Data Storage Ethics and the Freedom of Information Act
This paper examines the legal, ethical, and social dimensions of a hypothetical scenario in which an information systems design firm is pressured by a government-linked client to deliberately degrade a well-functioning data storage system in order to limit public access to records. Drawing on the Freedom of Information Act, established IT ethics frameworks, and social trust theory, the paper argues that the chief development officer and the design firm should refuse the client's request on all three grounds. Legally, the client is required to maintain accessible records; ethically, restricting information access violates core principles of transparency and public good; and socially, such actions erode the democratic trust that open information systems are designed to sustain.
- Introduction: IT professionals face legal and ethical responsibilities
- Legal Facts: FOIA mandates transparent records for government-linked entities
- Ethical Concerns: Data control raises serious ethical conflicts for IT professionals
- Social Issues: Open information systems sustain democratic social trust
- Conclusion: Design firm should refuse client's request outright
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The hypothetical case study format gives the paper a concrete, applied focus, allowing abstract legal and ethical principles to be grounded in a realistic professional scenario.
- The three-part organizational structure — legal, ethical, social — mirrors standard applied ethics frameworks and demonstrates methodical, disciplined reasoning.
- The paper effectively shows how a single professional dilemma implicates multiple overlapping domains of responsibility, moving from the most concrete (law) to the most abstract (social values).
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied ethical analysis: it takes a specific professional scenario and systematically evaluates it against legal mandates, ethical principles, and social obligations. Rather than treating these as separate silos, the argument builds progressively — establishing illegality first, then showing that the conduct is additionally unethical and socially harmful even where legal liability may be unclear.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction that establishes information systems as a locus of power and responsibility. Three body sections follow, each dedicated to one analytical lens: legal facts (FOIA requirements and liability), ethical concerns (data control, transparency, harm prevention), and social issues (public trust and democratic values). A brief conclusion delivers a clear, actionable recommendation. The structure is tight and logically cumulative, with each section reinforcing the case built by the one before it.
Introduction
Information technology often seems, especially in some of its more mundane business applications, to be about as far removed from areas of legal, ethical, and social concern as is possible. Communication and information, however, are the primary seat of power and decision-making within an organization and in relation to society as a whole. With this in mind, it becomes obvious that information systems and information technology professionals are in many ways the vanguard of ensuring that an organization's actions are legal, ethical, and socially responsible. IT professionals do not have paramount control over most organizations' actions, of course, but there are definitely situations in which these concerns must be taken into consideration.
In the hypothetical case at hand, a start-up system design company landed a contract with a government-linked company to design and implement a new information system. The team did their job too well, in the eyes of the client company's management, who feared that their necessary compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, coupled with easy access to all company information, would not be advantageous. The chief development officer of the design firm was asked to correct the "problems" with the system by limiting the amount of information it could reliably handle, or by making access to the information more time-consuming and difficult — and therefore more costly.
References
Arquilla, J. (2006). "Traces of ourselves: The ethics and politics of databases." Markula Center for Applied Ethics. Accessed 22 April 2010. http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/technology/databases.html
Amoroso, D. (2003). "Social issues in information systems." American Conference on Information Systems. Accessed 22 April 2010. http://galletta.business.pitt.edu/amcis2003/05ITMGT8_SocialIssues.htm
FOIA Update. (1996). Freedom of Information Act. Accessed 22 April 2010. http://www.justice.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_XVII_4/page2.htm
Garson, D., & Garson, G. (1995). Computer technology and social issues. Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing.
Kvamme, E. (2001). "Ethics and technology in the wake of September 11." Markula Center for Applied Ethics. Accessed 22 April 2010. http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/ethicalperspectives/kvamme.html
Worthington, T. (2005). "Ethics and the IT professional." University of Canberra Information Science and Engineering Seminar. Accessed 22 April 2010. http://www.tomw.net.au/2005/ethicsit.html
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.