The Business Ethics Blog provided a thorough definition of “Business Ethics”. Concluding from that, I think to determine how ethical something is in the business world can be measured on an imaginary scale of how affective is the matter on others in relevance with the company’s profitability. The article Shaw, Cisco to build Wi-Fi super network in major cities on Vancouver Sun exemplifies an ethical issue with its actions to build a super Wi-Fi network that will ultimately inhabit every spot of the Lower Mainland. The company’s profitability comes from the lowered cost of building a wi-fi network instead of a wireless phone network; as well as the potential customers since the service will only be available to Shaw Internet users. On the other hand, with Shaw being the only company that holds this feature, people would be limited to contract only with Shaw in order to enjoy the Wi-Fi network. Also, it would break the somewhat balanced competition between the large wireless carriers. Personally, i think it is not unethical for Shaw to act out of self-interest besides the inconvenience it has brought. Rather, it would bring internet accessing to a brand new and innovative level.
Betty
Just another UBC Blogs site
I’m definitely looking forward to wifi everywhere in Vancouver!!! And I guess this is a good marketing move by Shaw, improving their PR and such, but what is the cost of providing such a service? And how long will it take other companies like Telus or Rogers to catch up and be even more innovative?
Hi! The cost of setting up such a service is around 200~300 million dollars. I think it won’t be long until the other companies to catch up in the race; though I’m not exactly sure how long….. it is a good thing that technology keeps on advancing.
It’s an irresponsible and ethically challenging move by Shaw given the ever increasing electro-smog mankind is exposed to. WHO has announced that non-ionizing radiation is a class 2B carcinogen. Bau-Biologie has set safe limits for indoor exposure to 1 mW/m2 fir non-pulsed radiation and .1mW/m2 for pulsed. We are exceeding these limits by the thousands. Do you give consideration to the people who are electro-hypersensitive, about 5% of the population? Their lives can be made miserable by all this electro-smog. What about a person’s right to choose? There should be public debate regarding this, many more studies, and a cap put on radio-frequency fields. The scientists are already cautioning us on the amount of EMF’s in our everyday lives. Why are we paying no heed?
Hi Sharon,
I think what you said is completely valid and does show another side to the increase of wifi network.