Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2025, Issue: 37, 118 - 134, 15.10.2025
https://doi.org/10.35415/sirnakifd.1707624

Abstract

References

  • Capurro, Rafael. “Towards an Ontological Foundation of Information Ethics.” Ethics and Information Technology 8/4 (2006), 175–186.
  • Cooper, A. Feder, Emanuel Moss, Benjamin Laufer and Helen Nissenbaum. “Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility and Robustness in Machine Learning.” 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, (2022), 864–876.
  • Couldry, Nick and Ulises A. Mejias. The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2019.
  • Floridi, Luciano. The Ethics of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
  • Inness, Julie C. Privacy. Intimacy and Isolation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  • Kopuz, Tuba, Yiğit Emrah Turgut and Alper Aslan. “Sharenting: Kavramsal Bir Çözümleme”. Intermedia International E-Journal 9, No. 17 (2022), 379-390.
  • Lyon, David. Surveillance Society. McGraw-Hill Education: UK, 2001.
  • Martin, Kirsten and Helen Nissenbaum. “Measuring Privacy: Using Context to Expose Confounding Variables.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015.
  • Mathiesen, Thomas. “The Viewer Society: Michel Foucault's ‘Panopticon’ Revisited.” Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), (1997): 215–234.
  • Mittelstadt, Brent. “From Individual to Group Privacy in Big Data Analytics.” Philosophy & Technology 30 (2017), 475–494.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. “Privacy as Contextual Integrity.” Washington Law Review 79/1 (2004), 119–157.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.
  • Öztürk, Şerife. “Sosyal Medyada Etik Sorunlar.” Selçuk İletişim 9/1 (2015), 287–311.
  • Pastor-Escuredo, Diego and Rodrigo Vinuesa. “Towards an Ethical Framework in the Complex Digital Era.” arXiv Preprint, 2020.
  • Romero-Ruiz, Carmen et al. “Information and Communication Technologies Impact on Family Relationship.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237 (2017), 30–37.
  • Stern, M. J. and C. Messer. “How Family Members Stay in Touch: A Quantitative Investigation of Core Family Networks.” Marriage & Family Review 45/6–8 (2009), 654- 676.
  • Tadpatrikar, A. et al. “Influence of Technology Usage on Family Communication Patterns and Functioning: A Systematic Review.” Asian Journal of Psychiatry 58 (2021), 102595.
  • Westin, Alan F. Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum, 1967.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. “Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization.” Organizational Theory 3 (2022), 1–78.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.

Aile Mahremiyetinin Dönüşümü: Floridi ve Nissenbaum'un Dijital Etik Üzerine Görüşleri

Year 2025, Issue: 37, 118 - 134, 15.10.2025
https://doi.org/10.35415/sirnakifd.1707624

Abstract

Bu çalışma, dijital çağda mahremiyetin dönüşümünü aile yapısı bağlamında etik bir perspektiften ele almaktadır. Dijital teknolojilerin yaygınlaşmasıyla birlikte gizlilik, sabit ve korunan bir alan olmaktan çıkarak bağlama göre şekillenen, geçirgen ve kırılgan bir yapıya dönüşmüştür. Özellikle sosyal medya platformları, aile mahremiyetini bozarak özel hayatın sınırlarını bulanıklaştırmış ve aile üyelerinin sürekli görünür ve izlenebilir hale gelmesine neden olmuştur. Bu çalışma, dijital çağın normatif değerleri ile aile içi gizlilik arasındaki gerilimi hem kavramsal hem de teorik düzeyde incelemektedir.
Yöntem olarak teorik analiz benimsenmiş ve Luciano Floridi'nin “bilgi etiği” ve Helen Nissenbaum'un “bağlamsal bütünlük” teorileri temel teorik çerçeve olarak kullanılmıştır. Floridi, bireyi dijital evrende bir “bilgi varlığı” olarak tanımlar ve mahremiyeti varoluşun etik bir alanı olarak değerlendirir. Nissenbaum ise mahremiyeti, sosyal bağlamda bilginin uygun şekilde aktarılmasıyla ilgili normlara dayalı bir bütünlük sorunu olarak ele alır.
Literatürde dijital mahremiyet genellikle bireysel mahremiyet, veri güvenliği veya kullanıcı davranışı açısından tartışılmaktadır. Ancak, dijitalleşme bağlamında aile yapısı içinde mahremiyetin etik teorilerle değerlendirilmesi sınırlı bir alandır. Bu çalışma, dijital etik teorilerini diğer ilgili disiplinlerle bütünleştiren disiplinlerarası bir yaklaşım benimseyerek bu boşluğu doldurmayı amaçlamaktadır.
Sonuç olarak, dijital çağda aile mahremiyeti, yalnızca korunması gereken bir değer değil aynı zamanda yeni dijital etik normların ve sosyal sorumluluğun acilen oluşturulmasını gerektiren aktif ve tartışmalı bir varlık alanıdır.

References

  • Capurro, Rafael. “Towards an Ontological Foundation of Information Ethics.” Ethics and Information Technology 8/4 (2006), 175–186.
  • Cooper, A. Feder, Emanuel Moss, Benjamin Laufer and Helen Nissenbaum. “Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility and Robustness in Machine Learning.” 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, (2022), 864–876.
  • Couldry, Nick and Ulises A. Mejias. The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2019.
  • Floridi, Luciano. The Ethics of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
  • Inness, Julie C. Privacy. Intimacy and Isolation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  • Kopuz, Tuba, Yiğit Emrah Turgut and Alper Aslan. “Sharenting: Kavramsal Bir Çözümleme”. Intermedia International E-Journal 9, No. 17 (2022), 379-390.
  • Lyon, David. Surveillance Society. McGraw-Hill Education: UK, 2001.
  • Martin, Kirsten and Helen Nissenbaum. “Measuring Privacy: Using Context to Expose Confounding Variables.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015.
  • Mathiesen, Thomas. “The Viewer Society: Michel Foucault's ‘Panopticon’ Revisited.” Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), (1997): 215–234.
  • Mittelstadt, Brent. “From Individual to Group Privacy in Big Data Analytics.” Philosophy & Technology 30 (2017), 475–494.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. “Privacy as Contextual Integrity.” Washington Law Review 79/1 (2004), 119–157.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.
  • Öztürk, Şerife. “Sosyal Medyada Etik Sorunlar.” Selçuk İletişim 9/1 (2015), 287–311.
  • Pastor-Escuredo, Diego and Rodrigo Vinuesa. “Towards an Ethical Framework in the Complex Digital Era.” arXiv Preprint, 2020.
  • Romero-Ruiz, Carmen et al. “Information and Communication Technologies Impact on Family Relationship.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237 (2017), 30–37.
  • Stern, M. J. and C. Messer. “How Family Members Stay in Touch: A Quantitative Investigation of Core Family Networks.” Marriage & Family Review 45/6–8 (2009), 654- 676.
  • Tadpatrikar, A. et al. “Influence of Technology Usage on Family Communication Patterns and Functioning: A Systematic Review.” Asian Journal of Psychiatry 58 (2021), 102595.
  • Westin, Alan F. Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum, 1967.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. “Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization.” Organizational Theory 3 (2022), 1–78.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.

Transforming Family Privacy: Floridi and Nissenbaum on Digital Ethics

Year 2025, Issue: 37, 118 - 134, 15.10.2025
https://doi.org/10.35415/sirnakifd.1707624

Abstract

This study uniquely focuses on the transformation of privacy in the digital age from an ethical perspective within the context of family structure. With the widespread use of digital technologies, privacy has evolved from a fixed and protected space to a structure that is shaped by context, permeable, and fragile. Social media platforms, in particular, have disrupted family privacy, blurring the boundaries between private life and public visibility, rendering family members constantly visible and traceable. The study explores the tension between the normative values of the digital age and intra-family privacy at both conceptual and theoretical levels.
Theoretical analysis was employed as the method, and Luciano Floridi's “information ethics” and Helen Nisenbaum’s “contextual integrity” theories served as the foundational theoretical framework. Floridi defines the individual as an “information entity” in the digital universe and considers privacy as an ethical domain of existence. Nissenbaum, on the other hand, approaches privacy as an issue of integrity based on norms related to the appropriate transmission of information within a social context.
In the literature, digital privacy is often discussed in terms of individual privacy, data security, or user behaviour. However, the evaluation of privacy within the family structure in the context of digitalisation using ethical theories is a limited field. This study aims to fill this gap by adopting an interdisciplinary approach that integrates digital ethical theories with other relevant disciplines.
In conclusion, family privacy in the digital age is not merely a value to be protected but also an active and controversial area of existence that urgently requires the establishment of new digital ethical norms and social responsibility.

References

  • Capurro, Rafael. “Towards an Ontological Foundation of Information Ethics.” Ethics and Information Technology 8/4 (2006), 175–186.
  • Cooper, A. Feder, Emanuel Moss, Benjamin Laufer and Helen Nissenbaum. “Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility and Robustness in Machine Learning.” 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, (2022), 864–876.
  • Couldry, Nick and Ulises A. Mejias. The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2019.
  • Floridi, Luciano. The Ethics of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
  • Inness, Julie C. Privacy. Intimacy and Isolation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  • Kopuz, Tuba, Yiğit Emrah Turgut and Alper Aslan. “Sharenting: Kavramsal Bir Çözümleme”. Intermedia International E-Journal 9, No. 17 (2022), 379-390.
  • Lyon, David. Surveillance Society. McGraw-Hill Education: UK, 2001.
  • Martin, Kirsten and Helen Nissenbaum. “Measuring Privacy: Using Context to Expose Confounding Variables.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015.
  • Mathiesen, Thomas. “The Viewer Society: Michel Foucault's ‘Panopticon’ Revisited.” Theoretical Criminology, 1(2), (1997): 215–234.
  • Mittelstadt, Brent. “From Individual to Group Privacy in Big Data Analytics.” Philosophy & Technology 30 (2017), 475–494.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. “Privacy as Contextual Integrity.” Washington Law Review 79/1 (2004), 119–157.
  • Nissenbaum, Helen. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010.
  • Öztürk, Şerife. “Sosyal Medyada Etik Sorunlar.” Selçuk İletişim 9/1 (2015), 287–311.
  • Pastor-Escuredo, Diego and Rodrigo Vinuesa. “Towards an Ethical Framework in the Complex Digital Era.” arXiv Preprint, 2020.
  • Romero-Ruiz, Carmen et al. “Information and Communication Technologies Impact on Family Relationship.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237 (2017), 30–37.
  • Stern, M. J. and C. Messer. “How Family Members Stay in Touch: A Quantitative Investigation of Core Family Networks.” Marriage & Family Review 45/6–8 (2009), 654- 676.
  • Tadpatrikar, A. et al. “Influence of Technology Usage on Family Communication Patterns and Functioning: A Systematic Review.” Asian Journal of Psychiatry 58 (2021), 102595.
  • Westin, Alan F. Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum, 1967.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. “Surveillance Capitalism or Democracy? The Death Match of Institutional Orders and the Politics of Knowledge in Our Information Civilization.” Organizational Theory 3 (2022), 1–78.
  • Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.
There are 20 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Islamic Studies (Other)
Journal Section RESEARCH ARTICLES
Authors

Nazan Yeşilkaya 0000-0002-9628-3492

Early Pub Date October 12, 2025
Publication Date October 15, 2025
Submission Date May 27, 2025
Acceptance Date August 9, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Issue: 37

Cite

ISNAD Yeşilkaya, Nazan. “Transforming Family Privacy: Floridi and Nissenbaum on Digital Ethics”. Şırnak Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 37 (October2025), 118-134. https://doi.org/10.35415/sirnakifd.1707624.

Şırnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC).