. (2) the practice of remote work can be used to ―hide‖ disabled workers, keeping them out of sight and away from the physical workplace. (3) remote work provides employers with a convenient excuse not to make the physical workplace compatible with current laws affecting disabled employees, such as the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) guidelines and requirements.
Globalization and Outsourcing
Torin Monahan (2005) defines globalization as …the blurring of boundaries previously held as stable and fixed…between local/global, public/private [and] nation/world.
Globalization (Continued)
Discussions of globalization tend to focus on concerns affecting:
labor outsourcing, international trade agreements, immigration, cultural homogenization.
Globalization and Outsourcing (Continued)
Our concern is with economic aspects of globalization, particularly as they impact cybertechnology and the workplace. Trade agreements have made possible a new global economy, encouraging greater competition between nations and greater efficiency for businesses.
Globalization and Outsourcing (Continued)
The economies of some nations have been severely impacted by the loss of jobs that has resulted from globalization. In the U.S., many manufacturing jobs, including traditional ―blue-collar‖ jobs, as well as jobs in the service sector, have been exported ―offshore.‖
Globalization and Outsourcing (Continued)
Outsourcing now also affects many highly-skilled ―white collar‖ jobs, including jobs in the computing field. Programming jobs traditionally held by employees in American companies are being ―outsourced‖ to companies in India and China.
Globalization and Outsourcing (Continued)
Ironically, the jobs of programmers, whose skills were essential to make remote work a reality, are now being outsourced to countries where programmers earn less money. Baker and Kripalani (2005) note that the career prospects of American software programmers are now in doubt. The outsourcing of programming jobs raises concerns that warrant serious consideration.
Quality of Work-life
Some quality-related issues affecting work-life include health and safety concerns such as:
repetitive stress injury (RSI) and carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS); video operator‘s distress syndrome (VODS).
Many companies have developed ergonomic policies to respond to these concerns.
Quality of Work-Life (Continued)
Other quality-related issues affecting work-life include stress resulting from:
employee stress; workplace surveillance; computer monitoring.
Employee Stress and Workplace Surveillance
According to the 2007 Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance Report, sponsored by the American Management Association (2008):
43% of American companies monitor employee email, and 96% of those companies ―track external (incoming and outgoing messages).‖
The report also noted that 45% of companies track the amount of time an employee spends at the keyboard.
Workplace Surveillance and Employee Stress
An increasing number of these companies now also monitor the blogosphere to see what is being written about them in various blogs, as well as what is said about them on social networking sites such as Facebook. As a result of increased monitoring, many employees have been fired for misusing a company‘s email resources or its Internet connection, or both. Some practices involving computerized monitoring have also contributed to employee stress.
Employee Stress and Workplace Surveillance
Kizza and Ssanyu (2005) describe some factors that have contributed to the recent expansion and growth of employee monitoring, two of which are the: plummeting prices of both software and hardware, miniaturization of monitoring products. The lower cost has made monitoring tools available to many employers who, in the past, might not have been able to afford them. The miniaturization of these tools has made it far easier to conceal them from employees.
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
Lucas Introna (2004) points out that surveillance technology, in addition to becoming less expensive, has also become ―less overt and more diffused.‖ He also notes that current monitoring technologies have created the potential to build surveillance features into the ―very fabric of organizational processes.‖
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
To support Introna‘s view, consider that monitoring tools are now being used to measure such things as the:
number of minutes an employee spends on the telephone completing a transaction (such as selling a product); number of minutes an employee spends on the telephone completing a transaction (such as booking a reservation); number and length of breaks an employee takes.
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
Some companies use software monitoring tools that block out certain kinds of content deemed ―inappropriate‖ or ―offensive.‖ Rudinow and Graybosch (2002) note that
Texas Health Resources uses software that scans employee e-mail for keywords that may indicate ―inappropriate content.‖ American Telephone and Telegraph uses software that rejects incoming e-mail message indicated as ―having offensive content.‖
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
Weckert (2005) points out that it is crucial to draw distinctions involving two areas of computerized monitoring, affecting: the different applications of monitoring, the different kinds of work situations.
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
Regarding the different kinds of applications, Weckert notes that employees could be monitored with respect to the following kinds of activities: email usage, URLs visited while Web surfing, quality of their work, speed of their work, work practices (health and safety), employee interaction.
Workplace Surveillance (Continued)
With regard to the different kinds of work situations, Weckert believes that some further distinctions also need to be made.
He notes that it may be appropriate to monitor the keystrokes of data-entry workers to measure their performance in specific period of time. But Weckert also notes that it may not be appropriate to monitor email in cases where client confidentially is expected.
E.g., a therapist employed in a health organization may receive highly sensitive and personal e-mail from one of her client‘s regarding the client‘s mental state or physical health.
A Comprehensive Analysis of Workplace Monitoring
Weckert believes that a ―comprehensive analysis of workplace monitoring‖ should combine two separate approaches (one conceptual, and one empirical):
A conceptual analysis is needed to ―enunciate and clarify‖ the relevant moral concepts such as privacy, autonomy, and trust. Empirical approaches are needed to examine the technologies involved with respect to questions such as: ―what can be done?‖; ―how easily and at what cost can it be done?‖; ―how intrusive will it be?‖
Table 10-3: Common Arguments Used to Support/Oppose Employee Monitoring Some Arguments in Favor of Monitoring
Some Arguments Against Monitoring
Helps to reduce employee theft
Increases employee stress
Helps to eliminate waste
Undermines employee trust
Helps employers to train new employees
Reduces individual autonomy
Provides employers with a motivational tool
Invades worker privacy
Improves competitiveness
Focuses on quantity rather than quality of work
Saves the company money
Creates an "electronic sweatshop"
Guards against industrial espionage
Provides employers with an "electronic whip"
Improves worker productivity and profits
Reduces employee morale and overall productivity
A Code of Ethics for Employee Monitoring Gary Marx and Sanford Sherizen (1991) proposed a code with six requirements (even though they do not endorse monitoring): 1. Apply to monitoring the same protection that applies to preemployment background checks – i.e., permit only information directly related to the job to be collected. 2. Require employers to provide employees with advanced notice of the introduction of monitoring as well as appropriate mechanisms for appeal. 3. Require people to verify machine-produced information before using it to evaluate employees. 4. Provide workers with access to the information on themselves. 5. Provide mechanisms for monetary redress for employees whose rights are violated or who are victims of erroneous information generated by a monitoring system. 6. Apply a ―statute of limitations‖ on data acquired from monitoring.
Employee Monitoring and Personal Autonomy
Rooksby and Cica (2005) analyze workplace monitoring practices from the perspective of an employee‘s right to personal autonomy. They do not argue that workplace monitoring is unjustified or is ―intrinsically wrong.‖ But they claim that this practice is wrong in cases where it used by employers or managers to ―facilitate coercive or manipulative changes to the workers‘ values in so far as this involves an attempt to undermine or distort their personal autonomy.‖
Employee Monitoring and Personal Autonomy (Continued)
Rooksby and Cica argue that individuals have a ―right to psychological autonomy‖ and that this right is analogous to other rights such as ―freedom of opinion, expression, and association.‖ They also believe that electronic surveillance in the workplace undermines the workers‘ right to ―psychological autonomy,‖ to the extent that it
contributes to a ―distortion or reduction of personal autonomy in the workplace by interfering with the workers‘ motivational attitudes.‖
Personal Autonomy, Confidentiality, and Email Privacy
Is a compromise view on monitoring possible? Richard Spinello (2002) focusing on workplace monitoring controversies affecting employee email. He argues that
workers have a prima facie right to the confidentiality of their email communications; email monitoring that uses ―extraordinary means‖ to acquire information about an employee is intrusive and offensive.
Spinello also argues that only ―ordinary means‖ should be used to seek ―relevant‖ knowledge about the employee.
Email Privacy in the Workplace (Continued)
Spinello favors a strong presumption for employee privacy rights in the workplace.
He believes that this is necessary to ensure respect for an employee‘s dignity and autonomy.
But Spinello believes that monitoring employee email can be legitimate under ―extraordinary circumstances.‖
International Dimensions of Workplace Monitoring
Do we now need international agreements for employee-monitoring policies because of the global workforce? Stephen Coleman (2005) notes that an employees‘ privacy could be violated by software-monitoring programs that reside on a computer located in a country different from that person is working. Coleman also suggests that an International Bill of Human Rights should be adopted to address global aspects of the employee monitoring.
