Technological temptation

Technology tempts us. It’s the candy dish that never gets depleted. It’s there for us whenever we want it. But too much sugar can be a bad thing. And it’s the same with technology – the laziness it can induce goes right to the thighs.
Availability of information makes it easier for ethical journalists to ensure accuracy. But it also makes it easier for the unethical to deceive. Do a Google search for “ethics,” and what do you get? The top result is Wikipedia, a Web site that can be edited by anyone, shaped into whatever form the public deems to be truthful and/or ethical. Ironic, isn’t it?
Technology enables us to do with it whatever we like. It can be easy to use it ethically if we have the right intentions and differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources. Technology also needs to be used ethically.
People feel the need to be constantly interconnected and informed. This is good news for media. Online updates and text casting are hugely beneficial for media consumption. The utilization of these technological tools can turn newspapers into a preferred medium. Paper publications won’t be regarded as much as “yesterday’s news” when they can keep people up to date with proper use of technology.
Most of the public thinks newspapers are a "backward" medium that is lagging behind. Public consumption of news via forms of technology requires the understanding that text casts and online updates are not the whole story. If this isn't made clear, it's not ethical because audiences aren't receiving the whole truth. Technology should be used to tell audiences they should look further.
As a copy editor, I love the Internet. LOVE IT. I've saved the paper and reporters great embarrassment many times by using the Internet, my catch-all research tool.
I’ve double-checked Donald Rumsfeld’s middle name against a government Web site when a Washington Post letter had “Donald H. Rumsfeld.” His middle initial is “M,” by the way.
I’ve read “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation” and gone to the humanitarian gazillionaire’s Web site to see the “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.”
Want to know the proper spelling of a medical term not covered by Merriam-Webster? Try the American Medical Association’s Web site. And while you’re there, look up a few peer-reviewed articles that make reference to the term and find out if that Dr. So-and-So in paragraph four actually knows what he’s talking about.
All of these examples show how technology can help us to be more ethical by being accurate.
But this use of technology needs to be ethical. The proper sources need to be used, and the person using the sources needs to have good intention.
Technology has made it easier for members of the boardroom to know more about their target audiences; it shouldn’t be used as an excuse for invading people’s privacy to get their attention.
As an ethical issue, technology falls into the same dichotomy as so many other things we’re told. Look, but don’t touch. Proceed, but with caution.
Technology is there for us to use; it’s that tempting candy dish. But we should use it wisely, use it carefully, use it with others in mind.