Module 11 - Facebook’s marketing director, who happens to be Mark Zuckerberg’s sister, proposed last year that banning online anonymity would help curtail cyber-bullying and Internet harassment. Then-Google CEO Eric Schmidt made a similar observation in year 2010, noting that “privacy is incredibly important” but “not the same thing as anonymity.” If banning is already imposed or will be imposed would this stop annoying comments against someone freely posted by an anonymous FB user? Is this ethical? Is this against the freedom of speech? Support your answer.

                 If banning will be imposed or is already imposed, I believe that annoying comments against someone would be curtailed but could not stop it. It could be curtailed since if anonymity will be banned, then users will act formally on social networking sites coz if they don’t it could harm their identity.

                The act of posting annoying comments against someone is unethical because it could harm other people. And so, the act of banning online anonymity is an ethical act. I would agree that it could prevent and curtail cyber-bullying.

                Banning anonymity is not against the freedom of speech. On my opinion, it is just protecting social networking site users to be cyber-bullied.

Module 10 - Is social justice evident in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Corona? Discuss.

In the Chief Justice Corona's impeachment trial, it focuses about the his property that may have come from illegal means like corruption. He was accused guilty of graft and corruption.

 In relation to social justice, graft and corruption is very much against it since social justice by definition is "referring to the idea of creating a society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognizes the dignity of every human being" (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice).

Considering that corruption violates the aim of social justice for the reason that it does not  show equality to the society, then social justice issue is evident.

 The money that has been corrupted may have been used to a more productive, useful and helpful projects of the government for the welfare of the many and not just for personal and greedy reasons. This thing makes social justice issue evident in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Corona.

Module 9 - In terms of privacy, how far will you go for the sake of social justice?

To show social justice and equality, i would not restrict other people accessing information about something I do. i would not keep it private and readily disclose it publicly if it is necessary and needed so badly for something that could show social justice. But not my private information since it would be too risky for me if I do so.