Your Science Toolkit forM3A2 Short Answer Earthquakes and H.docx

Your Science Toolkit for
M3A2 Short Answer: Earthquakes and Hydro fracking for
Natural Gas
Student name:
Enter the following information about the newspaper article you
are to analyze:
Title:
Author:
Publication:
Note: All responses must be supported by information from
your readings. Provide specific quotations or data to validate
your position in each response. Use APA (American
Psychological Association) style in-text citations and
references.
Part 1
1. Where did the author of the Standard Times article, A.
Kuchment, get the scientific information he/she is reporting, the
“source”? (Give the full name of the journal or publication,
website, etc.)
2. Does this source have a special purpose or goal? (Go to the
website of the journal/publisher and see who publishes this (i.e.,
what organization or government agency), and check their
stated objectives or goals. Is this a “peer reviewed” scientific
journal?)
Use the EC (Excelsior College) Library resource, Evaluation
Criteria, to help you evaluate a source.

Part 2
1. Is there a difference in the information/data you find in the
news article compared to the information provided in the
module resources, the USGS (United States Geological Survey)
reports, and the research reported by Frohlich et al. or any other
unbiased published the research you have located?
2. Is there a difference between what you learned from this
article and what you thought before? Do you think the American
public would agree with the findings reported in the news
article? Why or why not?
Give concrete examples from your readings to support your
positions on each question.
Part 3
1. Do all the scientific sources you have examined on this topic
provide data or information that supports the premise of the
newspaper reporter, Kuchment?
2. Did the newspaper reporter include any scientists who
disagree? Did you find any scientists who disagree with the
newspaper article’s premise?
3. Examine the key words used in the newspaper article in
conjunction with the scientific reports. Are misleading or
sensationalistic expressions used that indicate the earthquakes
are definitely a result of the fracking and/or waste water
disposal? Give specific quotations and examples to support your

response.
Part 4:
1. Does the evidence suggest correlation or causation? In other
words, does the data suggest that two factors are correlated with
one another, or that changes in one actually cause changes in
the other?
2. Is the evidence based on a large sample of observations or
just a few isolated incidents?
3. Does the evidence in the scientific literature, provided in the
module readings and other sources you have located, support the
claims made by the author of the newspaper article?
Part 5: Now, answer the following concluding questions:
1. Do you trust this newspaper, the Standard Times, as a place
to look in the future where you can find scientific research that
is accurately and fully examined to inform the public about
sensitive science topics, such as fracking?
2. What two questions do you wish you could ask Kuchment
and/or the Frolich or the USGS geologists?

Use the following space to provide complete APA style
references for any and all informational sources you used,
including the news article. Refer to the EC Library Tip Sheet on
writing references in APA style [PDF, file size 46 KB].
Ethical Decision-Making Framework Model
Assessment
Summary
Alternatives
Analysis
Application
Action
Notes
Ethical Assessment #1
This exercise was about right and wrong answers. You either
knew the material or you did not
I didn’t do as well as I hoped but that is to be expect given this
is week one of the course
Form the reading it was clear that ethics and business is not as
simple as making right, wrong, good, or bad choices based on

one’s personal belief. The reason this is so is because in
personal life, profit of a company is not a consideration. There
are no shareholders but, in some cases, there are stakeholders
dependent on the decision. being made. But it was clear that
you can’t just be a good person and be an ethical business
leader.
I will need to consider the appropriateness and how to apply my
personal morals and values when making business related
decisions. I hope that we will see a good example of a company
that does this during this course.
In the Values Inventory I rated assistance, character, honesty,
integrity, sacrifice, and truthfulness very high as these are
principles that I value in making ethical decisions. My response
was based on not knowing the situation or scenario. An
alternative would have been to rate some of the other areas
high, but I found this difficult because those I selected are
always non-negotiables for me. On the
The pros for the Values Inventory are limited to the fact that I
was comfortable with them because they are what I consider
non-negotiables. The con is that I didn’t give the others
appropriate consideration because I didn’t feel like I had the
information to do so.
dependent on the decision being made. But it was clear that you
can’t just be a good person and be an ethical business leader.

Moral Philosophy Assessment, I scored 25 overall which was 10
points higher than my classmates. An alternative would have
been to put aside my personal morals and values to elect to
assist a loved one end their life.
The pros for my choices on the Moral Philosophy exercise were
limited to the fact that it aligned with my personal morals and
values. The Con is that I was not willing to consider an
alternative because to do so would have been a significant
departure from my personal beliefs
dependent on the decision being made. But it was clear that you
can’t just be a good person and be an ethical business leader.
Week One Summary
See Above
See Above
See above
See above
Week Two Summary
The case study on Mark showcased a good approach to
corporate citizenship while the microchip case study left me
with a sense of uncertainty on how that citizenship should be
applied to the fielding of new technologies. The only
alternative would have been for Mark to not shift his mindset
and engagement to one of sustainment and for the fielding of

the microchip to be mandatory without the proper oversight and
regulatory environment.
The pros of Mark’s decision clearly enabled relationships with
companies like Dow Chemical and create opportunities to look
at their business practices to identify areas of improvement that
would facilitate sustainment. Conversely, if he would not have
made the shift, I am not sure these things wouldn’t have
happened anyways as Mark was doing it for Goldman Sachs
prior to his departure. The pros of fielding new technology and
allowing the oversight and regulatory environment to catch up
after the fact really revolve around convenience and the change
of organizational practices to benefit from their use.
Conversely, this would allow it to be exploited in a way that
could cause irreparable damage
From the reading corporate citizenship is very important and
often will determine a company’s success or failure depending
on their willingness to change as a result of the changing needs
landscape. An article by Donovan McFarlane was important
because it said “By having a social vision, a company becomes
clear about what it needs to do to become an important
corporate citizen and how it will carry out its plan to build an
image and reputation as part of community progress and
growth.”
It was apparent that a solid approach to corporate governance is
required to “keep the wheels turning” but also holds leaders and
workers accountable for unethical conduct. This is interesting
because I did some follow-up research on Mark Tercerk and
found that he stepped down in June 2019 amid complaints about
the culture at the environmental group and his handling of
complaints about gender inequality and discrimination (Colman
2019). In the business world, perceived bad behavior or
inability to resolve ethics-based issues in the organization can
have disastrous consequences.
Week Three Summary
The first alternative had to do with our discussion post and how

to handle a situation that teetered on the edge of ethical
decision making. The situation had to do with relationships that
led to the perception of an advantage. I decided that the issue
wasn’t the relationship and thus would not ban relationships in
the work area. An alternative would be to ban the relationship
in the work area.
The other thing we looked at was peer-reviewed articles
covering a topic related to our reading on the essential Elements
of Ethical Decision-making. I chose an article based on cause-
related marketing and Rawl’s Difference principle. The
alternative to cause-related marketing is to make and sell a
product that only benefits the consumer and turns a profit for
the business. The alternative to Rawls Principle is to not
consider the disadvantages associated with social mobility and
therefore not provide any incentives or programs that help those
in society who are least advantage overcome their status to
become successful
The pros to prohibiting romantic relationships in an
organization are that it creates a necessary separation between
business and personal. The con is that it doesn’t address the
problem. As the problem is why the perception exists on the
advantage in question. That advantage can exist whether there
is a romantic relationship or not.
The pros to not employing cause-related marketing are that it
streamlines the considerations required by the business. In a lot
of ways, they could ignore things like supply chain ethics and
management. The con is that you lose a market sector of
stakeholders who are willing to pay a higher price for a cause-
based product and miss out on the social responsibility
outcomes as well.
The reading made it clear that businesses must institutionalize
ethics in their business practices and make ethical decisions
based on a variety of factors that may not always apply to the
service they hope to provide. For cause-related marketing, the
articles by Hamby & Brinberg as well as Eikenberry illuminated
the benefits of cause-related marketing practices but left me

with the notion that as a consumer I don’t really care about the
social benefits of a product and care more about fit, form, and
function.
For Rawl’s principle, I read an article by Machin that talked
about the complexities associate with the issue of social
mobility. There is no easy solution to this problem and
penalizing those who are successful to benefit those who would
perhaps never be successful seems unfair. In my opinion this is
a combination government and business problem to solve.
I need to be more open minded to the benefits of cause-related
marketing strategies and be less fit, form, and function focused.
While I want a product that meets my needs, I guess I am
willing to pay more if it benefits a cause that I can relate too.
In short it makes me feel like a good human being to do so.
Week Four Summary
There were two case studies this week that focused on Theo
Chocolate and CVS. My thoughts on Theo Chocolate is that it
is admirable that they sell a chocolate bare that doubly benefits
the farmers in the DRC. The alternative would be to sell a
normal chocolate bar or continue to buy the beans from DRC
farmers without the investment to protect the supply chain or
partner with NPOs to benefit the community after the sale. CVS
placed more emphasis on profit, and it cost them. Their many
ethical challenges really resulted from poor oversight and
programs. They eventually turned it around and even decided to
eliminate the sale of tobacco products in their store because its
sale did not align with their core values. The alternative would
be to do like many others and continue to sale it.
The pros of Theo changing would be simplicity of operations
and maximize the profit returned to the company provided they
made a good product if all they did was make a regular priced
chocolate bar. The con would be they would be just like
everyone else and the benefits of their existing CSR practices
would be lost. The pros of simply buying the beans at a higher
cost would be limited additional overhead driven by supply

chain oversight, etc.
For CVS the pros to continue selling tobacco would be the
profits associated with those products. The con would be it
would slow their reputation gains as refusing to sell that
product clearly shows their commitment to their core values and
the changes necessary after so many ethical issues.
This week reading covered a lot of topics related to moral
philosophies and values, the role of culture and relationships,
and developing an effective ethics program. There were several
articles I read to help me understand the impacts of business
practices and their effectiveness on eliciting change based on
their investments. One of those articles was The Effectiveness
of Rural Versus Urban Nonprofit Organizations in the
Democratic Republic of Congo which showcased that there is
limited data to prove that these company’s efforts truly benefit
the cultures they are interacting with.
After this week, I am committed to take a closer look at things
versus jumping to conclusions that a company’s unethical
behavior automatically equals nefarious conduct. While I am
sure there are plenty of examples of where this has occurred,
what is also clear is that complacency can be just as dangerous,
if not more dangerous, than bad behavior.
Week Five Summary
This week was all about managing and controlling ethic
programs. The case study on BP showed how failing to
maintain a functioning ethics program can result in disastrous
consequences that can last for years. I chose to criticism BP for
there action following the 2010 Gulf Coast oil spill because of
how they responded to the crisis and how it continues to affect
other industries today. I could have chosen to applaud their
cleanup efforts and consider the bulk of their actions from a
different perspective but fell short in coming up with a good
reason to do so.
I also looked at the implications of shareholder activism on
influencing corporate decisions and governance.

The only pro to how BP responded is in the fact that the spill
was contained, and practices were implemented to mitigate the
impacts on other industries.
The con list is lengthy beginning with how the CEO of BP
responded say “I wish I had my life back.” Also, of note is
even today fishing and tourism industries are impacted by the
lasting impacts of an event that should have been avoidable.
For shareholder activism the pros were clear. Allowing
shareholders to truly influence the decisions made by
corporations would lead to undeniable accountability for the
practices of those businesses as well as the results of those
practices on stakeholders.
The con to this approach would be the persistence regulatory
that would be required to manage it and the cost associated with
conducting it.
These week’s reading focused on maintaining functioning ethics
programs with heavy emphasis on the various ways a program
can be audited to ensure in stays healthy. During the case study
we were asked a what if question regarding shareholder ability
to influence BP to change its business practices in the future
which would, in leaderships opinion, have significant negative
implications. I read several articles on shareholder activism
and arrived at the conclusion that shareholder activism is an
almost impossible task to accomplish
I think going forward I would want to ensure the businesses I
choose to use employ practices that not only maintain an ethical
climate but also give equal footing to both shareholders as well
as stakeholders affected by a company’s practices.
Week Six Summary
Week Seven Summary

Week Eight Summary
Assessment Make sure you have al lthe facts about the
ethical dillemia
Alternatives Consider your choices
Analysis Identify your decision and tests its validity
Application Apply ethical principles to your decision
Action Make a decision

· Assessment: Make sure you have all the facts about the
dilemma. This first step includes a question that relates to much
of the dilemma: “Does it align with your ethical values and
those of the surrounding culture?”
· Alternatives: Consider your choices. This second step asks,
“Have you listed possible alternative choices?” and “Have you
considered pros and cons for each possible choice?
· Analysis: Identify your candidate decision and test its
validity. This third step calls for a considerable amount of
critical thinking in response to questions, including “Will your
candidate decision have a positive impact…?” and “Are you
free from external influence…?” and “Looking back, will this
decision seem like a good idea a year from now?”
· Application: Apply ethical principles to your candidate
decision. This fourth step draws upon several of the dominant
ethical theories. Utilitarianism, put forward by Aristotle and
others, addresses the question, “Would your choice result in the
greatest good?” The “golden rule” ethical theory, which is
sometimes referred to as the ethics of reciprocity, is represented
by the question, “Would your choice treat others as you would
like to be treated? This theory appears prominently in many
religions in the form of “do unto others as you would have them
do unto you.”
· Action: Make a decision. This fifth step includes the
challenging questions. “Are you willing to accept responsibility
for your decision?” and “Could you make your decision public
and feel good about it?” These questions call for consequential

evaluation, not just of the decision itself, but also of the
resulting impact of the decision. This resulting impact, which
could be emotional, social, and professional, could extend well
beyond those directly involved in the dilemma.
Nathan Javins
Week 6 Discussion
Collapse
Top of Form
Google was on the forefront of combining the internet with an
easily used search engine to scour the internet to provide
superior search results. It has been able to retain 64% of the
global market share despite other significant comparable search
engines (Ferrell, Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2019). As it has grown in
popularity it has created joint ventures which have led tow
questionable tactics regarding the management of personal
information which leads to profit.
As Google has been able to transcend time it has remained “the
best company to work for” based on the strong stand on green
initiatives and how it empowers its employees to be creative to
come up with new technologies to address global challenges.
Which also plays a role in how it manages personal information,
based on new regulation Google has been forced to draw a line
between using information to generate revenue which may cross
into violating user privacy. As Google skirts this line it is
continually changing and adapting to new innovative technology
to manage user privacy and continues to lobby for and against
legislation which will be unfavorable for the company. (Ferrell,
Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2019)
As Google moves through a mine field it not only has to
understand how to legislate for the global populace’s privacy
information it must also provide the same provisions for its
employees. As tensions have risen over the use of personal
information for profit it has also grown within the realm of
employee/employer relationships. Continual changes require
consistent law reviews and legal protection to both employers

and the global populace. Although different global locations
the law appears to remain the same across the board as it
pertains to the protection of personal information and the
growth of profits for numerous companies. (Evans, 2007)
As Google continues to grow globally it has learned to adapt
ethically, which it continually struggles with, as expansion has
reached new cultures. Based on this growth it has reached new
economic systems which have encompassed new ethical values
systems and it has been forced to alter some of their practices
(not always successful) at times to reach into new economic
systems to ensure growth and stability. With continued growth
and expansion Google has been forced to find new ways to
adapt ethical decision making practices as well as ensuring risk
compartmentalization. As a multinational corporation Google
has successfully maintained its growth through the acquisition
of new companies and consistent updates to its ethical practices
which at times are questionable but it remains an innovative
company to work for which create new technologies and are a
staple for the global consumer.
REFERENCES
Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L. (2019). Case 10: Google:
The Drive to Balance Privacy with Profit. Business Ethics:
Ethical Decision Making and Cases, Twelfth Edition. Cengage,
20 Channel Center Street, Boston, MA 02210.
Evans, L. (2007). Monitoring Technology in the American
Workplace: Would Adopting English Privacy Standards Better
Balance Employee Privacy and Productivity? California Law
Review, 95(4), 1115–1149.
Bottom of Form
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
William Behr
Week 6 Discussion
Collapse
Top of Form
I found the case study into Google and the challenges they

have faced in regard to privacy quite interesting as I had no idea
they had faced such concerns in the past. I have used Google
extensively for years and have no complaints about my
experience with their various offerings.
To be fair, I think online privacy in today’s day and age is a
pipe dream. Anything we put on the internet is extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to control. Maybe if we were
interacting with one or two websites in our day-to-day lives it
would be a different story. But, if I had to guess, I probably
interact with at least ten different websites in one hour of
boredom. And that doesn’t include the sites I interact with for
shopping, banking, schooling, news, weather, investments,
etc. On top of that, every few years or so, a large corporation
or the government gets hacked which means there is a good
chance my personal information is compromised from those
events as well.
What I think is really hurting Google is their handling of the
legal challenges they have faced. When they make an
agreement not to track something but are found to still track it,
it does not make them look good. And good points were made
from the aspect that what works in one country or region from a
privacy standpoint does not always work in another. France’s
expectations from Google and how it handles privacy (Weiss,
2013) won’t necessarily match up to what the U.S. would
expect.
I don’t think there is any way to get to a “one-size-fits-all”
solution when it comes to privacy. At least not until the
international community can get on the same page and publish
their expectations. Google, in the meantime, has to focus on
doing what feels right. Make it easy for users to opt out of
sharing their data while making it clear that this will lead to
them losing some accessibility when it comes to their products
and the features within them. Furthermore, users need to start

taking the user agreements they agree to more seriously by
reading them in their entirety.
Fruhlinger, J. (2020, February 12). Equifax data breach FAQ:
What happened, who was affected, what was the impact?
Retrieved May 16, 2020, from
https://www.csoonline.com/article/3444488/equifax-data-
breach-faq-what-happened-who-was-affected-what-was-the-
impact.html
Lord. (2018, September 12). Top 10 biggest government data
breaches of all time in the U.S. Retrieved May 16, 2020, from
https://digitalguardian.com/blog/top-10-biggest-us-government-
data-breaches-all-time
Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L., & Ferrell C. (2019). Chapter 5: Ethical
decision making. In Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making
and Cases (12th ed.). Boston, MA: CENGAGE Learning.
Weiss, T. R. (2013). Google Faces French Order to Fix Privacy
Issues Within 90 Days. EWeek, 3
Bottom of Form
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
Keith Wandoloski
Google
Collapse
Top of Form
Good Evening,
"GOOGLE!", "Do you even google?", "Just use Google." What
are these phrases? Common things you've heard people say in
regards to Google without a doubt. Google is not only a
company name but has become a verb in languages. How many
companies can claim this sort of product penetration into
people's lives? Google though has had a long arduous road to
get to the point they've attained. I say arduous because any
company that is truly as multinational as Google has become
there had to have been roadblocks and setbacks to its operations
both from external sources and internally. Google's main
problem is its constant problems with privacy. Hardly surprising

because data has really become the currency of choice over the
last twenty years or so for companies that deal with data and
Google definitely deals with data.
What I find most irritating is that a company that could be an
advocate for the consumer, while still finding a way to be
profitable and beneficial to the company, for their data has
really failed to be the role model we would hope a multinational
corporation would become. Google does a great many good
things for people and the environment (Greenwood, 2008), but
they've routinely failed ethically in protecting or ethically
utilizing consumer data. As we move into the future, privacy
has become more important to a greater population percentage.
This is reflected by the number and scale of fines being levied
against companies around the world. TikTok, which has seen a
significant surge in use with quarantine orders around the
world, was levied a $5.7 million fine by the FCC (Cavanagh,
2019).
I hope that Google can become a company that is an advocate
for consumer privacy and protection, sets the example for
companies around the world to emulate, and its name becomes
synonymous with ethical use of consumer data and a privacy
leader.
References
CAVANAGH, S. (2019). FTC Hits Company With Record Fine
Over Children’s Privacy. Education Week, 38(25), 5.
Greenwood, B. (2008). Technology Turns a Brighter Shade of
Green. Information Today, 25(6), 52.
Bottom of Form
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
Cody Lasseigne
Week 6 Discussion
Collapse
Top of Form
After reading the case study, I have to say that I am not
surprised by the actions of Google and the ethical issues that

encompass their business practices. Google has become an
industry leader for a reason. Their business strategies and
innovations have become a staple in the world that we know
today. One of the significant ethical issues that Google faces is
violating consumer privacy. The case study made it clear that
Google could care less about user privacy. Time and time again,
they have been caught violating user privacy agreements, and
the lack of concern is exacerbated by the continuous cycle of
apologizing or paying a fine and then repeating the same act. As
a multinational corporation (MNC), Google has encountered
several issues with legal ramifications due to the lack of
understanding of what is deemed appropriate in a particular
nation. Domestic success does not always correlate or transfer
into a foreign market and requires businesses to reconfigure
capabilities and develop new operational models (Chen et al.,
2020). Google found out first hand that what is legal in one
country is not legal in another. For instance, the European
Union does not hold the same values as their American
counterparts and have fined Google billions of dollars’ due to
privacy violations and violating antitrust laws. The continued
violations go directly against the organization’s original core
value/mantra of “Don’t be evil.” Google also went against their
mantra by working within China and censoring the content that
was presented to Chinese customers. Essentially, Google was
seeking profit by creating a communist based service for an
oppressive country to increase their market share and profit
margin. Being a multinational corporation, Google did not
realize the image they presented to other countries, namely the
United States, when they created the new service in China.
Overall, MNCs such as Google must base their decisions using
their core values as a guiding light and understand that national
cultures will dictate certain business operations. I feel that
Google could benefit by living by their core values/mantra and
spend more time finding a way to be more transparent within
their operations and not continue to take advantage of a lagging
regulatory system.

I feel that it is up to the consumer to decide if they are being
tracked or their information is gathered. The decision should be
up to the user how they want to use Google services, and
Google must be more transparent when providing tracking or
information gathering methods. If people want a personalized
experience, then let them have it, if they don’t, then they don’t
have to have the “personalized experience” provided by
information gathering by Google. In all reality, if a person
disagrees with the user agreement, then that person can use a
different service other than Google that aligns more with their
needs such as Apple. Being a Google user, I do not care if my
information is gathered because the advantages provided by
linking my accounts suit my lifestyle. I use several different
devices at any given time for various reasons; if the price I have
to pay for seamless transitions between devices and the use of a
free service is my information being collected, I am willing to
pay that price.
References
Chen, L., Zou, S., Xu, H., & Chen, Y. (2020). Entrepreneurial
orientation in multinational corporations: antecedents and
effects. Management International Review (MIR), 60(1), 123–
148. doi:10.1007/s11575-019-00397-4
Bottom of Form

Your Science Toolkit forM3A2 Short Answer Earthquakes and H.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Your Science Toolkit forM3A2 Short Answer Earthquakes and H.docx

Similar to Your Science Toolkit forM3A2 Short Answer Earthquakes and H.docx (18)

More from bunyansaturnina

More from bunyansaturnina (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Your Science Toolkit forM3A2 Short Answer Earthquakes and H.docx