Considering the Ethics of Political Communication and Doing the Right Thing

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Ethics Elsewhere

This feature offers briefs of ethics-related published scholarship in other fields, such as business ethics, environmental ethics, moral psychology, and neuroethics, to expand our understanding of how to think about ethical issues.

Birte, F., Lüdeke-Freund Florian, & Stefan, S. (2020). A stakeholder theory perspective on business models: Value creation for sustainability: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(1), 3-18.:http://0-dx.doi.org.libus.csd.mu.edu/10.1007/s10551-019-04112-z

This article presents a broader view of how business models are developed and managed to create value based on a stringent application of stakeholder theory that highlights mutual stakeholder relationships in which stakeholders are both recipients and (co-) creators of value in joint value creation processes. The authors found that the concept and analysis of value creation through business models needs to be expanded with regard to (i) different types of value created with and for different stakeholders and (ii) the resulting value portfolio, i.e., the different kinds of value exchanged between the company and its stakeholders. They note, “With the explicit consideration of value flows in both directions from the company to a stakeholder and from a stakeholder to the company, the framework accounts for interdependencies in stakeholder relationships and value created through a business model as a portfolio rather than a single outcome” (p. 8). This research proposes a shift in perspective from business models as devices of sheer value creation to business models as devices that organize and facilitate stakeholder relationships and corresponding value exchanges.

Díaz-Domínguez, A. (2020). How Futures Studies and Foresight Could Address Ethical Dilemmas of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. World Future Review (Sage Publications Inc.), 12(2), 169–180. https://0-doi-org.libus.csd.mu.edu/10.1177/1946756719894602

This review, which draws from ethical concerns of communities of machine learning developers, includes three main sections: (1) a brief explanation of central concepts, such as big data, machine learning, and artificial intelligence; (2) a discussion about ethical issues, such as bias, discrimination, and dilemmas in research; and (3) a brief description of how future studies could address ethical dilemmas derived from different time horizons among machine learning immediate results, predicting short-time predictions, and foresight long-term scenarios. The authoer concludes, “concerns on the ethics of the whole data science process should be connected to future methodologies, to offer creative solutions that address dilemmas derived from the combination among ethics, ML and AI, and futures studies” (p. 178).

El Zoghbi, M. B., & El Ansari, W. (2014). Ethical Concerns and Contributions in Response to Climate Change and the Links to Well-Being: A Study of University Students in the Netherlands. Central European Journal of Public Health, 22(2), 118–124. https://0-doi-org.libus.csd.mu.edu/10.21101/cejph.a3998

This study explored the concerns and contributions of university students in response to the ethical dimensions of climate change, and the implications for their well-being. A triangulation of methods including focus groups, in-depth interviews and participant observation was employed in this research. The finding suggest that “university students’ moral concerns and contribution with regards to climate change can have various implications for their short and long-term well-being” (p. 124). The authors recommend that public institutions establish formal platforms for university students to participate in order to help them feel empowered and in control of their future.

Panizza, S. (2020). If Veganism Is Not a Choice: The Moral Psychology of Possibilities in Animal Ethics. Animals (2076-2615), 10(1), 145. https://0-doi-org.libus.csd.mu.edu/10.3390/ani10010145

Typically, discussions about the ethics of buying and consuming animal products assumes that the moral agent has two choices equally available, to engage or not to engage in such behavior. This paper argues that, in some cases, the experience of those who refuse to participate in animal exploitation is not a choice, but a reconfiguration of their understanding of what animals, and the products made out of them, are. Panizza explains, “Taking moral impossibility seriously, I will argue, it suggests a radically different way of thinking about a specific and increasingly adopted position in animal ethics—not contributing to animal exploitation by buying or consuming animal products, which I shall call veganism for short—which entirely subverts the view just summarized” (p. 146). The author advocates for a reframing of the debates in animal ethics concluding that it is not always correct to speak of veganism as a choice: the reason being that, sometimes, the opposite does not present itself as a possibility.

*A special thanks to Jordan McFaul and Mariet Bejarano, graduate research assistants in the Diederich College of Communication at Marquette University.