Analytical Framework Analysis
Remember! This is just a sample.
You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.Get custom essay
96 writers online
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is probably considered one of the most prestigious universities within the United States. It is listed as #3 on U.S.New’s greatest faculties. You can imagine my surprise after I read an article from The New Yorker highlighting the newest scandal involving MIT’s media lab. In reading this text, I discovered that MIT’s media lab accepted donations from Jeffrey Epstein, who is a convicted intercourse offender. Not solely did the Media lab settle for donations from Epstein, they, in flip, but also listed the donations as nameless from the organization and the public (Farrow, 2019).
The Lab’s Director Ito was conscious that Epstein was listed as a disqualified donor in MIT’s database and he continued to just accept donations and consulted with him on the usage of the funds (Farrow, 2019).
The whole Media lab staff had been aware of Epstein’s donations, as multiple emails documented that the Epstein donations ought to be labeled as anonymous.
Epstein visited the Media lab on a quantity of events for conferences with Ito. An article in The New Yorker dropped at light the truth relating to the donations and the function the senior management played in hiding the truth.
MIT’s media lab actions introduced numerous ethical issues. The lab Director Ito documented his conferences with Epstein as VIP or J.E. on his calendar as numerous individuals had entry to his calendar. Ito did not need everybody to know he was meeting with Epstein to discuss donations and using the funds (Farrow, 2019). Ito also directed his workers to make certain that Epstein’s donations had been nameless. While this is a widespread practice for some donors, the explanation behind Ito’s request was as a outcome of Epstein’s conviction as a intercourse offender and that he was listed as a disqualified donor. MIT’s mission statement, which may be discovered on the MIT web site, states “We search to develop every member of the MIT neighborhood the power and keenness to work properly, creatively, and effectively for the betterment of humankind”. Ito’s actions went towards MIT’s code of ethics. Accepting donations from a convicted sex offender is in violation of IS Principles 2 – Code of Ethics. Allowing Epstein to fulfill with Ito in an office full of females proposed a series of moral dilemmas. Ito was also not honest about his relationship with Epstein. He claimed that the lab acquired donations from foundations that Epstein managed, when in fact he had met with Epstein on numerous events (Farrow, 2019). When Epstein arrived for conferences, he was accompanied by two ladies. The workers members within the office have been worried concerning the well-being of these girls due to Epstein’s convictions (Farrow, 2019). The dilemma of accepting donations from a disqualified donor not solely goes against the code of ethics, however it also goes against the policies MIT has carried out. In MIT’s employment policy which may be discovered on MIT’s website, there is a section on dishonesty and states “Dishonesty is grounds for serious disciplinary action, as a lot as and together with discharge”. Ito didn’t act honestly in hiding these meetings from the organization and asking his employees to cowl them up.
The MIT Media Lab’s mission is to “create applied sciences to make our lives safer, cleaner, more healthy, fairer, and extra productive”. Accepting donations from Epstein has tarnished the lab’s status and the great work that has been done so far. The IS Principle 30 states “A charitable organization ought to undertake clear policies, primarily based on its particular exempt purpose, to determine whether or not accepting a present would compromise its ethics, monetary circumstances, program focus, or different interests” (IS Principles, pg 40). Ito ought to have realized the ethical dilemma he would place the Media Lab in when accepting donations from Epstein. MIT is a prestigious university and the Media Lab turned its backs on doing the best thing. Arwa Mboya wrote a column in August of 2019, prior to the New Yorker article, requesting Joi Ito to resign. She was a scholar at MIT and was appalled by the actions taken by Ito. Mboya acknowledged, “I am calling for the immediate resignation of MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito due to his deep connections with Epstein, his lack of leadership explaining involvement, and the shortage of transparency about the extent of his interactions with Epstein.” (Mboya, 2019). When reviewing IS Principle 30 – Ito was unethical in taking donations from Epstein because it compromised the Media Lab’s ethics. Ethan Zukerman leads the Center for Civic Media and in gentle of this scandal, has decided they received’t work with the Media Lab (Mboya, 2019). The Media Lab’s involvement with Epstein has set off a sequence response that may diminish the advances they’ve made in know-how. It will take the lab quite a while to gain the public’s trust back.
When referencing the analytical framework, I perceived that Ito’s decision-making was based on a consequentialist framework. Ito’s aim was to lift cash for the Media Lab to find a way to proceed with research. Ito’s determination to work with Epstein impacted the staff, college students, and research of the lab. Ito was well known in his field and the Media Lab is liable for the disobedience award. The award honored the ladies who started the Me Too movement. As a female, I cannot think about working for an institution that enables a intercourse offender to walk the halls. In Mboya’s column, she additionally acknowledged that an worker was requested to ship a Disobedience award to Epstein. Ito was not only unethical in his dealings, he was also hypocritical. Ito’s general aim was to obtain funds however, he lacked the essential sense of what’s right. He selected to disregard the women and girls that suffered from Epstein’s habits. The appearance of impropriety is due to the reality that Ito was not clear in his dealings with Epstein. When you consider the lengths Ito took to keep his relationship with Epstein private, one may assume that there was a personal connection there. IS Principle 3 – Conflict of interest highlights that senior management must act within the organization’s finest interest somewhat than their own private curiosity. When the Media Lab raised the cash it succeeded, and in turn, Ito turned extra profitable. Ito prioritized the financial value of the donations over what Epstein stood for as an individual. He ignored the mission behind his lab and jeopardized its popularity for years to come back.
It is my perception that Ito and the Media Lab (as nicely as MIT as an organization) shouldn’t have taken Epstein’s donation. The media lab violated MIT’s code of ethics by working with a disqualified donor. The Media Lab’s and MIT’s name will now be related to a sex offender. With every passing day, the Media Lab is beneath media scrutiny and various stories are being dropped at the light of the unethical practices within the lab. Another interesting cavoite on this story is that the Whistleblower’s that came ahead to Farrow from The New Yorker additionally gave this data to the NYTimes. However, the times did not go into details concerning Ito’s relationship with Epstein. This could be due to the reality that Ito was on the Board of Directors for the NYTimes (he has since resigned). This is a prime example of the competing pursuits that surrounded the Ito/Epstein scandal.
While Ito played a big position on this scandal, he is not alone. Ito’s actions mirror that of men in high power, who believe they will do no matter they need, without going through any repercussions. “Neither honesty nor integrity must be abandoned for personal positive aspects or to realize an advantage in any situation” (Gough Jr., 2013). The culture over time has been to cowl up the wrongdoings of highly effective males. I was most impressed by Arwa Mboya’s column and her decision to talk out on the actions taken by Ito. Once the article by Farrow was released, Ito resigned. It just isn’t sufficient. This scandal ought to be an instance to all men in power as a tale of warning. It is my hope that Ito’s relationship with Epstein is investigated by MIT to see if there was any personal acquire from Ito’s relationship. Institutions across the United States must hold their executives accountable for his or her moral wrongdoings.