Ethics

I have a habit of "stalking" people I'm interested in on the internet. I'll Google their names for information about their past, ferret out photos of them on Facebook and other sites, and so on. I don't invade their privacy in any real sense, at least insofar as the pictures and information I seek out is publicly available. But I still feel bad about it, and I have this sense that what I'm doing is somehow disrespectful to the person I've become fixated on. (Relatedly, I'm sure that if others found me engaged in such activities, they'd find it at least a little off-putting or creepy.) At the same time, it isn't clear to me that anyone is actually getting hurt by any of this, so I have a hard time explaining my unease in any precise way. Is there anything morally wrong with the sort of thing I've described, and if so, what is it exactly?

Comments

What an interesting situation, perhaps one that is unique, given the advance in technology. In a less technological age, when you had to tap phones or literally follow someone around to observe them, the line between respectful and disrespectful behavior might be clearer. Still, even in cases when a person might use stealth and covertly or even openly follow someone in public, so long as this was not done in a fashion that suggests a threat, the "stalker" may not be breaking any clear moral (or legal) codes. The idea is that when you go out in public, you more or less waive your right to privacy (the right not to be observed, in particular). But when it comes to the internet, it seems that you are only using sites and getting information and pictures that are licit or that people have themselves made public, and thus you are not breaking any privacy rules. So, let's imagine that you never use the information and pictures for any untoward ends (blackmail, extortion, harrasment, voyeurism....) and so there seems no evident harm to those you are "stalking" electronically. There might still remain two things that are "off-putting or creepy>"

First, you may not do any overt harm, but you would be in a better position to do so than if you were not engaged in electronic stalking. You have basically made your objects of study more vulnerable to harm by you. There may be public ways of finding out whether so and so is having an affair or betraying a friend or engaged in immoral or unprofessional conduct. Finding this out puts you in a position of power, whether you like it or not. Once you find that information, the possibility exists of you using it. Second, when people go out in public physically or place information about themselves on the internet, they (we) waive our right to privacy, but I suggest that this is a waiver that has a reasonable limit. When I take a subway, strangers have a right to look at me, but what if one of them develops an obsession with studying my right hand and makes a point of always staring, sketching and photographing or trying to smell my right hand? I don't think we would find this focused attention merely eccentric, but beyond the social contract, so to speak. So, I suggest that while your fixation(s) are not detectable (as in the subway example), they may be like the subway example insofar as none of us in public would invite (or want to tolerate?) the kind of attention you might give us. Actually, this last point might lead to a third: I wager that the people you are studying so closely would not want this, should they ever know about it. So, while you are not violating their actual consent, you are probably acting in ways they would not consent to or invite. (To be frank, I was initially reluctant to reply to your question, as I did not want you to focus on me!). Moreover, if you would not like such attention by a stranger on your life, you have a reason based on the Silver Rule (do not do to others, what you would not like done to yourself) to cease.

Read another response by Charles Taliaferro

Read another response about Ethics