Data governance/privacy that has an ethical dilemma

Sample Solution

   

Topic: Facial recognition technology

Position: Against

Quantitative information:

• A 2020 study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that facial recognition algorithms are more likely to misidentify women and people of color.
• A 2021 study by the ACLU of Northern California found that Black people were stopped by police and searched at a rate 95 times higher than white people when facial recognition technology was used.

Full Answer Section

      Qualitative information:

• Facial recognition technology can be used to track and monitor people without their consent. This raised concerns about privacy and civil liberties.
• Facial recognition technology can be used to discriminate against people based on their race, gender, or other characteristics.
• Facial recognition technology can be used to create a mass surveillance state.

Solution: I propose that facial recognition technology should be banned in public spaces. This would help to protect people's privacy and civil liberties. It would also help to prevent facial recognition technology from being used to discriminate against people. Stakeholders:

• Technology companies: Technology companies have a financial interest in promoting the use of facial recognition technology. They would likely oppose a ban on facial recognition technology.
• Government agencies: Government agencies use facial recognition technology for a variety of purposes, such as law enforcement and border security. They would likely oppose a ban on facial recognition technology.
• Civil liberties groups: Civil liberties groups are concerned about the privacy and civil liberties implications of facial recognition technology. They would likely support a ban on facial recognition technology.
• The public: The public is concerned about the potential for facial recognition technology to be used to track and monitor them without their consent. They would likely support a ban on facial recognition technology.

Analysis of what is important to each party and why:

• Technology companies: Technology companies are interested in maximizing profits. They believe that facial recognition technology has the potential to be a lucrative market.
• Government agencies: Government agencies are interested in protecting public safety and national security. They believe that facial recognition technology can help them to achieve these goals.
• Civil liberties groups: Civil liberties groups are interested in protecting people's privacy and civil liberties. They believe that facial recognition technology poses a threat to privacy and civil liberties.
• The public: The public is interested in protecting their privacy and security. They are also concerned about the potential for facial recognition technology to be used to discriminate against them.

How my recommended solution would impact each group:

• Technology companies: A ban on facial recognition technology would have a negative impact on technology companies. It would reduce their revenue and profits.
• Government agencies: A ban on facial recognition technology would have a negative impact on government agencies. It would make it more difficult for them to protect public safety and national security.
• Civil liberties groups: A ban on facial recognition technology would have a positive impact on civil liberties groups. It would help to protect people's privacy and civil liberties.
• The public: A ban on facial recognition technology would have a positive impact on the public. It would protect their privacy and security.

What I could do to influence my stakeholders to adopt my solution: I could try to educate my stakeholders about the privacy and civil liberties implications of facial recognition technology. I could also try to build a coalition of supporters for a ban on facial recognition technology. This coalition could include civil liberties groups, privacy advocates, and concerned citizens. I could also try to lobby my elected officials to support a ban on facial recognition technology. I could also try to raise public awareness of the issue and generate public support for a ban on facial recognition technology. I believe that a ban on facial recognition technology is the best way to protect people's privacy and civil liberties. It is also the best way to prevent facial recognition technology from being used to discriminate against people.