Companies Using Values For Ill Intents ​

In the lecture today, we saw how Airbnb, despite creating a very detailed table for their stakeholders, most likely in an intentional way, left out how the app actually impacted the community in areas like New York but instead discussed how they were lowering carbon emissions and that alone is how they impact the community.

I feel like this way of misusing value-sensitive approaches to cover up some of the questionable impacts a company has on the world around them is not one of a thing, but a reoccurring problem.

One example is the notion of 'carbon footprint'. Analyzed in isolation, that framework seems like a good idea to measure how each individual impacts nature and how they can act to be more nature-friendly. However, it is quite shocking to learn that the term was popularized by BP in an ad campaign, most likely to divert the blame for environmental damage from big companies, who are actually responsible for the majority of the damage, to individuals.

I feel like, for this reason, it is very important to analyze the meaning and intent of every statement from a company, no matter how "value-sensitive" it might seem. Maybe this is where analyzing with an impact case might be helpful, to see if there is actual good intent between actions.