In a recent revelation by The Intercept, Amazon is reportedly developing an in-house messaging application for its employees, and this app might wield the power to ban a multitude of words, with “ethics” being one of them. This list includes terms that might be commonly used by disgruntled employees, such as “union,” “compensation,” and “pay raise.” As per a leaked document scrutinized by The Intercept, one of the features of this forthcoming messaging app is an “automatic word monitor” that could potentially block terms hinting at criticism of Amazon’s labor conditions. Notably, Amazon has a well-documented history of opposing labor unions and has, as per The Intercept’s report, invested significantly in “anti-union consultants.”
The Two Sides of the Coin
On one side of the coin, it’s reasonable to comprehend why a company might be reluctant to provide employees with a tool that enables actions not aligned with the company’s interests. If employees wish to organize or voice grievances, they could utilize their personal email accounts or messaging apps like Signal or Telegram. However, if they intend to utilize an app furnished by the company for internal business purposes to achieve these goals, the company does have some grounds for concern.
On the other side, Amazon’s potential move to forbid these terms raises ethical questions. It could be seen as unscrupulous, if not outright unethical, to prohibit employees from using words that may suggest they are engaged in activities the company disapproves of or that hint at shortcomings in the company’s employment practices.
The Ham-Fisted Nature of the Plan
What strikes one most about this plan is its rather heavy-handed approach. Employing keyword-based censorship seems archaic in an age where we are well aware, as is Amazon, that social media platforms offer much more sophisticated means of influencing people’s behavior. We have already witnessed social media being utilized to manipulate elections and even shape emotions. In comparison, this list of banned words appears almost comically simplistic, akin to Dr. Evil attempting to equip sharks with laser beams. Unions should perhaps be more concerned about employer-provided platforms that don’t overtly ban words but subtly mold user experiences based on the usage of certain terms. If Cambridge Analytica could plausibly attempt to influence a national election in this manner, employers could similarly aim to manipulate the outcome of a unionization vote.
The Perplexing Ban on “Ethics”
The decision to prohibit the word “ethics” is particularly baffling. The ability to openly discuss ethics, values, principles, and a company’s core beliefs is considered fundamental by most scholars and consultants in the realm of business ethics. If employees are unable to engage in these discussions, the likelihood of effectively implementing ethical practices within the company diminishes significantly. It raises the question of whether silencing such essential conversations is the right path for Amazon to tread.
ALSO READ: Ricky Dickson’s Retirement – A Turning Point in Blue Bell Creameries Legacy
In conclusion, Amazon’s potential ban on these words, including “ethics,” in its internal messaging app is a topic of concern and debate. While the company may have legitimate reasons for implementing such restrictions, the ethical implications and the seemingly outdated approach of keyword censorship warrant careful consideration.
