The Ethics of the Internet

On September 18, a federal appeals court ruled that a “Like” on Facebook is constitutionally protected speech, in essence legally classifying it as a substantive declaration. Last year, controversy exploded when Facebook began using the photos and names of other users in connection with advertisements on the site. Liking a page means that your endorsement of that brand as a whole is connected to every new post they issue on Facebook- site unseen.

Most of IR‘s readers probably use Facebook often enough to have noticed this. But it seems that we have a conflict between the social weight of liking a page and the legal weight. As with any time cultural values and legal values are in conflict, the situation is messy until reconciled (see abortion, integration, the ACA, etc.). Millenials are being asked to determine just what level of personal responsibility they have on social media platforms. From online bullying to becoming an inadvertent distributor of offensive content, it’s clear that actions online have serious weight to them. Why is it that we feel so detached from them?

A philosophy of personal ethical responsibility online is increasingly needed. It will take a mind greater than mine to develop it. Part of the answer lies in the ground of ethics itself. The radical altereity (“Otherness”) of the people with whom we interact is the fountainhead of all morality, according to postmodern ethicists like Emmanuel Levinas. One of the most assertive aspects of this truth is the recognition that the other person inhabits a physical space, or body, that is fundamentally separate from ours. The physical space they take up is purely there’s; something we cannot share or violate. Disembodied forms of interaction mask this obvious reality by relegating all contact to an artificial, wholly shared space: the internet.

This means one of the natural catalysts of right moral decision-making is removed. This may be worth it for a variety of other goods (which the internet certainly does offer). However, the fact that cyber-socializing gravitates toward a Gnostic-tinged ethic means that internet morality requires purposeful reflection and intentional action. Should this really surprise us?