I keep going back and forth on whether I think a social media monitoring system is ethical to have monitoring high school students. One part of me thinks that what you put on this internet is public and anyone can see it, so it should be monitored anyway. But, another part of me thinks that there should be a divide in school life and home life. Kids should be allowed to do things outside of school once they go home for the night that has nothing to do with their school. They are at school to learn not to be parented. Overall, I think I am for the idea of a social media monitoring system because it monitoring violent posts about school shootings and one day could save hundreds of lives.

casestudy

Though I think everyone that uses social media should know that anyone can see what they write, I think it is important for schools to notify students that they are monitoring their posts. If students know that their posts are being monitored they would most likely filter the things that they post which could cause a reduction in things like online bullying. It would also make the jobs of the people who are doing the monitoring easier because they might not have as much content to filter through if students are more careful about what they post.

casestudy

As I mentioned in my earlier annotation, there are so many things that people will post on social media that they do not really mean. If the algorithm picks up on something on social media the student might be called out of class to go talk to the principal or another supervisor. This takes away from class time and from the student's learning and also wastes the time of the principal or other supervisor.

casestudy

I agree with this statement. In my own experiences people will say a lot on social media that they do not really mean, and it is hard to interpret because over the internet you cannot hear someones tone of voice or how they are acting. An example of this is when someone faces a minor inconvenience like maybe spilling their coffee they just paid $5 for. They might tweet something like "omg I am going to kill someone" but it does not mean they actually want to kill someone. They are just frustrated because they spilt their coffee and extremely over-exaggerated their response to the situation.

casestudy

After reading the first chapter from the book Ethics of Emerging Technologies: Scientific Facts and Moral Challenges (Budinger & Budinger, 2006) the theory that really interested me was duty ethics. Duty ethics is the idea that people should not be motivated to do something because they want to, they should do something because they have a "duty" to society. People should be motivated to do what is right and what is moral. Duty ethics focuses more on humans as individuals rather than society as a whole. The example that is given in the text is clinical trials. According to duty ethics, one patient should not be put in risk by a clinical trial even though the results of the trial could later help hundreds of people. One of the main points of duty ethics is that people should do something because they think that it is right, and that is considered an act of moral worth but if someone does something just because they are following a rule that is an act without morals.

summary

This part of the text made me think about the part in the podcast when Dash touches on the fact that Twitter played a large role in the most recent presidential election. Many politicians use the app, including our president, to influence other users. It is free publicity for them, and for people that might not be as educated on political candidates and their beliefs they might see a tweet that could sway their decision for an election. Years ago this was not an option for American citizens. They had to do their research through more reliable resources to educate themselves on not on politicians but news in general. There are so many articles floating around the web these days that are not genuine that people will instantly believe because they saw it on Twitter or Facebook.

This sentence made me think of the podcast when Anil Dash talks about how he did not grow up with technology but now his child does, and it reminds me of my own experiences compared to my parents experiences. When my parents were kids there were no cell phones or computers. They did not have social media, and they way they interacted with each other was completely different than how people do now. In todays society people do not get nearly as much face to face interaction. People communicate over social media, text messaging, email, etc. It makes it easier for people to say things they would not feel comfortable saying face to face. It has allowed things like bullying to get much more prevalent. It has also changed the dating world. People often times meet on dating apps and talk online before ever meeting each other in personal rather than going out to a bar and meeting someone which is what my parents did. Online dating also allows for "catfishing" which is saying you are someone different than you really are. When Kaplan says "sometimes they make our lives worse" I agree. There are so many positives and negatives to technology.

This very first paragraph in the text really made me realize just how often technology influences my day to day life. From the second I wake up in the morning I am already using technology because I use my Amazon Alexa to set an alarm in the morning. I then typically check my phone and then go into the bathroom and use my electric toothbrush to brush my teeth. In the first 5 minutes in my I have already used three different electronic devices. It also made me realized just how reliant we all are on technology. Just like the text says we use technology for work and play, we even use it to prepare food to keep ourselves alive and we even wear it.