A Digital Communication Handbook for the Central Intelligence Agency

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

The Purpose of the Manual
Laws and Regulations
Ethical Guidelines
Case Study
References

The Purpose of the Manual

The handbook’s purpose is to demonstrate the laws and ethics that govern communication in digital and mediated situations. It was created to instruct the CIA staff on how to communicate ethically and legally in the digital age. The digital communication handbook contains three major sections: laws and regulations, ethical guidelines, and case analysis. The manual will investigate issues in digital communication for their legal and ethical consequences, as well as the impact of major legal cases and First Amendment applications on rules regulating interaction in a digital world.

Laws and Regulations

The First Amendment

The First Amendment protects American residents and businesses from government speech restrictions. The well-known examples that the First Amendment protects are hate speech, misinformation, and pornography (Nott & Peters, n. d.). Nevertheless, suppose a social networking site is discovered to host messages and content that may be accountable for encouraging and supporting terrorist activities or terrorist groups. In that case, it may be prosecuted (Segado-Boj & Díaz-Campo, 2020). Privacy is a basic right being impacted by digital and social technologies. Using personal information is one of the difficulties because digital technologies enable platforms and service providers to collect and analyze a wide range of data on their users.

Landmark Court Cases

The landmark cases have had an ongoing impact on laws and future issues. For instance, the United States v. Anderson (2014) was related to the digital alteration of a picture of a minor’s face onto an adult having sex (Moore et al., 2022). George Anderson filed an appeal against his sentence and conviction for two counts of child sex trafficking. During the trial, the government’s case proved that Anderson induced two minor female prostitutes. The defendant maintained that no actual kid was sexually abused and referenced the First Amendment’s Free Speech Coalition. The federal appeals court held that modified images are the same as child pornography because they are minors’ records of harmful sexual exploitation (Moore et al., 2022). Hence, the court upheld Anderson’s punishment and conviction.

The second significant example of a landmark court case is Fort Wayne Books v. Indiana (1989). The Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) law successfully resolved interstate pornography possession and distribution (Wiggins, 2022). The owner of an adult bookshop was charged with distributing obscene material, including videos and books, violating Indiana law (Wiggins, 2022). The Indiana Supreme Court determined in a RICO trial that the pretrial seizure of allegedly obscene books and DVDs violated the First Amendment and required prior restraint. The defendant challenged the statute because it enabled the seizure of his whole inventory, which was illegal (Moore et al., 2022). As a result, the Court confirmed that his assets could not be seized unless the accurate protections given in Freedman v. Maryland and other cases applied did not abolish the legislation.

Content and Messaging Changes

The most assertive legal procedures are those that safeguard children from cybercrime. The Eighth Circuit helped to strengthen and empower citizens to report any situations involving morphed child pornography because they create reputational damage (Steinberg, 2019). The law provides substantial redress for child pornographic victims (Federman, 2021). Because they can be punished and jailed for reputational injury, the ruling impacts future digital communication regarding morphing child pornography.

The verdict in Fort Wayne Books v. Indiana (1989) aided the empowerment and strengthening of governments in controlling the transmission of information to citizens for responsibility and checks. Bookstore owners should be legally required to provide materials that enhance modern community value (Moore et al., 2022). A lawful state obscenity law’s culmination is the prevention of selling obscene publications or media.

Best Legal Practices

The power of digital communication may be beneficial. It can, nevertheless, lead to the downfall of any individual or corporation. As a result, several best practices may help the digital platform user create digital messages and other communication material for their company. Firstly, in order to keep a sense of morality in digital activities, one should avoid distributing or sharing sexually explicit materials on internet networks. Secondly, a person must develop messages that do not hurt or have a harmful influence on people in their near surroundings, particularly kids. Finally, as a best legal practice, it is critical to assess messages before publishing to avoid being viewed as offensive and failing to satisfy contemporary cultural norms.

Ethical Guidelines

Professional Codes of Ethics

Organizations create ethical rules for their employees and the broader public. The moral standards of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) will be reviewed. The PRSA was selected because it claims to be a leader in digital interactions and public affairs in the United States (PRSA Code of Ethics, 2022). The ethical standards of the PRSA are based on advocacy, integrity, professionalism, freedom, dedication, and justice.

According to the SPJ, public access to information is the most crucial part of justice and the cornerstone of a democratic society (SPJ, 2020). The SJP was selected because they believe public understanding is vital to justice and the cornerstone of a democratic society. The critical ethical principles are seeking the truth, preventing harm, acting independently, and accepting responsibility. All obligations must be kept, and documentation must be amended to reflect the real picture. People should be treated with dignity, and conflicts of interest must be avoided to behave freely. It is vital to justify good actions and admit mistakes while working to fix them.

Common Themes

While there are many differences between these two codes’ approaches to ethics, they have a lot in common. Transparency, error accountability, and the free flow of knowledge are prominent themes. Though these rights differ, integrity and a duty to the customer or the subject of an article are shared. The PRSA primarily protects the client’s money and personal information, whereas the SPJ protects individual rights. Both need honesty and accuracy in engagement, the disclosure of all interests and ads, and the avoidance of competing interests and extortion.

Ethical Guideline

The ethical guideline was constructed using these common patterns as a foundation for the concepts. The first principle is to stay truthful, not just about the facts on which an individual’s interactions are based, but also about their intentions and ambitions. The second is to create creative works based on one’s honest understanding of the subject matter’s truth and proof, without regard for monetary or other rewards. Finally, never limit the spread of information, but be aware that doing so may result in errors, and actively try to correct any that arise not just professionally but also as soon as possible with recognition.

Best Ethical Practices

When developing digital messages, firm personnel should adhere to the highest ethical standards. For instance, it is critical not to utilize work email or expose sensitive information that might affect the organization’s reputation. The second step is to be trustworthy and respectful. Employees should also follow copyright regulations and avoid posting discriminating or harassing content. They should communicate openly while being professional. The cornerstone of all communications should be truthfulness, including clarity in the term truth. Never limit the spread of information, but be aware that doing so may result in errors, and actively try to correct any that arise.

Case Study

Google in China: When ‘Don’t Be Evil’ Met the Great Firewall

In this scenario, Google in China: When ‘Don’t Be Evil’ Met the Great Firewall is pertinent. This case demonstrates the complicated and ongoing issue surrounding Google’s operations in China (Bergen, 2018). The government censors and requires the concealment or removal of postings, articles, and other communications relating to illegal topics such as free speech, sex, and political opponents. Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, argues that the corporation should submit to China’s government and operate on its terms, even if it appears immoral (Bergen, 2018). Employees have begun to resign; when word of this began circulating, management denied it (Bergen, 2018). Nevertheless, an audience member at one meeting began reporting Pichai’s remarks to New York Times reporter Kate Conger.

Existing Communication Laws

It is inadmissible when corporations and governments collaborate to deny citizens their fundamental and inalienable right to knowledge. This decision has far-reaching repercussions for everyone, not just China, regarding information openness, Internet freedom, interaction, and digital ethics. If Google does this, it will set a massive precedent for many other companies who want to do business in China while bypassing Chinese regulations. The Chinese government’s achievement in creating the world’s largest censored search engine sends a message that protesting and fighting for rights is worthless.

References

Bergen, M. (2018). Google in China: When ‘don’t be evil’ met the great firewall. Bloomberg. Web.

Federman, C. (2021). Varieties of censorship: Hate speech, pornography, and the First Amendment. First Amendment Studies, 55(2), 126-147. Web.

Moore, R. L., Murray, M. D., Youm, K. H., & Farrell, M. (2022). Media law and ethics (6th ed.). Routledge.

Nott, L. & Peters, B. (n.d.). Free expression on social media. Freedom Forum. Web.

PRSA Code of Ethics. (2022). PRSA. Web.

Segado-Boj, F. & Díaz-Campo, J. (2020). Social media and its intersections with free speech, freedom of information and privacy. An analysis, Icono 14, 18(1), 231-255. Web.

SPJ. (2020). SPJ Code of Ethics – Society of Professional Journalists. Spj.org. Web.

Steinberg, S. B. (2019). Changing Faces: Morphed child pornography images and the First Amendment. Emory Law Journal, 68(909), 910-937. Web.

Wiggins, C. (2022). Fort Wayne books, Inc. v. Indiana. The First Amendment Encyclopedia. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!