The furore over Facebook’s alleged mishandling of 50 million of its users’ personal information illustrates the poor ethical, cultural and governance record of a large group of tech-enabled and multinational companies that play an increasing part in our daily lives. Most have yet to fully take on board the values, responsibilities and behaviours that come with that territory or to accept that being tech-enabled or web-based does not release them from society’s expectation that they are honest, open, transparent and fair in their dealings with all their stakeholders. These are the values that generate the trust that allows society and commerce to flourish, that are observed by the vast majority of the planet’s inhabitants and that underlie ethical and professional codes of conduct, including those of the CISI.
For all their talk of being disruptors, many of what we refer to as technology businesses simply deliver an existing service in a novel way. For example, we can think of Amazon as a mail order retailer and a storage business, eBay as a chain of auction houses, Uber as a taxi company, Deliveroo as a delivery firm and Google, YouTube and Facebook as publishers. Facebook exemplifies how many disruptors believe they are different and free to circumvent not only employment and tax laws but also to ignore generally accepted standards of ethical behaviour, conduct and governance. But while technology may have changed the way we access these services, it does not excuse providers from these responsibilities.
Historically we have trusted very few with unfettered access to our personal information. We have given doctors access to our medical history, financial advisers access to our financial and spending habits and solicitors access to our wills and family information. One reason we have felt comfortable doing so is their regulated status and the knowledge that as members of a professional body they have a responsibility to adhere to a code of conduct or ethics and act in our best interests. We treat regulated firms similarly. But while Facebook and other tech companies have no such obligations, we have, until now perhaps, been more than happy to share even more extensive information with them than we have previously.
Until recently the misuse and theft of data seems to have been considered an almost victimless crime by some. The new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) greatly increases our obligations for securing and using data together with the penalties for failing to do so. But the alleged misuse of Facebook data to influence the US presidential election highlighted once again how open to abuse social media is and how it sidesteps the issue by disowning any responsibility for content or its impact on its customers.
Having brought data privacy up to speed with GDPR, the focus must now turn to bringing social and other new media into line
It might be more profitable and cheap for a media company to use algorithms to target related content and advertisements at those who look at a particular topic or channel, but the ability to do so comes at a cost to society. At its simplest, for as long as there are no controls over these algorithms, we will continue to see invitations to gamble targeted at those with gambling problems. At its worst, we will continue to see those with extreme views fed a larger stream of related material and those wanting to publish subversive information or fake news free to do so with impunity.
It is time to hold these companies to the same standards we expect of the companies and professionals we already entrust with our most intimate information.
It is unlikely that Facebook and other tech-enabled companies will come up with an acceptable solution on their own. Indeed, this looks to be just another example in a pattern of unethical behaviour where tech-enabled and multinational companies deliberately avoid the responsibilities of citizenship until forced to do so by specific legislation. For example, multinationals have always used transfer pricing to reduce tax bills, but tech-enabled companies eliminating them completely shows a remarkable disdain for stakeholders that include their customers and host nations.
In 2015 the UK was forced to put in place a ‘diverted profits tax’, and in March the EU announced plans for a 3% tax on digital businesses’ revenue. While this is expected to bring in some €5bn, it seems that at the moment, unethical, antisocial behaviour pays well.
Having brought data privacy up to speed with GDPR, the focus must now turn to bringing social and other new media into line, introducing measures to improve ethical and professional standards, to protect the consumer and to reduce the opportunity for abuse. But the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica incident is also a wake-up call to politicians that our laws urgently need updating to ensure our values are reflected in the tech-enabled, global economy. Government must act, and quickly.
Views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the CISI.