The white paper project presents many issues of ethics I hadn’t even considered before reading this week’s TCT. Since this is a group project, it raises both social and personal ethical decisions. Like the text says, many of these aren’t in fact ethical dilemmas, but simply the difference between right and wrong, and the right choice has probably already been made without extra consideration.
Take for example the nature of working in a group. It would be unethical for me to slack on my share of the work, and force everyone else in my group to do more. In social ethics, this would fall under Manuel Valasquez’s categorization of justice, or fairness among equals. Another example of an ethical decision that occurs whenever researching something for a paper or document is plagiarism. It would take a lot less work to simply copy and paste the work of others as information we produced for our white paper, but this would be unethical and wouldn’t pay off in the long run.
These are the types of personal and social ethical issues that we don’t even have to regularly consider—they are unethical, harmful, and immoral. Of greater importance in this project are the ethical decisions we make concerning our audience. Would it be ethical to include information we know is false, or at least a bend of the truth in our white paper if we also had a stake in the issue? (In our case, pretend we were involved financially in the open source software industry). This would present a huge ethical dilemma, and is probably why objectivity and the audience were the two things highly stressed for this project. Considering the white paper will be used by people with the authority to make decisions regarding policy, technology, and funding, it’s crucial that the information presented to them is objective, factual, and ethical.
Ethics Credentials
You raise a good point about the importance of good ethics and objectivity, especially if you're involved in the industry, but this also leads me to believe that people have probably used white papers to guide the audience in a certain direction. My question is, how can the writer(s) assure the audience that they are impartial to the issue? In some cases you can link the author(s) to a company or industry, but it seems like somebody could easily present themselves as an independent if they wanted to. I'm sure that most of us will be as objective as possible, but how will the readers know that?
Proof R14
You ask “how can the writer(s) assure the audience that they are impartial to the issue?” I think the answer is that you can only do the obvious things like give your audience your information and credentials. There will always be a certain air of uncertainty that a person could question the validity of your position on the subject. If there was a way to make all readers believe you wholeheartedly then there would be no conspiracy theories, which would be a sad day. In the end it’s the reader who decides so we can only give our best and let our writing persuade them.
Shane
Impartiality
I think writers can also make efforts to assure the audience that they are impartial through the use of citations and sources. If the writers are using credible, reliable sources that don't have any kind of vested interest in the topic of the white paper. For example, in our project on comparing wireless routers, we wouldn't want to use the manufacturer's company to explain the benefits of a particular router, or to use a competitor's site to explain the potential drawbacks of that router; in my mind, that would severely decrease our impartiality and credibility in the reader's eyes.
Kristin
Bender Bending Rodriguez R14
When you ask “would it be ethical to include information we know is false, or at least a bend of the truth in our white paper if we also had a stake in the issue” the answer is an obvious no. Even though most of us probably don’t have a stake in the issues we are presenting like being involved financially, I think this dilemma still presents itself in many possible ways. It could be as simple as you have a personal preference of one of the choices. It could also be that maybe bending the truth would allow you to come to a solution or get to a certain word count quicker. No matter what these ethical questions will almost always be there so we can only be professional and accountable for our work and go from there.
Shane
Ethics and Audience
Something else to consider with respect to ethics and audience: different ethical frameworks. As we have discussed with respect to needs, values, and expectations, one ethical "dilemma" to be aware of is competing ethical frameworks. Many times, ethical decisions involve having to decide between competing goods. It's not just avoiding lying or bending that truth that you have to be aware of; it's deciding when you have given them enough information. Where do you draw the line? That is what makes ethics difficult: ethics are about decision making, and decision making is always about including and excluding.