Editing 1390: Research Ethics

{{comic
| number    = 1390
| date      = July 4, 2014
| title     = Research Ethics
| image     = research_ethics.png
| titletext = I mean, it's not like we could just demand to see the code that's governing our lives. What right do we have to poke around in Facebook's private affairs like that?
}}

==Explanation==
This comic references the recent revelation that {{w|Facebook}} engaged in a "{{w|Experimental psychology|psychological experiment}}" by selectively showing users more "positive" or "negative" posts on their news feed and recording the users' comments to see if the change affected the positivity or negativity of their posts. Further experiments have since been revealed [http://online.wsj.com/articles/facebook-experiments-had-few-limits-1404344378 such as one that tested security measures by locking users out of their accounts].

Here, [[Megan]] is commenting on the fact that, while the media is calling this control over what content the user sees "{{w|unethical}}," Facebook, and other companies like {{w|Google}}, must, one way or another, control what content the user sees, whether to present users with a limited selection of all postings, or to tailor ads to particular users; even if the regular algorithms are not set up for psychological experiments, they are still "manipulating" what posts users see or don't see. As Megan points out, no one really knows what the "normal" constraints are of the algorithm which chooses which posts are shown on news feeds. This comic is parodying the strong reaction to what is basically already a common practice.

Accumulation, control and analysis of user-generated information can be a part of the {{w|terms of service}}/{{w|end-user license agreement}} of a Website or software. In such a scenario, the user has effectively signed his/her consent to being part of such research. Unfortunately, most users don't read the terms before clicking the "I agree" option, so it can come as a shock when the service uses the data in a way the user hadn't anticipated.

The title text ironically/sarcastically accepts that Facebook has access to all of its users thoughts through posts and photos, and they can read them for research or other purposes, but contrasts this with a suggestion which likely mirrors how Facebook would respond to such a request that Facebook's code is private and can not be revealed to us. The title text basically appears to be musing that this is backwards, and our personal data should be considered MORE private than Facebook's programming code, which may be proprietary, but is not personal private data.

It is as if your neighbor was spying on you while you left all your shades open, but you felt it to be inappropriate to find out what he knew about you because that's his business.

*In the comic [[743: Infrastructures]] the same issues with Facebook and open source.
*And in [[1150: Instagram]] the subject is again about how users feel used by social networks, this time by {{w|Instagram}}, which is now owned by Facebook.

==Transcript==
:[Megan is facing Cueball and Ponytail.]
:Megan: Facebook shouldn't choose what stuff they show us to conduct unethical psychological research.
:Megan: They should ''only'' make those decisions based on, uh...
:Megan: However they were doing it before.
:Megan: Which was probably ethical, right?

==Trivia==
*The [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/images/archive/a/a3/20140704163127!research_ethics.png original comic image] had a typing mistake. [[Randall]] wrote ''what'' twice in a row - first at the end of the first line and then again at the start of the second line. This is a classic optical illusion - but he got caught in it by himself, because he obviously did not do it on purpose, since he quickly corrected the error and loaded the current version up on xkcd.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Social networking]]