In a controversial study published in the Proceedings of the…

Anetkaa In a controversial study published in the Proceedings of the…In a controversial study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, researchers from Facebook and Cornell University manipulated the newsfeeds of a random sample of 689,003 Facebook users. For some users, they removed newsfeed content that contained positive words, while for other users they removed content that contained negative words. To put the experiment in straightforward terms, some users were manipulated to feel happier and others were manipulated to feel sadder. The goal was to determine if the manipulation had a corresponding negative or positive emotional impact on the users and whether or not these emotional states could be transferred by users to their Facebook friend friends. The degree of impact varied among users, but the results indicate that, in general, the emotions of users were successfully manipulated. This study could have shown no impact on user emotions, or a much greater impact on user emotions. The study was not restricted to adults and included Facebook users in the 13-17 age range. The researchers didn’t obtain informed consent from the Facebook users as is commonly required of any US based research on human subjects conducted by university researchers. Research on children normally requires special permission and compelling justification tied to public welfare. The fine print in Facebook’s Data Use Policy didn’t inform Facebook users of the possibility of such research being undertaken until four months after the study was completed, although it did acknowledge that user data would be used by the firm to improve customer service. Even so, the document is written in dense legal language that is thousands of words and length. Few users can be expected to examine it with care before agreeing. Defenders of Facebook note that this type of research by Internet companies is commonplace, if not widely understood by users. It was mainly because the Cornell University researchers didn’t obtain informed consent from users that this study was particularly controversial and received widespread media attention. Discussion questionsWhat, if anything, is ethically objectionable about changing user newsfeeds in this ways? Explain.Would you feel like Facebook was wrongfully harming you if they covertly manipulated the information you saw online in this way without disclosing this to you? Why, or why not? Explain.Facebook is a for-profit company which users access and utilize for free. Shouldn’t Facebook, and similar companies, be expected to manipulate consumers in ways that allow them to increase profits? Why, or why not? Explain.Which theoretical perspective in last lecture best informs your thinking about this case? Explain.BusinessBusiness – Other