QUESTION OF THE WEEK NO. 9
The Food & Drug Administration has required
all advertisements for prescription drugs to list possible side effects. Should the Federal Trade Commission require
all advertisements for “smart devices” to list possible privacy and security
risks?
No, I think that the FTC should not require this. I think it would make sense for this information to be listed somewhere for a customer to read before that customer actually purchases a "smart device," but not necessarily in advertisements. I also think that perhaps it would make sense for the most significant privacy and security risks to be listed in advertisements. This wouldn't necessarily include all risks. I think that this would be beneficial to consumers.
ReplyDeleteNo, I think there is a difference between possible health risks and security risks. People who need medications might not have much of a choice if they need it or not and should be aware of what can happen to them. People do not "need" to buy a smart device they just might want to. I think people should be able to access a list of privacy risks, but I don't think companies should be required to do so.
ReplyDeleteNo, I think that these risks should be available somewhere for customers, but the FTC need not be responsible for providing it in advertisements. We choose whether or not to purchase these new devices as they emerge, and we are responsible for doing our own background research before buying. Many people who take advertised medications do so because they need to in order to be able to function normally throughout their day. They have much less choice in whether or not they wish to buy these medications, it is more of a necessity for them.
ReplyDeleteNo, however, I think that the risks should be available to customers. The is a big difference between something that could be harmful for your health and something that is maybe invading someones privacy. I do think that is is important to know the risks one is taking when they buy a smart device but I don't think that it needs to be monitored by the FTC. Like what Zoey and Molly said, taking medication is much less of a choice than buying a smart device.
ReplyDeleteNo, although I do agree with the idea that the privacy risks/concerns should be available to consumers in some fashion, maybe on the packaging or the website. The difference between prescription drug advertisements and smart device advertisements is that prescription drug side effects need to be known ahead of time because the consumer might not have an alternative, and ultimately the effects depend on the individual consumer's health status. Contrasted with smart devices, where the risk comes from third-parties, who can potentially breach security in a myriad of ways. There are a number of ways we can protect ourselves, but knowing about every single way a smart device is vulnerable to hacking isn't necessary to take reasonable efforts to protect ones privacy.
ReplyDeleteThe Federal Trade Commission should not require all advertisements for “smart devices” to list possible privacy and security risks. I like the ideology behind informing the consumer, but I don’t think that an advertisement should be the medium for this transparency. Advertisements are short and cannot go in depth. The important information will be skimmed over. If the advertisement is too long, the consumer may check out or not watch it. I do think that if a device is bought, the risks should be made clear and gone over during the sale (not just paperwork to skim over). Maybe something that should be included in advertisements is that it is a “smart device.” Maybe that term should be connected to every name of every “smart device.”
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not think putting privacy information in advertisements is a perfect solution, if this law were on the table, I would support it.
ReplyDeleteThe current state of affairs is that companies have no desire, requirement, or even a good way to report privacy information. Having some kind of required way to post this information would force engineers to think about this information as well as ensuring consumers are as educated as they can be.
No, I do not believe that all advertisements should list potential privacy risks in advertisements. An individual's usage of a "smart device" is not imperative in the same way certain medications are; some medications are required to live a functional life whereas "smart devices" are not. In a way, there is an implied risk in purchasing a "smart device" e.g. I know that there is a chance my computer may be hacked, and I still continue to use it. I do not have to use a computer, but I choose to.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, an argument may be made that "smart devices" will become as imperative to live a functional life as medication. We live in a digital age, and we are progressing to an even more digitized age. While that is true, my health and well-being does not depend on "smart devices." Additionally, the side-effects of medication are very different from privacy concerns. Side-effects of medication directly harms your body, and "smart devices" pose no direct physical harm. With all this being said, I do believe that there should be a warning in the instruction manual, or a warning on the label of a device that addresses the potential of privacy breaches.
No, I do not believe that such a requirement should be made. I feel that there is a difference between requiring the warnings for medication and the suggested warnings with smart devices because the medication can do direct harm to one's body and privacy risks with smart devices will not do so. This does not mean to say that such risks are not important because they can cause damage to one's life if certain information is made public. I think that companies should post these risks in the manual or on the company's webpage, but not in its advertisements.
ReplyDeleteYes, to a degree. I don't necessarily think that warnings need to be given to the same extent and in the same format that drug warnings are. Drug warnings list virtually every possible thing that could happen to you while taking this drug, ranging from hiccups to death. I don't know that it's necessary or even possible to likewise list every single potential security risk associated with a product. But I do think that applying the general principle of warning consumers is a step in the right direction. I think companies should be required to advertise common threats to security, such as hacking, and explain how to activate the product's security features that will protect them from this threat. Requiring such warnings would tighten security because it forces technology producing companies to be more accountable to the public.
ReplyDeleteNo I don't think this should be mandated at a federal level. But think of this-we have our three sources of regulation. If the goal is to let the market choose which products are safe and which are not, thus incentivizing businesses to tackle safety issues on their own dime in order to win the hearts of consumers, then the consumers must be informed as possible. So in this ideal situation, where the consumers select the best products and the ones with security threats die out, I can see where you would make the argument that disclosing this information should be mandatory. In the same strain, however, if the industry is to regulate itself using the same method of consumer selection, then it should have incentive to publish this information, and especially for a particular company to compare its lack of threats to another company's abundance as part of their marketing strategy. In the third case of government regulation of privacy concerns among the IoT, if the minutia of desired regulation for the issues we talked about in class like disclosure of information collected and the ways in which it is used are solidified, then this FDA type warning may be entirely unnecessary. Going back to the example of cars, because the government is able to mandate certain safety features in detail, you don't need to see a message that says “driving a car can lead in some cases to fatality” at the end of every Chevy commercial.
ReplyDeleteIt would be a good thing for people to know. Since smart devices and the Internet of Things threaten to further undermine privacy, it would serve the average consumer well to list some of the potential risks involved with ownership of these devices. The decision of whether to purchase one or not is left up to individual discretion.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this is necessary at all, but I would support it simply because I have a strong hatred of advertising and I will support anything that makes it more expensive and regulated. I doubt this kind of legislation would really do anything except make advertising more expensive. It is the same issue with the side effects disclaimers in that anyone smart enough to listen to the side effects would probably look them up before taking the drugs anyway, and people who don't care just don't care.
ReplyDeleteNo. Privacy concerns aren't likely to vary from phone to phone, while drug side effects vary wildly. And in the United States, the burden of protecting your privacy is largely borne by individuals; meanwhile, it is the responsibility of companies that produce food and/or pharmaceuticals to declare possible safety concerns. The two groups aren't really comparable.
ReplyDeleteNo, I believe companies should feel free to talk about security features but there are so many potential security risks that you couldn't possibly name them. It's like a car, you can list all the safety features it has but you couldn't possibly list all the things that could potentially go wrong with it. You can't predict what can go wrong with things, only prepare for them.
ReplyDeleteYes,
ReplyDeleteHowever, I’m on both sides of the coin for this one. On one hand, I don’t like that the internet of things is going to pose a lot of everyday privacy concerns. On the other hand, I am tired of every child’s toy posting a choking hazard and every commercial simply being a list of side-effects. At some point people need to take responsibility for using devices smartly, and safely. But at the same time, there are many scenarios where you wouldn’t even think to have your guard up. I especially like the idea of there being a website where developers of new products will publish what bids of information are collected and how that’s used.