IS THERE A PLACE FOR ETHICS?
In considering whether there is a place for ethics on the Internet, we need
to have understanding of what such a grand word as ‘ethics’ means in this
context. I suggest that it means four things:
- Acceptance that the Internet is not a value-free zone
This means that the World Wide Web is not the wild wild Web, but instead a
place where values in the broadest sense should take a part in shaping content
and services. This is a recognition that the Internet is not something apart
from civil society, but increasingly a fundamental component of it.
- Application of off-line laws to the on-line world
This means that we do not invent a new set of values for the Internet but,
for all the practical problems, endeavour to apply the law which we have evolved
for the physical space to the world of cyberspace. These laws might cover issues
like child pornography, race hate, libel, copyright and consumer protection.
- Sensitivity to national and local cultures
This means recognising that, while originally most Internet users were white,
male Americans, now the Internet belongs to all. As a pervasively global
phenomenon, it cannot be subject to one set of values like a local newspaper or
national television station; somehow we have to accommodate a multiplicity of
value systems.
- Responsiveness to customer or user opinion
This means recognising that users of the Internet – and even non-users – are
entitled to have a view on how it works. At the technical level, this is well
understood – bodies like the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) end the World Wide
Web Consortium (W3C) endeavour to understand and reflect user views. However, at
no level do we have similar mechanisms for capturing user opinions on content
and access to it.
