Imagine you go back to 1967, when the World Health Organization decided to launch a global campaign to eradicate smallpox. This required significant financial resources that could have been used for other pressing health issues, and importantly, it involved temporary infringement upon individual autonomy and freedom of choice because of mandatory vaccination and quarantine measures. Would you find this ethical at that moment and implement it? Maybe yes, maybe no, but what if we consider its long-term implications? What if I said that in 23 years, these seemingly unethical considerations resulted in ultimate success leading to the eradication of smallpox, which saved millions of lives and prevented future healthcare costs?
Achieving the greater ethical long-term goal can entail making seemingly unethical choices along the way. From another perspective, sometimes we may just execute ethical actions in the moment, but while our intentions may be good, they may result in the outcome that actually doesn’t lead to what we want, maybe greater destruction in the end. These lead me to have a more consequentialist view in making my decisions. Working within Facebook could provide me an opportunity to contribute positively to society by effecting change from within. By joining Facebook and advancing my career there, I can access the levers of change within the organization, possessing the ability to influence policies, advocate for user privacy, and combat misinformation. Furthermore, I believe that inaction is also an action; if I will be possessing the expertise that can mitigate the very issues that plague Facebook’s way to more ethical actions, is there not a moral imperative to apply those skills where they are most needed? Avoiding employment on Facebook in that case could result in a loss of opportunity to make a significant impact. By both what we do and don’t do, we touch the lives of lots of people. Therefore, choosing to engage actively in improving a flawed system may be more ethically commendable than disengaging entirely.
Moreover, my decision would depend on which project I will be working on. Like our reading posed the question, “How close is my work to those actions I believe are wrong?” Am I going to be working on making Facebook more addictive to users? Or am I working on creating Facebook’s product for providing charitable fundraising tools, which will simplify the process of charitable giving and amplify fundraising efforts through social networks, supporting numerous causes worldwide, from disaster relief to medical expenses? If it’s the latter, in which my involvement can help steer Facebook towards actions that benefit society more than they harm it, then I would accept the job from Facebook.
In conclusion, for me, the pursuit of ethical integrity does not necessitate abandoning organizations with questionable practices but rather transforming them. I think that good people should work within challenging environments to foster positive change, because by embodying ethical principles and demonstrating their viability within the corporate structure, we can set a precedent and inspire others to follow suit.
