---
title: "Information ethics"
chunk: 2/3
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_ethics"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:23:24.851455+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

== Censorship ==
Censorship is an issue commonly involved in the discussion of information ethics because it describes the inability to access or express opinions or information based on the belief it is bad for others to view this opinion or information. Sources that are commonly censored include books, articles, speeches, art work, data, music and photos. Censorship can be perceived both as ethical and non-ethical in the field of information ethics.
Those who believe censorship is ethical say the practice prevents readers from being exposed to offensive and objectionable material. Topics such as sexism, racism, homophobia, and anti-semitism are present in public works and are widely seen as unethical in the public eye. There is concern regarding the exposure of these topics to the world, especially the young generation. The Australian Library Journal states proponents for censorship in libraries, the practice of librarians deciphering which books/ resources to keep in their libraries, argue the act of censorship is an ethical way to provide information to the public that is considered morally sound, allowing positive ethics instead of negative ethics to be dispersed. According to the same journal, librarians have an "ethical duty" to protect the minds, particularly young people, of those who read their books through the lens of censorship to prevent the readers from adopting the unethical ideas and behaviors portrayed in the books.
However, others in the field of information ethics argue the practice of censorship is unethical because it fails to provide all available information to the community of readers. British philosopher John Stuart Mill argued censorship is unethical because it goes directly against the moral concept of utilitarianism. Mill believes humans are unable to have true beliefs when information is withheld from the population via censorship and acquiring true beliefs without censorship leads to greater happiness. According to this argument, true beliefs and happiness (of which both concepts are considered ethical) cannot be obtained through the practice of censorship. Librarians and others who disperse information to the public also face the dilemma of the ethics of censorship through the argument that censorship harms students and is morally wrong because they are unable to know the full extent of knowledge available to the world. The debate of information ethics in censorship was highly contested when schools removed information about evolution from libraries and curriculums due to the topic conflicting with religious beliefs. In this case, advocates against ethics in censorship argue it is more ethical to include multiple sources information on a subject, such as creation, to allow the reader to learn and decipher their beliefs.

== Ethics of downloading ==
Illegal downloading has also caused some ethical concerns and raised the question whether digital piracy is equivalent to stealing or not. When asked the question "Is it ethical to download copyrighted music for free?" in a survey, 44 percent of a group of primarily college-aged students responded "Yes."
Christian Barry believes that understanding illegal downloading as equivalent to common theft is problematic, because clear and morally relevant differences can be shown "between stealing someone’s handbag and illegally downloading a television series". On the other hand, he thinks consumers should try to respect intellectual property unless doing so imposes unreasonable cost on them.
In an article titled "Download This Essay: A Defence of Stealing Ebooks", Andrew Forcehimes argues that the way we think about copyrights is inconsistent, because every argument for (physical) public libraries is also an argument for illegally downloading ebooks and every argument against downloading ebooks would also be an argument against libraries. In a reply, Sadulla Karjiker argues that "economically, there is a material difference between permitting public libraries making physical books available and allowing such online distribution of ebooks." Ali Pirhayati has proposed a thought experiment based on a high-tech library to neutralize the magnitude problem (suggested by Karjiker), and justify Forcehimes’ main idea.