LA Police Chief Claims Google’s Traffic App Endangers Cops

News Analysis #3


LA Police Chief Charlie Beck urges Google to eliminate a cop-tracking feature of the Waze app. According to Jose Pagliery, Waze is Google’s traffic app which enables users to view reports of heavy traffic, road closures, accidents, and police speed traps. Chief Beck wants Google to get rid of the cop tracker function because he claims that it is endangering the lives of cops. He reported to Google that because of the app two police officers were killed.

The Waze app is very useful for consumers but the question is how much information should civilians have access to? Should civilians know the whereabouts of police officers? This creates an ethical dilemma because with the app, civilians will be driving safer when they know a cop is around. So in essence, we are just teaching society to only drive safer when they see a cop and when the cop is not there; they can do whatever they want. Also, another possible issue that is raised is that does too much information put lives of human beings at risk. In corporations, for example, we see that one person cannot perform all of the accounting functions for instance because it is not ethical for one person to know all of that information. Could the same principal apply here? Is too much information unethical?

Within this article, we see two types of ethics, duty-based versus results-based ethics. Per Managerial Ethics lecture, duty-based ethics uses a sense of moral duty and responsibility to determine whether or not an act is ethical. Results-based ethics, in contrast, states that a behavior is ethical if the results are positive and helpful to society. Google supports results-based ethics in this case. Google states that people are driving safer with the use of the app and for that reason the app should not be taken out. Chief Beck uses duty-based ethics. Chief Beck feels it is his responsibility to push for the app to be removed to save the lives of cops.

Results-based ethics does not work in this scenario because ultimately the results obtained using the app are only temporary. Results are temporary in the sense that people only drive safely in the presence of a cop. So therefore, results-based ethics do not apply here. As of now, we did not know if there is a direct correlation between the app and the murder of the two cops. Duty-based ethics, however, is a more appropriate selection of the two because it truly causes a person to analyze their personal ethical code rather than just results being displayed.

Google did not handle this issue in the correct manner. Currently, Google has not decided to remove the app. Google should consider removing the app because there is a high probability that the information could be misused. For instance, instead of using the app for cop speed traps, the app could be misused by criminals to run away from cops. Too much information can tempt someone to do something they would not normally do. Google should remove the app so civilians will learn to always drive carefully not just when they see a cop in the area.  

As mentioned above, results-based ethics do not provide accurate results to rely upon. Also, results can change in the long-run which also makes this method of ethics unstable. Duty-based ethics will cause Google to evaluate their ethics and consider what is best for members of the community. As a recommendation, Google should use the Kantian theories when conducting business. Kantian theories consider respect for the human being to be absolutely necessary (Arnold, 2012). Google needs to evaluate if the use of the Waze app will ultimately benefit consumers or will it just benefit the pocket of Google.

 
 


Bibliography


Arnold, B. B. (2012). Ethical Theory and Business. Pearson Education.

Bishop, J. (2015, January 29). Managerial Ethics Lecture.
Pagliery, J. (2015, January 28). LA Polic Chief Claims Google's Traffic App Endangers Cops. Retrieved from CNN: http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/28/technology/security/waze-police/index.html?iid=SF_BN_River
 




 


 


 



 

No comments:

Post a Comment