tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/moral-standards-19886/articles
Moral standards – The Conversation
2017-12-13T03:32:18Z
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/88696
2017-12-13T03:32:18Z
2017-12-13T03:32:18Z
Engineers, philosophers and sociologists release ethical design guidelines for future technology
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198858/original/file-20171212-9392-lfkr48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A team of technologists have joined forces with doctors, lawyers, economists and philosophers to make technology ethical.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/drawing-symbol-robot-arm-on-blue-320528222">from www.shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>If kids spend hours a day speaking to digital personal assistant Alexa, how will this affect the way they connect to real people? When a self-driving car runs over a pedestrian, who do you take to court? Is it okay to manipulate people’s emotions if it’s making them happier? </p>
<p>Together with an international team of researchers in fields as diverse as philosophy, engineering and anthropology, we set out to tackle these questions. The result is a new set of guidelines focused on the ethical and social implications of autonomous and intelligent systems. That includes everything from big data and social media algorithms to autonomous weapons.</p>
<p>The report, <a href="https://ethicsinaction.ieee.org/">Ethically Aligned Design</a>, was released today by the <a href="https://www.ieee.org/">Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers</a> (IEEE). It is the culmination of a year’s work by 250 world leaders in technology, law, social science, business and government spanning six continents.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-robots-that-can-improvise-but-its-not-easy-to-teach-them-right-from-wrong-87014">We need robots that can improvise, but it's not easy to teach them right from wrong</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>IEEE is the world’s largest technical professional organisation. With over 420,000 members in 160 countries, it’s the global authority for professional standards related to technology. The latest report proposes a set of recommendations (suggestions) that are open to public feedback. </p>
<p>Once adopted, the guidelines in the report will be implemented by professional organisations, accreditation boards and educational institutions to ensure the next generation of engineers incorporate ethical considerations into their work. </p>
<h2>Guiding principles</h2>
<p>The big questions posed by our digital future sit at the intersection of technology and ethics. This is complex territory that requires input from experts in many different fields if we are to navigate it successfully. </p>
<p>To prepare the report, economists and sociologists researched the effect of technology on disempowered groups. Lawyers considered the future of privacy and justice. Doctors and psychologists examined impacts on physical and mental health. Philosophers unpacked hidden biases and moral questions. </p>
<p>The report suggests all technologies should be guided by five general principles:</p>
<ul>
<li>protecting human rights</li>
<li>prioritising and employing established metrics for measuring wellbeing</li>
<li>ensuring designers and operators of new technologies are accountable</li>
<li>making processes transparent</li>
<li>minimising the risks of misuse.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Sticky questions</h2>
<p>The report runs the spectrum from practical to more abstract concerns, touching on personal data ownership, autonomous weapons, job displacement and questions like “can decisions made by amoral systems have moral consequences?” </p>
<p>One section deals with a “lack of ownership or responsibility from the tech community”. It points to a divide between how the technology community sees its ethical responsibilities and the broader social concerns raised by public, legal, and professional communities.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/an-ai-professor-explains-three-concerns-about-granting-citizenship-to-robot-sophia-86479">An AI professor explains: three concerns about granting citizenship to robot Sophia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Each issue tackled includes background discussion and a set of candidate recommendations. For example, the section on autonomous weapons recommends measures to ensure meaningful human control. The section on employment recommends the creation of an independent body to track the impact of robotics on jobs and economic growth. </p>
<p>A section on affective computing – an area that studies how computers can detect, express and even “feel” emotions – raises concerns about how long-term interaction with computers could change the way people interact with each other.</p>
<p>This brings us back to our question: if kids spend hours a day speaking to Siri or Alexa how will these interactions change them? </p>
<p>The report makes two recommendations on this point: </p>
<p>1) To acknowledge how much we don’t know (we need to learn much more before these systems become widely used); </p>
<p>2) That humans who witness negative impacts – parents, social workers, governments – learn to detect them and have ways to address them, or even shut technologies down. Experience shows this is not always easy – try forbidding your child from watching YouTube and see how well that flies. </p>
<p>Clearly affective computing is an area in which we are at a particular loss for evidence of its human impact.</p>
<h2>Consultation and feedback</h2>
<p>IEEE standards are developed iteratively and the organisation will use the findings in this report to build a definitive set of guidelines over time. </p>
<p>Early feedback on an earlier version of the report highlighted its Western-centric bias. As a result, a larger and more diverse panel was recruited. A number of new sections were added, including the section on affective computing, along with policy, classical ethics, mixed reality (including augmented reality technologies like Google Glass) and wellbeing. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/dear-prime-minister-wed-like-you-to-join-the-call-for-a-ban-on-killer-robots-86758">Dear Prime Minister: we'd like you to join the call for a ban on killer robots</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Over the next year, the final version will be released as a handbook with recommendations that technologists and policy makers can turn to, and be held accountable for, as our technological future unfolds. </p>
<p>This is an important step toward breaking the protective wall of specialisation that allows technologists to separate themselves from the impact of their work on society at large. It will demand that future tech leaders take responsibility for ensuring that the technology we build as humans genuinely benefits us and our planet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88696/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rafael A Calvo receives funding from Australian Research Council, Asthma Australia, ReachOut Australia, Beyondblue, Google and Alertness and Productivity CRC. He is a Senior member of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dorian Peters does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
A report released today by the world’s largest technical professional organisation is designed to help humanity avoid a robot apocalypse.
Rafael A Calvo, Professor and ARC Future Fellow, University of Sydney
Dorian Peters, Creative Leader, Positive Computing Lab, University of Sydney
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/68020
2016-11-03T02:07:00Z
2016-11-03T02:07:00Z
Why voters don’t seem to forgive Clinton, while Trump gets a free pass
<p>A <a href="http://www.salon.com/2016/09/19/playing-by-different-rules-the-media-lets-trump-get-out-of-jail-free-but-wont-let-clinton-pass-go/">persistent mystery discussed</a> in this presidential campaign has been double standards. In other words, while Donald Trump seems to have a “get out of jail free” card, Hillary Clinton can’t seem to “pass go.” </p>
<p>A case in point is the news last week <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/politics/fbi-reviewing-new-emails-in-clinton-probe-director-tells-senate-judiciary-committee/">that the FBI is looking at more emails</a> potentially tied to Clinton. Without knowing anything about their contents – whether they show wrongdoing or not – the <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2016/10/29/democrats_should_ask_hillary_clinton_to_step_aside_394609.html">pundit reaction</a> was swift and <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/29/just_the_facts_maam_132195.html">negative</a>, and <a href="http://www.investors.com/politics/clintons-lead-shrinks-to-1-point-as-voters-react-to-the-fbis-email-bombshell/">polls suggested</a> it may have shifted some voters into the Trump column. At the same time, a <a href="http://people.com/bodies/twelfth-woman-accuses-donald-trump-sexual-assault/">trail of women</a> accusing Trump of sexual assault and a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/12/donald-trump-jeffrey-epstein-alleged-rape-lawsuit">rape trial</a> failed to generate as much outrage (considering the significance of the alleged wrongdoing).</p>
<p>The possibility of different standards for how voters assess the perceived failings of Trump and Clinton <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/09/19/a-trump-clinton-double-standard">is discussed frequently</a>. New research suggests one reason may be that we actually do hold people we perceive as leaders up to a higher standard – and more importantly, we more easily forgive those we don’t see that way. </p>
<h2>‘Human brands’</h2>
<p>The question of how people form moral judgments about corporate executives and other types of spokespeople is important because it reflects on their “brand” or organization.</p>
<p>Companies use celebrities and athletes to “speak” for their products because <a href="http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkg.70.3.104">people develop attachments</a> to such “human brands.” And these positive feelings bleed into the company’s brand as well. </p>
<p>But while hitching one’s brand to a popular celebrity or athlete may make it more relatable and potentially more valuable, there’s a flip side: the more human a brand becomes – and the more influential the spokesperson – the more <a href="http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jm.11.0510">vulnerable</a> it is to moral judgments, such as when the endorser is caught in wrongdoing and his or her sponsors run for the hills. Think <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/investopedia/2013/02/05/5-most-publicized-ethics-violations-by-ceos/#30db07a22799">Tiger Woods</a>, <a href="http://search.proquest.com/docview/1511441663?pq-origsite=gscholar">Lance Armstrong</a> or <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/sponsors-flee-ryan-lochte-robbery-201512940.html">Ryan Lochte</a>. </p>
<h2>Leadership and influence</h2>
<p>Most research in this field suggests people in their role as spokespersons for brands or companies <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/4188769?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">are typically judged</a> in terms of attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise. </p>
<p>That is, we’re more likely to buy what they’re selling (whether a product or an idea) if they are physically appealing, appear trustworthy and/or seem to be an expert in the field.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ts0XG6qDIco?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>We wondered whether a fourth criterion should be added: leadership. In other words, we were interested in learning if the perceived leadership qualities of spokespeople influence how people respond to the products, brands or ideas they represent.</p>
<p>For example, when <a href="https://www.entrepreneur.com/slideshow/246671">we think of leaders in technology</a>, like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, we think of them almost as synonymous with their companies, Tesla and Amazon, respectively. </p>
<p>That is, how we view corporate executives as leaders is strongly connected to how we feel about their brands – for good or ill. They are CEOs but <a href="http://www.brandingstrategyinsider.com/2016/09/how-ceos-shape-brand-perceptions.html#.WBpII3eZOV5">they are also spokespeople</a>, and their <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/investopedia/2013/02/05/5-most-publicized-ethics-violations-by-ceos/#784bc8c62799">ethical failings can end up destroying their companies</a>. </p>
<p>While <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/03090561111119958">most of our research</a> is focused on celebrity spokespeople and how their actions influence the fate of their brands, we thought some of the same insights might apply in the political realm as well. Specifically, how does our perception of them as leaders affect their “personal” brand and how we judge them after a moral lapse? </p>
<h2>Leaders get all the blame</h2>
<p>To answer that question, we conducted a study in May (just as the presidential nomination battles were winding down) involving 209 college students. We randomly assigned each participant one of five U.S. political figures to evaluate on five criteria: the three typical influential traits of spokespeople (trustworthiness, attractiveness and expertise) as well leadership and their general favorability toward them. </p>
<p>The five figures were President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. Participants scored their assigned politician by responding to a series of survey questions for each trait, using a scale of 1 to 7 to measure them on several opposing word pairs related to the category. For example, under trustworthiness, they were asked if the politician was honest or dishonest, whereby 1 was the least honest and 7 was the most. </p>
<p>All of the scores were then tallied to generate an overall measure of each trait. </p>
<p>We then asked each participant to answer three general questions, using a similar 1-7 scale, from strongly disagree to strongly agree: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>If this person did something wrong, I would be very disappointed.</p></li>
<li><p>I would blame this person if he or she did something wrong.</p></li>
<li><p>I would forgive this person if he or she apologized for a wrongdoing.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The results showed that a politician’s score in terms of perceived leadership significantly predicted how people judged them later. That is, a high score in terms of leadership was associated with more blame, more disappointment and less forgiveness (even after an apology). A lower score, on the other hand, correlated to less blame and disappointment and a greater capacity to forgive.</p>
<p>As one might expect, participants who indicated a positive attitude toward the politician were less likely to blame him or her for a wrongful act and more likely to forgive – in other words, they were more likely to give them a break. But despite this, the general link between perceptions of leadership and subsequent moral judgments was very strong. </p>
<p>For example, Obama and Clinton received two of the highest scores in terms of leadership, while Trump was lowest among the five. Yet participants – even those who had a positive attitude toward a politician – if they were viewed as leaders – indicated they would be much less likely to forgive them if they did something wrong. </p>
<p>Interestingly, attractiveness, expertise and trust were not predictors of blaming and forgiveness – that is, they weren’t statistically significant. </p>
<p>The key finding, however, is not each politician’s various scores but that our views of them as a leader greatly influence our tolerance of subsequent bad behavior. In short, the more the person is perceived as being a leader, the more they will be blamed and the less they will be forgiven if suspected of wrongdoing. </p>
<h2>Setting a standard</h2>
<p>What does this all mean? </p>
<p>Being perceived as a leader comes with a cost: People will hold you to a higher standard, as we intuitively feel should be the case. But on the flip side, our research suggests those whom we don’t see as leaders aren’t judged by the same standard.</p>
<p>The takeaway isn’t that we should lower the standard for our leaders, but perhaps we should raise it for those who want to be among them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68020/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>T. Bettina Cornwell is a registered Democrat.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeffrey Xie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
There often appears to be a double standard in how voters and pundits evaluate the candidates. Being perceived as a leader may have a lot to do with it.
T. Bettina Cornwell, Professor of Marketing, University of Oregon
Jeffrey Xie, Ph.D. Candidate in Marketing, University of Oregon
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/51202
2015-11-25T02:37:46Z
2015-11-25T02:37:46Z
Blessed are the Hunger Games? Katniss Everdeen lives the Beatitudes
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/102977/original/image-20151124-18230-11nee55.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Hunger Games heroine Katniss Everdeen represents the strength of living the Beatitudes against injustice. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Murray Close/Lionsgate</span></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>This article contains plot spoilers for The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part II</p>
</blockquote>
<p>“I am done being a piece in his game.” So says Katniss Everdeen, the Mockingjay, in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ending-with-a-bang-or-a-whimper-the-hunger-games-mockingjay-part-ii-51031">last instalment</a> of The Hunger Games movie franchise. She is done with corruption, with manipulations, and with being a pawn.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1058&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1058&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1058&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1330&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1330&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103116/original/image-20151125-18264-qg12ra.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1330&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Augustine of Hippo.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Simone Martini via Wikimedia Commons</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Done, too, with reactionary violence, undertaken to stay alive or in retaliation to the violence of others. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1951266/">Mockingjay Part II</a> (2015) draws The Hunger Games film series to a conclusion. Throughout, Katniss (played by Jennifer Lawrence) has been an unpredictable heroine, who refuses to be typecast. </p>
<p>Over the course of her journey through violence, rebellion and political power, she serves as an example of the Beatitudes in today’s society. </p>
<p>The Beatitudes, from Christ’s Sermon on the Mount (<a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A3-12&version=NRSVCE">Matthew 5:3-12 </a>), have historically been seen as the essential moral theology of Christianity. In the 5th century Augustine wrote of the Beatitudes as <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_and_Post-%0ANicene_Fathers:_Series_I/Volume_VI/Our_Lord%27s_Sermon_on_the_Mount/Book_I/Chapter_1">tools for living perfectly</a>, embodying Christian ethics: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>If anyone will piously and soberly consider the sermon […] on the mount […] I think that he will find in it, so far as regards the highest morals, a perfect standard of the Christian life.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The 14th Dalai Lama has <a href="http://www.dalailama.com/news/post/1233-his-holiness-the-dalai-lama-addresses-the-international-luncheon-held-in-conjunction-with-the-national-prayer-breakfast">drawn parallels between the Beatitudes and Buddhism</a>, emphasising concepts of compassion and respect for human life.</p>
<p>But are these relevant for us today, in a society where it seems that religion and beliefs are either used as weapons, or powerless in the face of oppression and violence? </p>
<p>I think they are. Katniss Everdeen represents the strength of living the Beatitudes against injustice. Through Katniss we gain a glimpse of how to live well, in the face of oppression, violence and corruption. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=304&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103101/original/image-20151125-18255-1ks547l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Beatitudes on the steps of MEEI church.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">James Emery/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Blessed are the poor in spirit, those that mourn</h2>
<p>Katniss signals hope for the oppressed, those “poor in spirit”. She mourns and represents grief that channels action. Her shock at seeing rebels harm fellow citizens, in seeing citizen against citizen, galvanises her. </p>
<p>Katniss grieves for the loss of solidarity among the Districts and for the lack of respect for human lives. She steps forward, and rallies others to action. She symbolises hope: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We all have one enemy! He corrupts everyone, and everything! He turns the best of us against each other. Tonight, turn your weapons, to the Capital! Turn your weapons, to Snow!</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The poor in spirit lack hope. We need leaders in our community to have empathy in grief, in the face of global violence, and to move beyond grief to action. </p>
<h2>Blessed are the meek</h2>
<p>Gone is the Katniss that lashes out, whose primary concern is for her family. In Mockingjay Part II we see Katniss’ strength in control, her identification with, and concern for, the marginalised. </p>
<p>It’s in this film that Katniss names an armed rebel as one of President Snow’s workers. He angrily retorts, “I’m not a slave.” Katniss quietly and simply acknowledges the truth in reply: “I am.” </p>
<p>It is this strength under control that makes the most powerful statement. It is recognition of our chains in connection with others who suffer that builds our communities, through strength and solidarity.</p>
<h2>Blessed are the peacemakers, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/103104/original/image-20151125-18233-mpuxqb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An active peacemaker.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Lionsgate</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Katniss “hungers and thirsts for righteousness” and is a “peacemaker”, albeit an active peacemaker in refusing to support yet another corrupt government. When we hunger and thirst for what is right, we care less for our own material gain and care more for the good of others. </p>
<p>Katniss’ thirsts for what is right. She refuses to be bullied and made into a victim, even under the new government of the rebels under President Coin. She opts for that which is good, giving freedom a chance, and makes her own choice against injustice and for righteousness. She defines a new future for herself, for her family, and community.</p>
<p>Katniss highlights the role of peacemakers in society. She takes risks in the name of peace. She seeks resolution. She effects change by changing her narrative, and the narrative of her District. </p>
<p>And she makes sure, in that plaintive final scene, that atrocities against human freedom will not be forgotten. Can we do the same, in contemporary society? </p>
<h2>Blessed are the pure of heart</h2>
<p>In the final scene of the movie, Katniss comforts her child after she wakes from a nightmare:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Did you have a nightmare? I have nightmares too. Someday I’ll explain it to you. Why they came. Why they won’t ever go away. But I’ll tell you how I survive it. </p>
<p>I make a list in my head. Of all the good things I’ve seen someone do. Every little thing I could remember. It’s like a game, I do it over and over. It gets a little tedious after all these years. But there are much worse games to play.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In this exchange, we see the another Beatitude personified: blessed are the pure in heart. Katniss is “pure in heart” in her actions and desire in wanting to overthrow President Snow, and in her final act of defiance in the removal of power hungry President Coin. </p>
<p>She seeks justice and freedom from oppression for the community, rather than political power for herself. We see in the real world that the motive for action often determines the outcome; not much good comes from “help” that ravages the helpless. </p>
<p>Katniss is acting out of pure and selfless motives. </p>
<p>The relevance of belief, of ethical and moral choices for the good of self and others, of the Beatitudes, in our contemporary lives is signified. They have meaning, in a society that should seek to overturn injustices.</p>
<p><br>
<em>The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part II is in cinemas now</em>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51202/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Leonie Westenberg does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
The Hunger Games movie franchise has ended. What can we learn from Katniss Everdeen about living a just life? This article contains spoilers for The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part II.
Leonie Westenberg, Associate Lecturer in Theology, University of Notre Dame Australia
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/46589
2015-08-28T09:32:14Z
2015-08-28T09:32:14Z
Is there a teaching moment in the Ashley Madison hack?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93225/original/image-20150827-326-1vk8s7n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Why did people make their personal information so easily available to a company that facilitates cheating?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/viirok/2498157861/in/photolist-4NKHig-oCKxT-4s3Mmd-oCT59-dpYE6B-79p1wW-4eZnhN-9pNy3j-ffJjkw-3R8Fyq-9GhW94-oCT4U-7oATva-8uwo-9pNw7Y-4eErsa-6bo6Kf-7RUwtv-7D7PPY-7S335j-afajTC-oCT9q-9pNuQy-6ZY5Yw-8iDkVc-Cswv3-8yYbso-8k1TQj-7RUxct-9pKuf8-5ptkTt-mYiyF-oB2Gr-3Djmk2-oBCHx-5yzRGx-yGGwi-yGFmz-6yJgsp-4yrrcm-4VVR2y-4kEKU3-oCT72-7RUx5V-oCT8s-7BGwuS-n6ZbC-9pNujN-bBuS2-so61Kr">Johan Viirok</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Why would anyone use their official work or school email address to register for a website that promises to facilitate extramarital affairs?</p>
<p>Reports indicate that there are 74,468 unique “.edu” email addresses in the recently hacked user database of <a href="http://AshleyMadison.com">AshleyMadison.com</a>. Might we not expect educators and students to have a better understanding of the internet (which, after all, began with a link from <a href="http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/what-internet/history-internet/brief-history-internet">UCLA to the Stanford Research Institute</a>)?</p>
<p>I am not only a proud user of a .edu email address, but as a professor at the University of California, I research media culture. It might make us laugh that people would entrust their information to a company that facilitates cheating, in the naive assumption that it would not cheat on its users. But in the information age, using your home address, credit card information and work-related email address to sign up for a service that promises illicit connections is so careless that it constitutes <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/trail-secrets-leave-online-ever-safe/">a teaching moment</a>. </p>
<h2>The blame or shame game</h2>
<p>When the AshleyMadison.com user database (with names, addresses, phone numbers and credit card information) was hacked and then <a href="http://www.wired.com/2015/08/happened-hackers-posted-stolen-ashley-madison-data/">distributed</a> through file-sharing services, the hackers <a href="http://motherboard.vice.com/read/ashley-madison-hackers-speak-out-nobody-was-watching">claiming responsibility</a> for taking the data and <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/05/22/risky-business-for-ashleymadison-com/">releasing</a> them stated they did so to criticize not only the lack of security, but also the lack of credibility of a website that promised discretion but profited from hefty but <a href="https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/07/organizational.html">deceptive profile-deletion fees</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93227/original/image-20150827-372-6u0loi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Warnings are being made about public shaming and possible extortion.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/thelampnyc/4400190644/in/photolist-7GQ8nW-7GQ8oL-7GLbYt-6vD3bG-dAPegg-5FWrVU-nvtve-BxSkW-dMiBYN-5vKEoq-4UWtTb-4FmeLf-cjGsYS-4EmCGP-4c1juF-3ED4vM-4YTLy2-cfm5D1-5W3HQp-2p2ynh-5ngEau-9qt4VB-8idtba-997uAg-E8L1T-61DxdD-nNCo4-3PkaSc-fNk7Cf-ia9UzB-8idtbT-voERMo-uJnQNr-99ti3r-9dAgG4-s3P5YT-9ZeATK-uyg8f-voF4oG-9fpXJ3-vEEyiy-76BxE-7oR5p-uJnF1a-6D94es-4sj8qL-vCX6Ws-bp6yh-voFcPC-rUq3zS">The LAMP</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2014 alone, the company netted <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-15/adultery-website-ashleymadison-seeks-ipo-as-demand-booms">US$1.7 million in fees</a> for a “full delete” of user profiles (at $19 each). Several users <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/21/ashley-madison-hack-five-people-database-experience?CMP=twt_a-technology_b-gdntech">anonymously confirmed</a> that their payment information, address and other identifying data were in the files, despite assurances from AshleyMadison.com that they had been deleted or not kept in the first place.</p>
<p>Some observers have gleefully outed AshleyMadison.com users who are conservative <a href="http://gawker.com/family-values-activist-josh-duggar-had-a-paid-ashley-ma-1725132091">defenders of family values</a>, while others worry about <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/ashley-madison-hack-leaking-personal-email-addresses-puts-gay-lives-at-risk-around-the-world-10464546.html">adverse consequences</a> for people suspected of adultery or homosexuality in places where that is unlawful. </p>
<p>Jokes about divorce lawyers are bandied about, and warnings against wholesale public shaming are made. Brian Krebs, the investigative journalist who first broke the story on July 15 that AshleyMadison.com had been hacked, has <a href="http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/08/extortionists-target-ashley-madison-users/">warned</a> that it might lead to blackmail.</p>
<p>Since about 15,000 addresses in the <a href="http://pastebin.com/U4QQEaBE">database</a> are .mil or .gov (among them 6,788 in the US Army, 1,665 in the US Navy, 809 US Marines and 127 in the US Air Force), it is not surprising that the <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/251581-pentagon-looking-into-ashley-madison-leak-of-military-emails">Department of Defense</a> is combing through to see whether it needs to fend off blackmail. Surely some <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/22/technology/ashley-madison-hack-government-workers/index.html">government employees</a> are facing discipline.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/22/ashley-madison-adultery-hacking-technology-blackmail?CMP=twt_a-technology_b-gdntech">Guardian suggested</a> worrying about possible extortion of bankers, and <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/08/21/hack-ashley-madison-website-affairs-reveals-many-edu-addresses">Inside Higher Ed ran a column</a> revealing that there are numerous .edu email addresses in the leaked database.</p>
<h2>Address verification</h2>
<p>Claims that AshleyMadison.com did not validate emails on sign-up led to speculation that just because someone is listed does not mean they actually were users of the site – someone else could have used their name and email address. </p>
<p>However, the database lists a field for valid/invalid email address checks, and while among the registered users there are 12,358,191 whose email field reads “isvalid = 0,” there are also 24,039,705 email addresses marked as “isvalid = 1.” </p>
<p>Therefore, millions of people will not be able to use as their excuse that someone else might have used their name and email to sign up. While <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/251431-ashley-madison-leak-appears-real-includes-thousands-of-government-emails">The Hill</a> has pointed out that some email addresses that might look like government ones are clearly fake, others are not: “several emails were registered at <a href="http://whitehouse.gov/">whitehouse.gov</a>, whereas White House officials use <a href="http://eop.gov/">eop.gov</a> for email communications.”</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=780&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=780&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=780&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=980&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=980&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/93229/original/image-20150827-364-aywx5h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=980&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Do those working in higher ed have a greater obligation?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/thelampnyc/4399422291/in/photolist-7GLbYt-6vD3bG-dAPegg-5FWrVU-nvtve-BxSkW-dMiBYN-5vKEoq-4UWtTb-4FmeLf-cjGsYS-4EmCGP-4c1juF-3ED4vM-4YTLy2-cfm5D1-5W3HQp-2p2ynh-5ngEau-9qt4VB-8idtba-997uAg-E8L1T-61DxdD-nNCo4-3PkaSc-fNk7Cf-ia9UzB-8idtbT-voERMo-uJnQNr-99ti3r-9dAgG4-s3P5YT-9ZeATK-uyg8f-voF4oG-9fpXJ3-vEEyiy-76BxE-7oR5p-uJnF1a-6D94es-4sj8qL-vCX6Ws-bp6yh-voFcPC-rUq3zS-9pPy3e-7oswtG">The LAMP</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is possible that many people merely signed in with their email address out of curiosity and never went much further – but for those there would be no payment information, phone numbers and addresses on file. Yet the database shows that more than 173 million credit cards had been used to pay for the site’s services in 2014.</p>
<h2>A teaching moment</h2>
<p>Inside Higher Ed shows a <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/08/21/hack-ashley-madison-website-affairs-reveals-many-edu-addresses">table with the top 10 most represented institutions</a>, led by Michigan State, Penn State and Kent State. Students and alumni are likely to have other primary email addresses, and a majority of students are probably not yet married and looking for an extramarital affair on AshleyMadison.com.</p>
<p>It is safe to assume that a significant proportion of those .edu email users Inside Higher Ed found in the AshleyMadison.com database are those of current or former college or university employees. </p>
<p>If they chose to use their .edu addresses instead of alternatives, what does that show about their awareness of privacy online, about their critical evaluation of information technology? </p>
<p>I won’t argue that people in higher education should conduct their lives according a higher ethical or moral standard than those in the military or in government service, although some educators might want to set an example for values they profess.</p>
<p>But I do think people in higher education do have a greater obligation to value the integrity and security of data. Of course, colleges and universities deal in information, but precisely not for shameless commerce – they deal in information for the greater good of the communities they serve. </p>
<p>Academia depends on verifiable information, and one of the fundamental values of academia is that we share important insights. One of those is that privacy is under siege online, and we need to do better with our passwords, with our social technologies, with our control over personal information.</p>
<p>Education, putting our hard-earned knowledge to use, must act as the opposite of the shameless commerce of AshleyMadison.com and its ilk – reconstituting in the individual affect the public virtue for which it substitutes.</p>
<p>Czech writer Milan Kundera urged:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When it becomes the custom and the rule to divulge another person’s private life, we are entering a time when the highest stake is the survival or the disappearance of the individual.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But he was writing about surveillance-riddled totalitarian Czechoslovakia in 1975, not about the United States in 2015.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/46589/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Krapp does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
In the Ashley Madison hack were reports of 74,468 unique “.edu” email addresses. If people chose to use their .edu addresses, what does that tell us about awareness of privacy online?
Peter Krapp, Professor of Film & Media Studies, University of California, Irvine
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.