Lying in online social networks: a bug or a feature

Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 21 (4):438-451 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Purpose Online social networks can bridge the gap between distant individuals by simulating online experiences that closely resemble physical interactions. While people have positive experiences, such as joy, in a physical relationship and would like to enjoy those experiences online, they also have negative experiences, such as being subject to a lie. An online social network may allow users to lie to simulate a real-world social group better. However, lying must be prevented on social networks as unethical behavior. Thus, this study aims to investigate an ethical dilemma raised due to the two abovementioned perspectives. Design/methodology/approach This paper examines different aspects of lying in social networks, using a comprehensive descriptive literature review approach and a classification scheme. Findings Contrary to their initial intent, social networks are disrupting the traditional notion of human interaction, either by disregarding the presence of dishonesty or by attempting to regulate relationships. In this research, the authors examine the challenges of these two perspectives by identifying enablers, consequences and control measures of lying on social networks at the individual, social and technological levels. The authors also develop a framework to facilitate investigating this dilemma. Originality/value This paper examines a controversial topic. Although lying is unethical, allowing users to lie may be considered an appealing feature of social network platforms. This paper offers a framework to propose several research directions for future studies. This study’s examination focuses on the challenges associated with deception on social networks, prompting the formulation of three crucial questions regarding the potential impact of technology on such behavior.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,682

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Lying, Liars and Language.David Simpson - 1992 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (3):623-639.
Corporate Responsibilities in Internet-Enabled Social Networks.Stephen Chen - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (S4):523 - 536.
Lying, liars and language.David Simpson - 1992 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (3):623-639.
Web 2.0 Social Networks: The Role of Trust.Sonja Grabner-Kräuter - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (S4):505 - 522.
Logging On and Letting Out: Using Online Social Networks to Grieve and to Mourn.Katie Landry & Brian Carroll - 2010 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 30 (5):341-349.
The Distinctive Wrong in Lying.Alan Strudler - 2010 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (2):171-179.
Lying.James Edwin Mahon - 2006 - In D. Borchert (ed.), Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Macmillan Reference. pp. 2--618.
The Freedom to Lie.Dimitris Vardoulakis - 2014 - Philosophy Today 58 (2):141-162.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-07-14

Downloads
16 (#925,932)

6 months
8 (#405,070)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Artificial intelligence and responsibility gaps: what is the problem?Peter Königs - 2022 - Ethics and Information Technology 24 (3):1-11.
What Is Lying.Don Fallis - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy 106 (1):29-56.
Reasons for Meaningful Human Control.Herman Veluwenkamp - 2022 - Ethics and Information Technology 24 (4):1-9.

View all 9 references / Add more references