Thursday, December 6, 2012

The Ethics of Social Media After Death

There are many questions dealing with what should be done (if anything)  with our online identity when we die. And ,of course, there are many different ethical perspectives we could use to attack these questions. Recently, I've read a New York Times article about life after death. I've also seen a TED talk by Adam Ostrow who also questions if our online identity should live on even long after we're dead.

Some of the questions asked are: "What happens to our online personality after we die? Could it...live on?"(-Adam Ostrow) Should it live on? What should happen to our social media accounts and blogs after we die? Should our families get to be in charge of our internet identities?

The should part is where different answers and perspectives of ethics and right vs.wrong comes into play. To answer Ostrow's question, our online personality can live on. He even says later in the video"But today we're creating this incredibly rich digital archive that's going to live in the cloud indefinitely years after were gone,". But the real questions that need to be asked is should we allow them to live on. Personally, I think its important to preserve these online profiles, but others may not want their life to stay on the web forever.

Many people haven't thought about this topic yet. As Rob Walker says "Not many people have given serious thought to these questions. Maybe that’s partly because what we do online still feels somehow novel and ephemeral, although it really shouldn't anymore. Or maybe it’s because pondering mortality is simply a downer." But, I think people should start taking this topic more seriously.  Most people see these questions as silly topics because its just Facebook, but whats on there Facebook is important. I think Facebook profiles should be memorialized ( along with other sites) because our online profiles are the equivalent of the scrapbooks, photo albums, and diaries we never made in person but are online. Going back to what Adam said, ".. we're creating this incredibly rich digital archive that's going to live in the cloud indefinitely years after were gone," By memorializing we are allowing the option of other loved ones to share pictures of the deceased.  The ability to do this is more amazing than it seems. Before websites were created things were hand written and pictures printed instead of stored on phones. And, although they may seem to be more precious, there made out of material, meaning they will fade and be destroyed. The NY Times article comes across this by saying "Something else happened at the same time: the family realized that a big batch of slides in his grandmother’s possession had faded beyond recognition. Hunt was stunned. 'Memories that were precious to me — not just living them, but after that going back and revisiting them — and now it’s gone,' he recalls. 'I thought: I really need to do something.' ” This makes a valid point that the things we put online(unless deleted) will stay in perfect condition forever.

Think about it; if I were to write out this post instead of typing it,eventually it will fade, but maybe many years from now my grandchildren can stumble across this site, in the pile of trash that is my online identity, and read this very post. It is somewhat of a morbid thought to think about death, but with death comes new life and its cool to think that even though I never met my great grandmother, my great-grand-kids can look at my profiles and get an idea of the person I was and hear about my life without me having to be there to tell them.
Questions like "Should our families get to be in charge of our internet identities? Should it live on?" cant be answered with a general yes or no, these types of questions have different answers for every person because everyone has different morals. The deceased should tell what they ant done to their profiles,  like an addition to their will, because the family may have different opinions. The New York times article talks about a situation where a web pioneer lost her digital legacy due to the family wanting people to remember her for her. But its possible she would have wanted different, the article writes “Her work is her legacy,” one admirer, Rogers Cadenhead, wrote to Harpold’s niece, Melissa Krauskopf, an attorney who served as the personal representative of Harpold’s estate. “I have corresponded with several of Leslie’s friends about her sites all disappearing from the Web. For what it is worth, all of us believe that she would not have wanted that to happen.” There are ways for this to be prevented: there are sites Adam talks about that help you decide what you want done with your personal identity.

In conclusion, even though I believe our identities should be able to live on forever in the cloud, not everyone feels the same way. Everyone has different opinions and views on whats right and whats wrong.