Privacy and Public Interest in a Digital Age:
Is Social Media a Risk to the Public Good?
By Scott C. Williamson
Robert H. Walkup Professor of Ethics
Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
A background paper prepared for the Bluegrass Chapter of the PRSA on the occasion of their
ethics program, September 18, 2014.
I.
Third Party Risk as Ethics Achilles Heel
The Ethics Resource Center is America’s oldest nonprofit organization devoted to independent
research and the advancement of high ethical standards and practices in public and private
institutions. Since 1994 they have issued a yearly National Business Ethics Survey of the U.S.
workforce. The good news is that misconduct in the workplace is down overall. But not all the
news is good. The 2013 report finds that the most common ethical concerns reported by workers
include retaliation for reporting misconduct (21% of respondents), and misconduct by managers.
Workers reported that 60% of misconduct involved “someone with managerial authority from
the supervisory level up to top management. 1 Not surprisingly, the percentage of workers who
report observed wrongdoing has remained flat the last few years (63%).
Beyond misconduct that occurs in-house, companies are also at risk by the misconduct of third
parties. Navex Global, an ethics and compliance company, calls Third Party Risk the Achilles
heel of ethics and compliance because companies are held morally responsible for wrongdoing
that occurs anywhere along the multi- level supply chains and distribution networks.2 Take
Apple for example. You might remember when Apple took a hit in 2012 because of the working
conditions at the Chinese manufacturer of the iPhone. About 150 Foxconn employees threatened
to commit mass suicide in protest of their working conditions.3 Navex warns the for-profit
business sector to expect more third-party risk in the years to come. What moral responsibility do
companies have for supply chains and distribution networks? The business community knows
that reputational harm from a fast-moving crisis can send your sales into free-fall and do
significant damage to consumer trust in your brand.
1
2013 National Business Ethics Survey of the American Workforce. Ethics Resource Center.
2
Navex Global, Ethics and Compliance: 14 Emerging Trends in 2013 , Ed Petry, Ph.D.
3
Wikipedia.
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
I want to think about Third Party Risk in a different way. Instead of specific instances of
misconduct or gross neglect, what if the risk is that we as a society are losing something valuable
and we hardly notice? What if social media puts society at risk much the same way that a third
party can put a company at risk? An example will help. Do users know that when they click on a
Facebook “like” button belonging to your brand, they have granted you access to additional
information about them, including birthdate, school affiliation, workplace information, and other
things they like? Social Networking ProCon.org is a nonpartisan, nonprofit website that presents
research, studies and pro and con statements on questions related to social networking and its
impact on society. An invasion of privacy is one of their concerns about the impact of social
networking sites on society. They write “from social media sites, simple algorithms can
determine where you live, sexual orientation, personality traits, signs of depression, and other
information, even if users put none of those data on their social networking profiles.”4 I have
pressed many Facebook “like” buttons in my day and never once thought that I was giving
implied consent for the data mining industry to access and leverage data about me beyond my
“like.” And I’m not alone. Social Networking ProCon.org reports that 13 million users said they
had not set or did not know about Facebook’s privacy settings and 26% shared all or nearly all of
their posts publicly.5 Users might not know how much they are revealing about themselves on
social networking sites, but divorce attorneys, the U.S. Justice Department, the IRS, insurance
companies, marketers, and social science researchers have a good idea. Let’s take a closer look at
one particular case involving Facebook.
I.
A Fascinating Controversy on the Ethics of Digital Data
A recent article in the New York Times reports an extraordinary claim. Jeffrey T. Hancock is a
Cornell University professor of communication and information science. He claims that all of the
personal information disclosed online by Internet users has created a “new era” in social science
research. “I liken it a little bit,” he says “to when chemistry got the microscope.”6 Think about it.
Instead of conducting laborious and context-sensitive personal interviews with research subjects,
a scientist can sit in her office and instantly access the raw data supplied by millions of subjects
around the world. The technology is already being used. The problem is that none of these
Internet users gave explicit consent to participate in an experiment, and they do not know
whether the personal information they share online will be used in future research or how it will
be used. Having neither disclosure from researchers, nor the ability to provide informed consent,
their privacy is significantly undermined. Professor Hancock is a pioneer in this brave new
4
Are Social Networking Sites Good for Our Society? Social Networking ProCon.org
5
Ibid.
Vindu Goel, “As Data Overflows Online, Researchers Grapple With Ethics,” The New York Times (August 12,
2014).
6
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
world of social science research. He co-authored the Facebook study “in which the social
network quietly manipulated the news feeds of nearly 700,000 people to learn how the changes
affected their emotions.”7 The scientists involved in research wanted to “shed light on how
emotions spread through large populations.”8 The research was published in June of this year.
The experiment highlights two issues that I want to consider, one about privacy, and one about
the moral obligation of professionals to the public good. The issues raise a number of questions
for public relations professionals: how do your clients and employers make sure that the public
has a clear understanding of how their personal information might be used? Who decides
what the rules should be? What guidelines does the PRSA recommend for using social media?
Can an obligation to the public good trump the loyalty that is due to a client or employer?
Let’s look at the problem more closely and evaluate two approaches that provide guidance for
PR practitioners.
II.
Social Media Facts and Concerns
Technology is transforming our society, and social networking technology is at the front of that
change. A few statistics will help to make the case:

A recent study by the Pew Research Center estimates that nearly 3 out of 4 U.S. adults
use social media.

Social networking sites are “a top news source for 27.8% of Americans, ranking only
below newspapers (28.8%).” 9

Over 50% of people learn about breaking news on social media.

65% of traditional media reporters and editors use sites like Facebook and LinkedIn for
story research.

Almost 90% of big companies using social media have reported at least one measurable
business benefit.

87% of colleges and universities use Facebook to recruit students.
The skyrocketing popularity of social networking does not tell the whole story, however.
The ethics of social media remain to be studied. But philosophers are flagging some concerns
and privacy is a main one. If you use social media in your work, privacy is an inescapable moral
7
Ibid
8
Ibid.
9
“Social Networking Pros and Cons,” ProCon.org
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
concern. In the January 2014 edition of Business Law Today, a publication of the American Bar
Association, privacy concerns are discussed at length 10 :
“Thanks to social media, we now know that if our nearest coworker were a tree, she would be a
willow, and the celebrity she believes that she most resembles is Angelina Jolie. We also know
that Shirley’s kids are honor students and that Tom’s brother was just released from prison, that
Jeffrey lives and dies with his Eagles and that Sandra is so, so, so sad at the plight of shelter
animals. All of this sharing may help create communities, but it also destroys privacy.
When we report online that we baked cookies last night or that we visited our Kia dealership and
test drove a Sorrento, that information, and everything else we share about ourselves is another
database to be mined and measured, sorted and sold. Social media sites are designed to draw as
much information out of us as possible. A search engine site then takes what we report and
aggregates Kia owners and cookie bakers and sells that information to companies who can
exploit that information.”11
The article makes the case that unlike many countries in the world that protect each citizen’s
private information as a human right, including European countries, and Canada, the United
States has generally upheld “deep intrusions of privacy so long as the social media site does not
misrepresent the information it collects and how that information is used.”12 So long as they are
acting in accordance with their own privacy settings, safeguarding federally protected classes of
information, such as financial transactions, and health care transactions, and protecting data from
unauthorized breach or disclosure—social media sites are not likely in violation of state law. The
laws are changing in many states, but it remains true that most of what we share is fair game. 13
III.
Foundational Value Systems for PR Practitioners
Let’s suppose that you use social networking sites to promote a client’s interests. And let’s grant
that social media and the data mining industry undermine privacy. In theory, you are obligated to
serve both your client’s best interest and the public interest. But what if these obligations
conflict? You’d certainly be in good company if you say that the effect of social media on the
public good is not a public relations matter. Or you might say that loyalty to a client always
overrides the public interest. Or you might promote the public good by developing guidelines for
the ethical use of social media. If you want employees and stakeholders to think highly of your
10
Business Law Today. January, 2014.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
organization, which option(s) would you choose? What values guide your decision? Let’s
consider two approaches by PR professionals; approaches that are grounded in different values.
Kathy Fitzpatrick is a member of the PRSA Board of Ethics and Professional Standards (BEPS).
She asks this question in the Ethical Decision-Making Guide: “When might the obligation to
serve the public interest override loyalty to clients?”14 In order to guide PR practitioners who
wrestle with this question, Fitzpatrick emphasizes the Code, short for the PRSA Code of Ethics.
The Code functions as the industry standard. It sets out “principles and guidelines built on core
values”15 Transcendent values like advocacy, honesty, loyalty, professional development and
objectivity are translated into principles of ethical practice, which in turn are translated into
guidelines. Beyond the Code itself, Ethical Standards Advisories address specific practice issues
and challenges.
Peter O’Malley, an Ottawa-based communications consultant and member of the Canadian
Public Relations Society, takes a very different approach to ethical questions. For his part,
O’Malley emphasizes the professional obligation that is created by entering into a contract with a
client. Instead of the Code, O’Malley emphasizes the contract. He writes:
“PR ethics are not defined by the techniques of a public relations intervention, such as deciding
what to disclose and not to disclose, to whom, when and how. Nor are PR ethics rooted in the
transcendent values of honesty, accuracy, integrity and truth in public communications. If we are
ethical PR practitioners, it means we choose to serve clients whose self-defined interests are, in
our view, ethical."16
For O’Malley, the “central ethical decision to be made is whether or not to undertake a particular
assignment, and to cash a particular check.”17 The public interest as such is not a moral concern
because PR practitioners serve the public good by promoting “the lawfully-pursued, self-defined
interests of those we serve.”18 PR practitioners are not reporters, who have a professional
“responsibility to report all the facts and viewpoints they can gather.”19 Instead, the PR agent has
a responsibility to “advocate those views that they want the public to receive.”20 O’Malley writes
14
Kathy Fitzpatrick. http://www.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/Ethics/documents/decisionguide.pdf
15
“Ethical Guidance for Today’s Public Relations Practitioners from PRSA” http://www.prsa.org/aboutprsa/ethics/
Peter O’Malley, “In Praise of Secrecy: The Ethical Foundations of Public Relations.” All About Public Relations
with Steven R. Van Hook
16
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid.
19
Peter O’Malley, “In Praise of Secrecy.” http://www.aboutpublicrelations.net/ucomalleyb.htm
20
Ibid
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
in praise of secrecy. By so doing he implies that secrecy is not only a professional value, but an
ethical one too. Let’s take it a step further than O’Malley. Secrecy can be translated into a
principle of ethical practice, something like: Disclose only those views that will “persuade your
audience to your point of view” (to buy your client’s product or service or to embrace their
cause).21 And the principle can be translated into a guideline, something like: Always act in the
best interest of clients or employers by advocating only those views that you want the public to
receive. Secrecy, then, is grounded in the contractual obligation to a client or employer. And one
can presume that it is not the only value grounded in the contract.
Besides secrecy, I want to consider two additional values that might follow from the contract.
Andrea Coville and Paul Brown emphasize action and relevance in an article for the PR Insider.
They write that “public relations efforts should focus on action—making a difference in the
audience’s behavior.”22 Relevance is the way to make a difference. “By relevance we mean
making sure everything you communicate is both practical—you are solving a problem someone
has or are advocating something that will make their life better, and socially applicable—i.e.,
your message needs to resonate. It is rare when facts alone will do that. 23
Secrecy, relevance, and action do not appear among the core values of the PRSA Member Code
of Ethics, but they do a lot of work orienting PR professionals to values they need to be
successful. If the profession wants me to “build trust with the public by revealing all information
needed for responsible decision making,” and the client organization that employs me prefers
that I advocate only those views that they want the public to receive, then what am I to do?
IV.
Code, Contract and Social Media
For Fitzpatrick, the Code is the ethical foundation that grounds the issues of privacy and the
public interest. And the transcendent values of the Code might lead a PR practitioner to question
when her obligation to serve the public interest overrides the loyalty that is due a client. For
O’Malley, the contractual obligation to a client or employer makes the privacy and public
interest questions moot. If you use social media to serve your client’s interests, then the
fundamental ethical question is whether you want to serve this client or seek out one who shares
your views on the public good. But your determination that social networking sites destroy
privacy or diminish the public good should not override your loyalty to a client. The values you
claim will change the nature of the questions you ask.
Andrea Coville and Paul B. Brown, “PR Insider: Relevance—The Key to a Successful PR Campaign,”
www.prnewsonline.com. 7/31/2014
21
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
For professional communicators, social media is simply too pervasive not to use, regardless of
the dangers and harms to the public. But leaving the ethical question to individual practitioners
does not raise the bar for the profession. O’Malley thinks it is time for a Code rethink, and a
revised Code might frame core values and contractual obligations in a way that helpfully attends
to concerns about social media. Alternately, the PRSA Board of Ethics and Professional
Standards (BEPS) might develop new Ethical Standards Advisories (ESA’s) that apply the Code
to social media dilemmas as they arise. I want to press for a third option, however. Clarifying the
relationship between transcendent and contractual values is helpful, but is it enough? Instead of
limiting our response to only the ill effects of social media, perhaps we should consider how to
change social media. To paraphrase an old firefighting axiom, the sooner you get to the source of
the fire, the sooner you can take up and go home.
V.
The Medium is the Message
Before you revise the Code, or write new ESA’s, consider the medium. I have in mind the classic
work of Marshall McLuhan.24 McLuhan penned the famous paradox that “the medium is the
message.” In other words, a medium is known by the changes that it brings to a society. The
change is the message. The paradoxical relationship between medium and message begins to
make sense when the insights behind it are clear. We tend to be students of the obvious. We
appreciate innovations for what they can do; from the invention of stone tools 2.5 million years
ago, and the world’s first alphabet, to the development of Facebook and Twitter. Anything from
which a change emerges is a medium. And that means “everything we conceive or create, all of
our inventions, innovations, ideas, and ideals are McLuhan media.”25 But we fail to appreciate
how these innovations change the texture of our relationships and the fabric of our communities.
Take the evening news, for example. When I watch ABC World News with Diane Sawyer, the
stories I see on the social unrest in Ferguson, MO. can be described as the content of the news.
But the message is something else entirely. The message is the change in public sentiment
toward the shooting of Michael Brown that is occasioned by the evening news. McLuhan’s
wisdom is that we are good at observing content, but we miss that interpersonal change and
shifting public opinion are the effects of a medium. ABC World News with Diane Sawyer is a
medium because it changes how we communicate with each other, how we see each other, how
we relate to each other, how well we understand each other, whether we are fearful of each other,
whether we empathize with each other—and that change is the message.
What, then, is the message of Facebook? What change is it making to our society? By paying
attention to the societal effects of Facebook, or any other social networking site, we can “set out
24
McLuhan, Marshall. (1964) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw Hill.
25
Federman, M. (2004) What is the Meaning of the Medium is the Message?
http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/MeaningTheMediumistheMessage.pdf.
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson
to characterize and identify [it] before it becomes obvious to everyone.”26 While most others are
paying attention to its content, you might discern those effects of social media that are bad for
society. Discernment of this sort creates an opportunity to get ahead of pervasive social harm,
and not just respond to it. Perhaps the PRSA can sponsor a symposium on what comes after
Facebook and Twitter in conjunction with other professions. Who is better positioned than
professional communicators to bring ethical principles and moral imagination to the future of
social media?
26
Ibid.
Copyright 2014, Scott C. Williamson