The document summarizes the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal where: - Cambridge Analytica created a quiz app that obtained Facebook data on millions of users without consent. - This data was then used to psychologically profile voters and target them with political advertisements, influencing elections. - Facebook was criticized for allowing this data breach to happen without proper safeguards to protect user privacy. - The actions of companies like Facebook and Cambridge Analytica were deemed unethical by violating user trust and consent.

1. FacebookExposed
I n s i d e t h e F a c e b o o k - C a m b r i d g e A n a l y t i c a S c a n d a l

2. Agenda
• Evaluating alternatives
• Were other courses of action
possible?
• Why do you think the actor
pursued the course of action
they did
Taking the position
Did the moral agent do the
right thing?
What would you have done in
these circumstances?
What are some reasonable
criticisms of the decision you
would take?
The Facebook-Cambridge
Analytica Scandal
Moral Agents exposed
Summarizing the case
Virtue ethics and deontology
ethics explained
Applying EthicsTheory
What are the implications of this
case for the affected profession?
What lessons can future
organizations learn from this
case?
Looking to the future
Discussing the core ethical
dilemmas

3. • Cambridge Analytica created a quiz app called, “This is
Your Digital Life” generated by Russian psychologist,
Dr. Aleksandr Kogan. This app paid users $1 to $2 to
complete the quiz Invented by Russian psychologist,
Dr. Aleksandr Kogan (Glaser, 2018)
• Used the data it collected to create a psychological
weapon, using targeted Facebook ads and social
media campaigns to manipulate American voters
• Facebook allowed Cambridge Analytica to access
data about users’ networks, such as friend’s names,
their likes, and other personal details (Glaser,
2018).
Summarizingthecase

4. • 30 – 80 million Facebook profiles were violated by this data breach
(Perrigo, 2019).
• Approximately 10,000 various ads were placed to different users on
Facebook by using data modelling and performance-optimizing
algorithms. What’s worse is that these ads were viewed by users
billions of times (Lewis & Hilder, 2018).
• Cambridge Analytica then sold this information to Donald Trump for a
hefty sum of six billion dollars (Perez, 2018)
• Ultimately, in 2023, the case was laid to rest and Facebook was
ordered to pay $725 million dollars and $181 million in legal fees to
plaintiffs' lawyers (Merken & Merken, 2023).
Summarization
Continued
I n s i d e t h e F a c e b o o k - C a m b r i d g e
A n a l y t i c a S c a n d a l

5. The MoralAgents
a.k.a., “the actors”
Despite a flood of employee
emails, Facebook did nothing to
shut down unethical app created
by Dr. Kogan
Mark Zuckerberg
Knowingly produced an app for
psychological warfare to
manipulate votes
Wittingly collected users' private
data without consent
Cambridge Analytica
Unethical vote tampering
was Trump’s strategy to
achieve his candidacy.
Different types of voters
received different ads from
Trump campaign as a way to
influence the elections.
DonaldTrump
The app was developed by Dr.
Kogan, the Russian psychologist,
who knew it had an unethical and
immoral intention
Dr. Kogan

6. Government Entities Civilians and Businesses
• Additionally, government agencies, such
as Congress and the FTC, had a stake in
the matter. (Federal Trade Commission,
2019).
• Congress deposed Facebook CEO as
users’ privacy was breached and online
advertising laws were at risk
• The FTC agency investigated as well on
behalf of Facebook customers due to
privacy breaches. (Federal Trade
Commission, 2019).
• The Federal Trade Commission imposed
$5 billion dollars in fines on Facebook
and imposed new restrictions
• Shareholders lost income as stock prices
plummeted by twenty-four percent with
a loss of $134 billion dollars in market
value (Mirhaydari & CBS NEWS, 2018).
• Facebook users and their friends had their
private data breached in this case, which made
them stakeholders..
• Shareholders were affected as stock fell 24%
and lost $134 million dollars in market value
(Mirhaydari & CBS NEWS, 2018).
• The distrust in the company caused
advertisers on Facebook to
minimize their marketing on the
social media platform.
Whowerethe
stakeholders?

7. Core
Ethical
Dilemmas
VIRTUE ETHICS
One of the core ethical values involved are virtue ethics; virtue
ethics, as we learned in the Banks and Gallagher article, “Virtue
Ethics and Professional Life”, this ethical approach is based on
the judgements of people’s inner lives such as motives,
disposition, and character (Banks & Gallagher, n.d.).
DEONOTOLOGY ETHICS
Another core ethical value at play is
deontology ethics which is based on
the idea that there are certain rules and
principles that we have a duty to
follow, regardless of the outcomes
(Neher, n.d.).

8. ISSUES RAISED CONFLICTINGVALUES
• In regard to virtue ethical issues
raised, Facebook became careless
dealing with third party apps and
user’s profiles which was a
violation of their own policies
and code of conduct (Arora &
Zinolabedini, 2019).
One of many conflicting values that
gave cause for concern is control
versus convenience as Facebook
gives users the convenience of using
their platform, but the user must
hand Facebook control of their
private data. (Moglen & Choudhary,
2018)
Thesevaluesareinconflictwitheach
otherinmultipleways.Onewayis
opennessversussecrecyand
managementversussecrecy.
Conflicting Values and
Issues Raised
HOW ARETHEVALUES IN
CONFLICT

9. ISSUES RAISED CONFLICTINGVALUES
• In terms of deontological ethical
issues raised, Cambridge
Analytica had an unfair
advantage because in the Trump
campaign as it singled out users
with tailored ads to sway votes.
Another conflicting value is that
Facebook does not share how it
collects our data which causes users
to become confused about what they
do with the information and how we
can protect our privacy (Porter,
2018).
Thesevaluesareinconflictwitheach
otherinmultipleways.Onewayis
opennessversussecrecyand
managementversussecrecy.
Conflicting Values and
Issues Raised
HOW ARETHEVALUES IN
CONFLICT

10. Evaluating
Alternatives
and
Alternatives
the Moral
Agents
Could Have
Utilized

11. Evaluating
Alternatives
T h e F a c e b o o k - C a m b r i d g e A n a l y t i c a D a t a S c a n d a l
What other courses of action were possible?
Facebook should have been more open about
their data sharing with users and more
forthcoming about the Cambridge Analytica
scandal which would have earned trust from
users.
As much as I am against government in the
personal lives of citizens, I believe government
should have passed a law to regulate social media
platforms like Facebook in order to protect
privacy breaches from its users.

12. EvaluatingAlternatives
T h e F a c e b o o k - C a m b r i d g e A n a l y t i c a D a t a S c a n d a l
What could the moral agent have
done?
First, Cambridge Analytica did not
need to be covert with the use of
their app; they could have easily
aligned with Facebook and notified
users about their app and their
intentions.
Next, Cambridge Analytica
inappropriately breached user data
for the sole purpose of swaying
votes which should have never
occurred.
Dr. Aleksandr Kogan, like Cambridge
Analytica, should have never been
covert with his actions; this shows
he had ill intentions.
Dr. Kogan should never have
worked with Cambridge Analytica,
however because of their
relationship, it shows he, like the
other moral agents, had devious
intentions.
Donald Trump, another moral
agent, should have never
committed an egregious act by
working with Cambridge Analytica
for the sole purpose of collecting
user’s psychological profiles to sway
votes.
Perhaps, Donald Trump could have
gained the public’s trust again by
educating society about protecting
their data and he should have
apologized for conspiring with
Cambridge Analytica which may
have calmed voters.
Lastly, Mark Zuckerberg should
have been more forthcoming with
Congress when he spoke during
investigations; Zuckerberg instead
was aloof and dodged questions.
Zuckerberg should have come out
with a public apology to regain the
trust of its users.
Mark Zuckerberg also should have
minimally compensated users
monetarily for the inconvenience
and worry caused.

13. EvaluatingAlternatives
The Facebook-Cambridge Analytica Data Scandal
Why do you think the actor
pursued the course of
action they did?
I believe Facebook was
interested in growing their
user profiles and perhaps
making money off of
advertising from Cambridge
Analytica.
I also would suggest that
Donald Trump’s interest was
to gain votes in any way
possible, regardless of his
unethical practices.
Cambridge Analytica was
also interested in obtaining
votes for Donald Trump in
order to receive the large
payout he gave.

14. Applyingtheethicstheory

15. SummaryoftheCore
Elements
Virtue ethics is, as we learned in the Banks and Gallagher article, “Virtue
Ethics and Professional Life”, this ethical approach is based on the
judgements of people’s inner lives such as motives, disposition, and
character (Banks & Gallagher, n.d.).
Knowing
the theory
Virtue
Ethics

16. SummaryoftheCore
Elements
Deontology ethics which is based on the idea that there
are certain rules and principles that we have a duty to
follow, regardless of the outcomes (Neher, n.d.).
Knowing
the theory
Deontology
Ethics

17. Facebook allowed Cambridge Analytica to collect
information from more than 87 million Facebook users
without getting their consent which I believe opposes the
principles of fairness as it allowed Cambridge to have access
to user’s personal data.
Facebook did not keep user’s data safe which shows, not
only a lack of attention, but lack of caring from the
corporate giant.
Facebook violated a core part of virtue ethics which
is honesty because users were led to believe that
their personal information would be safe.
Furthermore, was more concerned about financial gains
over protecting user’s privacy and security which shows
a clear disregard for compassion and honesty.
How These Choices Reflect
or Violate the Selected
Theories
V i r t u e E t h i c s
The scandal involving Facebook's association
with Cambridge Analytica serves as an example
showing how a lack of virtuous behavior can
lead organizations down an unethical path,
especially when it comes to financial gain; the
choices made by executives at Facebook which
were disregarding honesty and compassion
ultimately hurt numerous users while eroding
public confidence in the platform itself.

18. Facebook had a duty to protect
user’s data and they failed to
investigate Cambridge Analytica
who stole user’s data without their
consent. Again, this goes against
deontology ethics according to Kant
because he believed that people
should, “act with good will”
(Kranak, 2019) which all the moral
agents violated.
Since the moral agents involved
collected and used user’s data without
their explicit consent, Facebook
violated their rights. According to
Kant’s theory of deontology ethics, he
said, “So act that you use humanity,
whether in your own person or in the
person of any other, always at the same
time as an end, never merely as a
means” (Kranak, 2019). The moral
agents in this case violated this core
value of deontology.
s
The Reflection and Violation
of Deontological Ethics
F a c e b o o k D a t a B r e a c h
One of the core facets of deontology
ethics is that people should be able to
discriminate between right and wrong;
thus, Kant felt that “ethical actions follow
universal moral laws” (McCombs School
of Business, 2023). Therefore, according
to Kant, it is wrong to collect and use user
data without their consent, specifically
because of one of Kant’s beliefs, “we
always have a duty to be truthful to
others” (Kranak, 2019).

19. What are some reasonable criticisms of the
decision you would take? How would you
respond to these criticisms
How does it produce a good (ethical) outcome?
Why is your preferred course of action preferable to
what was done?
What would you have done in these circumstances?
Takingthe
Position
D i d t h e m o r a l a g e n t s d o t h e r i g h t
t h i n g ?
I do not feel the moral agents did anything
right in this case. They were each
unethical for profit, gaining votes, and
practicing psychological warfare on user’s
profiles.
Furthermore, the moral agents violated
Facebook user’s privacy, did not obtain
consent prior to launching Cambridge’s
unethical app, and they caused a rift
between political parties and throughout
communities.

20. WhatWouldYouDo?
• I am a large proponent of virtue ethics, so this is an easy
question to answer. First, if I were Dr. Kogan, I would have
never created an unethical app specifically geared towards
Facebook users with the sole intention of manipulating people
and presidential votes.
• Virtue ethics is based on the judgements of people’s inner
lives such as motives, disposition, and character (Banks &
Gallagher, n.d.). Compassion, honesty, fairness, and prudence
are all basic tenets of virtue ethics. These are qualities I hold
near and dear to my heart.
• Whatwouldyouhavedonein
thesecircumstances?Usingethics
theory,explainwhy.

21. WhatIWouldHave
Done
• If I were CEO of Facebook, I would have never allowed an
unethical organization such as Cambridge Analytica to launch
a destructive app such as they did without consent or respect
for people’s mental health and privacy. I also would have had
multiple safeguards in place to prevent an unethical app such
as Cambridge’s from engaging in the harm they participated in
regarding this scandal.
• If I were the CEO of Cambridge Analytica, I would have
deleted the data that was collected, first of all, that my
company collected from Facebook users, especially knowing
there was a clear Facebook violation. However, as CEO of
Cambridge, I would have never accepted this app from Dr.
Kogan because of its unethical intentions.
• Whatwouldyouhavedonein
thesecircumstances?Usingethics
theory,explainwhy.

22. WhatIWouldHave
Done
I believe we have a moral obligation to
uphold people’s rights, to be
compassionate and honest. From a
deontological ethical stance, I would have
ensured that user’s privacy was
safeguarded, that no one could have
accessed user’s profiles, and that consent
was received from each user. I also would
have ensured there were proper
procedures and policies in place to prevent
user’s rights from being violated.
• One of the core principles of
deontology ethics is duty and
morality (Britannica, 2018). In
fact, Kant felt that there was a
clear-cut imperative to uphold
moral laws (Britannica, 2018)

23. Facebook-CambridgeAnalyticaScandal
G o o d E t h i c a l O u t c o m e s
How does it produce a good (ethical)
outcome?
Adhering to virtue and deontology ethics produces an
ethical outcome because one follows important qualities
such as compassion, honesty, prudence, and fairness. A
company who adheres to these ethics will be respected
and trusted.
Why is your preferred course of action
preferable to what was done?
Following virtue ethics and deontology ethics is
preferred because, again, observing moral qualities such
as compassion, honesty, and fairness are assets that
people trust in companies; these are qualities that gain
respect and loyalty.

24. CriticismsofMyDecision
• What are some reasonable
criticisms of the decision you would
take?
• Perhaps some may feel virtue ethics is too fixated on a
person’s character, although I would challenge this
criticism as focusing on our personal character helps us
make sound judgements, build better relationships, and
helps us cope with difficulties better.
• A criticism of deontology ethics may be that it’s simply
too rigid and I may agree with that to an extent. However,
when it comes to running an organization such as
Facebook or any social platform, I believe it is imperative
that policies are strictly adhered to in order gain the
respect, trust, and loyalty from a customer base.

25. HowWouldYouRespond
toCriticism?
• As with all criticisms, I would openly welcome anyone’s
constructive criticisms. I would listen to those critiques, if it
was a valid issue, I would re-evaluate my company or
policies. Listening to criticisms are vital because it validates
people’s feelings, it is respectful, and important, especially
when trying to gain respect and trust.

26. Looktothe
Future!
Looking to the future
What are the implications of this case for
the affected profession?
The consequences of this entire case have
caused many users to delete their
Facebook accounts because of distrust. In
fact, one in ten users deleted their
accounts (Palmer, 2018).
Additionally, there is enormous distrust of
not only Facebook, but many social media
platforms since this scandal occurred.
What lessons can future practitioners learn from this case, so that
better outcomes can be achieved next time a case like this happens
again?
Implementing qualities such as honesty, respect, prudence,
compassion, and fairness are all qualities that future companies
should implement in their organizations in order to prevent unethical
practices.

27. Answering
Questions
Ta k i n g t h e P o s i t i o n

28. StartingtheDiscussion
Choose one question and focus heavily on that question with
three sources from our readings OR choose a mix of questions
and provide three sources of our readings.
F a c e b o o k - C a m b r i d g e A n a l y t i c a S c a n d a l
Questions
This section identifies 3 questions that will be appropriate
prompts for class discussion.
1. How would you regulate social media companies in order
to protect user’s profiles?
2. In what ways has the Facebook-Cambridge scandal
impacted people’s trust in social media platforms?
3. Facebook has taken some measures to protect user’s
privacy. What other measures do you feel Facebook should
implement to protect profiles?

29. WorksCited
References Please see attached Word
outline.

30. Thankyoufor
watching!