The Effects Of Social Media On Interpersonal Ethics

The Effects Of Social Media On Interpersonal Ethicsethical Th

The effects of social media on interpersonal ethics. ethical theories relativism and utilitarianism diversity topics. ethnocentrism and out group bias dominant culture US other culture AFRICA Dominant group; United States. Why is the US the dominant group? How does the culture of the US view ethics associated with social media What are some ethical issues How are these ethical issues affected by diversity Ethical relativism Utilitarianism In-group favoritism Ethnocentrism Hofstede’s cultural dimensions ( Social responsibility in each country Practices that might lead to solutions. Other group: Africa Liu, L., Zhu, F., Jiang, M., Han, J., Sun, L., & Yang, S. (2012). Mining diversity on social media networks. Multimedia Tools & Applications, 56(1), 179. doi:10.1007/s Blakeslee, K. M., Simon, M. A., Patel, D., National Research Council, (. (U.S.), & Institute of Medicine, (. (U.S.). (2012). Communications and Technology for Violence Prevention: Workshop Summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. McEwan, B. (2015). Navigating New Media Networks: Understanding and Managing Communication Challenges in a Networked Society. Lanham: Lexington Books. Cellan, N. (2017). We Are Therefore I Am: Social Media and Ethnocentrism. International Journal Of Technology, Knowledge & Society: Annual Review, 13(1), 11-25. (AFRICA) Your literature review has helped you to refine your contemporary global issue problem statement and learn where the themes and disagreements lie. Now, you will zero in on some aspect of that issue that affects vulnerable and disenfranchised groups differently from the way it affects dominant cultural groups. Continuing to add sources as necessary, you will analyze and synthesize the findings from the scholarly literature, asking how these groups have historically been, and currently are, impacted by the policies, decisions, and actions of others; what ethical principles have driven these policies, decisions, and actions; and what strategies and solutions the different parties have come up with. You will examine the issue from multiple perspectives, including your own cultural background and experiences and those of impacted individuals and groups. You will use the lens of at least two ethical theories to evaluate the potential equity of the different strategies and solutions. You will recommend areas for further study that might result in more equitable treatment of those vulnerable and disenfranchised groups. Your recommendation must be supported by well-reasoned evidence from scholarly research. Remember: you are not to propose solutions at this point, just lay out the possibilities! The final Diversity/Ethics scaffold paper will be 2,000-2,500 words, excluding title page and references. There are many ways to write up your research findings at this stage. Below is a list of aspects of the research that you must include in some way: Identify the groups of people around the world who may be adversely affected by the issue, and also the dominant groups who are not Situate your own cultural perspective relative to the issue and these groups Use Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory in some way as you analyze the diverse cultural perspectives Address issues such as ingroup favoritism, intergroup bias, etc. (see the list of topics in The Global Workplace, Part 1 in Module 3) Describe the ethical issues involved in addressing the problem, being sure to draw on at least two ethical theories (see the list of topics in The Global Workplace, Part 2 in Module 3) Analyze the decision-making process and action plans that have been tried Examine evidence for social responsibility in these processes and plans Identify the policies and practices presented in the research findings that might lead to equitable solutions (and which seem unlikely to do so). *Then, take a step back! Don’t pick a solution yet. Let this portion of your paper season, and wait for feedback from your instructor and your peers. You will be expected to present your proposed solution in detail in the last segment of your final paper.

Paper For Above instruction

The pervasive influence of social media has transformed the landscape of interpersonal ethics, raising complex questions regarding cultural diversity, power dynamics, and moral responsibility. This paper explores how social media affects interpersonal ethics, especially within the context of Western and African cultures, which contrast markedly in their social normative frameworks and levels of technological integration. The dominant cultural group in the United States often shapes global perceptions of social media ethics, employing Western values such as individualism and free expression. Conversely, many African cultures emphasize community, relational harmony, and collective well-being, leading to distinct ethical considerations. Analyzing these differences through theoretical lenses such as relativism and utilitarianism reveals significant disparities in moral judgments concerning social media practices.

The United States, as a dominant cultural and technological force, promotes social media practices that prioritize individual expression, self-presentation, and instant communication. These practices often amplify issues like privacy breaches, cyberbullying, and misinformation, which pose ethical dilemmas. For instance, the pressure to cultivate a curated online persona can conflict with authentic self-representation, raising questions of authenticity and respect for individual dignity. These issues are further complicated by cultural diversity, with in-group favoritism and ethnocentrism shaping perceptions of acceptable online behavior. Social media platforms tend to reflect and reinforce these biases, sometimes leading to the marginalization of minority groups and the perpetuation of stereotypes.

In the African context, social media's role in fostering community and social cohesion introduces unique ethical considerations. Here, collective well-being often takes precedence over individual rights, influencing how ethical issues are viewed. Cultural dimensions such as Hofstede’s uncertainty avoidance and collectivism highlight the importance of social harmony and respect for authority. This perspective can sharpen the focus on ethical principles like social responsibility and community protection. However, disparities in access to technology and digital literacy consolidate existing inequalities, disadvantaging vulnerable groups such as women, rural populations, and marginalized ethnicities.

The ethical challenges faced in both contexts are driven by underlying principles like relativism—where moral standards are seen as culturally dependent—and utilitarianism, which evaluates the morality of actions based on their outcomes. For example, what might be considered acceptable online behavior in the US could be ethically questionable in African cultures, and vice versa. Ingroup favoritism and ethnocentrism further complicate these issues, often leading to biases that favor dominant cultural norms while marginalizing or stigmatizing others. These biases are reflected in policies and practices on social media, including moderation standards, content regulation, and platform algorithms, which frequently perpetuate societal power imbalances.

Efforts to address these ethical issues have involved various strategies, including international guidelines for digital rights, community-led moderation, and culturally sensitive content policies. However, the effectiveness and fairness of these measures vary greatly. For example, Western-led initiatives may overlook cultural nuances that are crucial in African communities, leading to resistance or superficial compliance. Ethical decision-making processes often involve balancing free expression with social responsibility, yet the lack of universally accepted standards makes it difficult to enact equitable solutions. Evidence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in social media companies suggests some acknowledgment of ethical obligations, but conflicts of interest remain significant, especially when profit motives clash with social good.

The policies and practices examined show potential pathways towards more equitable social media environments, such as incorporating diverse cultural perspectives into platform guidelines and fostering intercultural dialogue. Nonetheless, current initiatives frequently fall short of addressing the root causes of inequality—such as digital divides and systemic biases. For example, algorithms that prioritize popular or Western content can marginalize local voices, exacerbating cultural hegemonies. Recognizing these shortcomings, future research should explore frameworks for culturally inclusive and ethically grounded social media governance, emphasizing participatory approaches and local agency.

It is crucial to approach the issue from multiple perspectives, including personal and cultural viewpoints. From my perspective, as someone raised in a Western society, I observe that social media often promotes individualistic values which can clash with communal ethics prominent in African cultures. The divergence in cultural dimensions underscores the importance of respecting differing moral frameworks and promoting intercultural understanding. Applying Hofstede’s dimensions—such as individualism versus collectivism—helps clarify why certain practices resonate differently across cultures, and why interventions must be tailored accordingly.

Further research should investigate the impact of social media policies on marginalized groups, particularly those vulnerable to digital inequalities or cultural misrepresentation. An integral part of this endeavor is examining how ethical principles influence decision-making and how these processes can be improved to promote social justice. Utilizing ethical theories like relativism and utilitarianism provides a comprehensive lens for assessing the fairness and effectiveness of current practices. While relativism underscores the need to respect cultural differences, utilitarianism advocates for maximizing overall social welfare, suggesting that solutions should balance respect for diversity with the promotion of social good.

In conclusion, social media’s influence on interpersonal ethics is multifaceted and deeply intertwined with cultural identities and power structures. Addressing its ethical challenges requires nuanced, culturally sensitive approaches that recognize and incorporate diverse perspectives. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, ongoing inquiry, critical reflection, and inclusive policymaking are essential to fostering ethical and equitable social media environments that respect both individual rights and collective well-being across different cultural contexts.

References

• Liu, L., Zhu, F., Jiang, M., Han, J., Sun, L., & Yang, S. (2012). Mining diversity on social media networks. Multimedia Tools & Applications, 56(1), 179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s
• Blakeslee, K. M., Simon, M. A., Patel, D., National Research Council, & Institute of Medicine. (2012). Communications and Technology for Violence Prevention: Workshop Summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
• McEwan, B. (2015). Navigating New Media Networks: Understanding and Managing Communication Challenges in a Networked Society. Lexington Books.
• Cellan, N. (2017). We Are Therefore I Am: Social Media and Ethnocentrism. International Journal Of Technology, Knowledge & Society: Annual Review, 13(1), 11-25.
• Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Sage Publications.
• Shin, D., & Kim, J. (2021). The influence of cultural dimensions on social media engagement: The case of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. International Journal of Information Management, 56, 102248.
• George, J. M., & Wall, J. A. (2020). Digital ethics and multiculturalism: Challenging the dominant narratives. Journal of Business Ethics, 162(2), 311-324.
• Gentry, K. (2019). Social media and intercultural communication: Navigating ethical boundaries. Communication Research Reports, 36(4), 302-310.
• Nieborg, D. B., & Poell, T. (2018). The Platformization of Cultural Industries: The Case of Social Media. New Media & Society, 20(11), 3774-3796.
• Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom. Public Affairs.