Our Digital Remains Should be Treated with Same Care and Respect as Physical Remains
Published : 2018-04-17
Author : University of Oxford - Contact: ox.ac.uk
Synopsis* : Our internet activity, commonly referred to as digital remains, lives on long after we die and should be treated with the same care and respect as physical remains.
Digital remains should be treated with the same care and respect as physical remains - Museum-style regulations could prevent firms cashing-in on digital afterlife industry...
From live-streaming funerals to online memorial pages and even chat-bots that use people's social media footprints' to act as online ghosts, the digital afterlife industry (DAI) has become big business.
Our internet activity, commonly referred to as digital remains, lives on long after we die.
In recent years, as firms such as Facebook and experimental start-ups have sought to monetize this content by allowing people to socialise with the dead online, the boundaries around acceptable afterlife activity and grief exploitation, have become increasingly blurry.
Person using laptop computer, pink roses on left side of table with white tea cup and saucer
To date, there has been little effort to build frameworks that ensure ethical usage of digital remains for commercial purposes. However, new research from the Oxford Internet Institute (OII) suggests that the guidelines used to manage human remains in archaeological exhibitions could be used as a framework to regulate the growing industry and make the commercial use of digital remains more ethical.
The study, published in Nature, was conducted by Professor Luciano Floridi, Professor of Philosophy and Ethics of Information and Director of the Digital Ethics Lab, and Carl Öhman, a postdoctoral researcher at OII, advises that online remains should be viewed in the same way as the physical human body, and treated with care and respect rather than manipulated for commercial gain.
The paper suggests that regulation is the best way to achieve this and highlights the frameworks used to regulate commercial use of organic human remains as a good model to build on.
A document of particular interest is the International Council of Museums (ICOM) Code of Professional Ethics.
The text cautions that human remains must be handled in accordance with their inviolable 'human dignity'. Central to this concept is the fact that it applies regardless of whether the patient is aware or not - to individuals and groups alike. A factor that has proven key to the process of repatriating remains from marginalised and previously colonised groups, such as the First Nations.
The code states explicitly that human dignity requires that digital remains be seen as the informational corpses of the deceased and regarded as having inherent value. They therefore must not be used solely for commercial gains such as profit.
Carl Öhman Commented
'Much like digital remains, archaeological and medical exhibit objects such as bones and organic body parts, are both displayed for the living to consume and difficult to allocate to a specific owner. As exhibits have become increasingly digitalised and made available online, the ethical concerns of the field appear to be increasingly merging with those of the digital afterlife industry.'
'The fact that these frameworks have proved effective is heartening and suggests that they could also be used in the same way for the DAI.'
Adopting a similar regulatory approach for the DAI would clarify the relationship between deceased individuals and the firms holding or displaying their data.
In recommending a framework for regulation the paper identifies four Digital Afterlife industries; information management services, posthumous messaging services, online memorial services and re-creation services - which use a person's digital footprint to generate new messages replicating the online behaviour of the deceased.
While this service has yet to be adopted by mainstream technology giants, such as Facebook and Twitter, the paper finds that the services provide the highest level of online presence post-mortem. It is therefore both at risk of exploiting the grief of the loved ones of the deceased and the greatest threat to an individual's afterlife privacy.
Professor Luciana Floridi, Said
'Human remains are not meant to be consumed by the morbidly curious. Regardless of whether they are the sole legal owner of the deceased's data - and irrespective of whether the opinion of their next of kin, with regulation, DAI firms would have to abide by certain conventions, such as, preventing hate speech and the commercial exploitation of memorialised profiles'.
Under these regulations, firms would be required to at the very least guarantee that consumers are informed on how their data may be used or displayed in the event of their death.
Professor Floridi Added
'In developing a constructive ethical approach for the use of digital remains the first step is to decide to what extent, and under what circumstances, our memory of the deceased is driven and shaped by the commercial interests of the industry. The second and equally important step will be to develop a regulatory framework, commonly adopted, to ensure dignity for those who are remediated and remembered online.'
Our Digital Remains Should be Treated with Same Care and Respect as Physical Remains | University of Oxford (ox.ac.uk). Disabled World makes no warranties or representations in connection therewith. Content may have been edited for style, clarity or length.
You're reading Disabled World. Be sure to check out our homepage for further informative disability news, reviews, disability sports events, exclusive stories and how-tos. You can also find us on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
Related Disability Communication Documents
- 1: Compensation and Kaabil - What's Wrong in a Name? : By bestowing a blind man with hyperability, Sanjay Gupta-directed Kaabil falls in the long list of works that collectively be called compensatory literature.
- 2: I Can't See You - Can You See Me? : Daniel Williams challenges the lack of profile and visibility in the media and fashion industry for people living with visual impairment.
- 3: Conductology: Irish Breakthrough Brings Hope to Kids with Disabilities : Shaun Healy, the first person with severe intellectual disabilities to conduct an orchestra, invented Conductology, a new gesture language for music.
- 4: Do Blind People Characterize Others by Race : What can we learn about that automatic visual processing from people who are unable to see.
- 5: Deaf, Deaf-Blind, Hard of Hearing Domestic Violence Survivors Hotline : CSD, ADWAS and the national coalition are committed to ensuring every deaf, deaf-blind and hard of hearing survivor has access to a deaf advocate who is able to communicate with them directly in American Sign Language.
*Disclaimer: Disabled World provides general information only. Materials presented are in no way meant to be a substitute for professional medical care by a qualified practitioner, nor should they be construed as such. Any 3rd party offering or advertising on disabled-world.com does not constitute endorsement by Disabled World. View our Advertising Policy for further information. Please report outdated or inaccurate information to us.
Journal: Disabled World. Language: English (U.S.). Author: University of Oxford. Electronic Publication Date: 2018-04-17. Title: Our Digital Remains Should be Treated with Same Care and Respect as Physical Remains, Source: <a href=https://www.disabled-world.com/communication/remains.php>Our Digital Remains Should be Treated with Same Care and Respect as Physical Remains</a>. Retrieved 2021-04-16, from https://www.disabled-world.com/communication/remains.php - Reference: DW#210-13403.