Coerced Consent

In June, it was revealed that Facebook had conducted a research study on over 600,000 of its users to determine whether it could change their emotions by manipulating their news feeds.

The answer was “yes.”

The results of the research were published in an article entitled – Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion through Social Networks. (Click the link in the Related Resources section below if you would like to review this article).

Apparently, Facebook considered this research study to be fully justified because they had gotten “informed consent”. In Facebook’s view, this “informed consent” was obtained when users clicked on the button to agree to Facebook’s Data Use Policy that included a clause that read –

We use the information we receive about you […] for internal operations, including troubleshooting, data analysis, testing, research and service improvement.

This study has caused a significant level of concern and public outrage.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center, a digital privacy rights group, has filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission alleging that Facebook violated an agreement to protect user privacy. There have even been calls for Congressional hearings.

Facebook is not the only one who engages in activities that involve the manipulation or exploitation of individuals without their real consent.

Life seems to be full of situations where there is no real “informed consent” only coercion. In addition to website and software licenses, where your only real option is not accessing the site or using the software you have purchased, there are the following –

• Medical release and indemnification forms – Sign it or you don’t see the doctor.
• Rental car agreements – Agree or forget about getting a car.
• Airport inspections – Want to fly? Agree to be searched.
• Parking lot tickets – Try to find someplace else to park or agree to accept any damage to your vehicle.

Manipulation and coerced consent can also be an issue with workplace initiatives. Some of the “how to” guides on improving safety could be interpreted as suggesting coercion is an appropriate approach.

As an OH&S professional, ask yourself –

When my organization institutes programs to “improve safety” has there been agreement and consent on the part of those who will be impacted – or are the methods being suggested really coercion?

Situations where individuals are being coerced or manipulated without their consent can raise a number of ethical issues. This includes situations were individuals have no realistic alternatives.

In some cases, coerced consent may be necessary. The classic example is isolation of an individual to prevent the spread of an infectious disease. In other situations, it may be completely unacceptable. For example, when employees are told to keep quiet about safety concerns or be fired.

For an interesting discussion of some of these ethical issues check out the following post – Consent and Ethics in Facebook’s Emotional Manipulation Study.

Related Resources:

Click here to access the article that started the discussion – Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion through Social Networks

For information about the FTC complaint filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, click here.

Employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees who complain to OSHA about unsafe conditions. Click here for additional information about two OSHA enforcement actions.