Black and white transparency: contradictions of a moral metaphor

Abstract

Transparency has evolved from an individual, dangerous power in Plato to a desirable, collective property in the contemporary world. This paper intends to give a brief account of this long and somehow surprising path and extract some interesting consequences for economic and political activities, as well as for information technologies. Six literary masterpieces are used to highlight the contradictions and dangers entailed by the abuse of the fascinating metaphor of transparency. In the end, what is usually intended when demanding transparency from a corporation, a firm or a state is more (or more accessible) information about it, i.e., understandable and abundant black and white data. This means reporting, picturing, producing material, becoming apparent, which is precisely the contrary of being transparent. We don’t want to look through, but to look directly at. The question, then, is not transparency, but opacity: what do we need and want to see, and how is this going to be produced?

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Alexander, K. (2007). The GATS and financial services: The role of regulatory transparency. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20(1), 111–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartlett, A., & Preston, D. (2000). Can ethical behaviour really exist in business? Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bindé, J. (2005). Towards knowledge societies. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carroll, L. (1998/1872). Through the looking-glass. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  5. de Cervantes, M. (1998/1613). El licenciado Vidriera, one of his Novelas ejemplares (Trans. by Lypson, L.), The Glass Graduate, in Exemplary Stories. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

  6. de Cervantes, M. (2006/1615). El retablo de las maravillas (The Tableau of Wonders), one of his Entremeses. Madrid: Alianza. Available on line at http://www.cervantesvirtual.com

  7. Descartes, R. (1985). Optics (Trans. by Stoothoff, R.), In The philosophical writings of Descartes (Vol. I, pp. 152–175). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  8. European Commission. (2001). Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility: Green paper. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Foucault, M. (1977). Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Éditions Gallimard, Paris, 1975 (Trans. by Sheridan, A.), Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin Books.

  10. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times, September 13.

  11. Goldstein, D. G., & Giegerenzer, G. (1999). The recognition heuristic: How ignorance makes us smart. In G. Giegerenzer, P. M. Todd, & the ABC Research Group (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 37–58). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hebb, T. (2006). The economic inefficiency of secrecy: Pension fund investors’ corporate transparency concerns. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 385–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Islam, R. (2006). Does more transparency go along with better governance? Economics and Politics, 18(2), 121–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaptein, M. (2004). Business codes of multinational firms: What do they say? Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 13–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Macho-Stadler, I., & Pérez-Castrillo, D. (2001). Introducción a la economía de la información. Ariel, Barcelona, 1994 (Trans. by Watt, R.), An introduction to the economics of information: Incentives and contracts (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  16. Meuwese, A. (2008). Impact assessment in EU lawmaking. Leiden: E.M. Meijers Institute of Legal Studies of Leiden University.

    Google Scholar 

  17. OECD. (1983). Transparency for positive adjustment: Identifying and evaluating government intervention. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Orwell, G. (1989/1949). Nineteen eighty-four. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Plato. (1993). Republic (Trans. by Waterfield, R.). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

  20. Smythe, E., & Smith, P. J. (2006). Legitimacy, transparency, and information technology: The world trade organization in an era of contentious trade politics. Global Governance, 12, 31–53.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). The contributions of the economics of information to twentieth century economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(4), 1441–1478.

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. van de Klundert, T. (1999). Economic efficiency and ethics. De Economist, 147(2), 127–149.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wells, H. G. (2005/1897). The invisible man. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been developed at the Department of Sociology and Philosophy of the University of Exeter, UK, and sponsored by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science through its MEC/Fulbright Fellowships program and its FFI2008-03599 research project. The author wishes to express his debt with both institutions and his gratitude to all his colleagues and friends at Exeter, particularly to Francesco Guala, Anne Meuwese, and Michiru Nagatsu. Special thanks must also be given to Teresa Erice, for her careful corrections of earlier drafts.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Armando Menéndez-Viso.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Menéndez-Viso, A. Black and white transparency: contradictions of a moral metaphor. Ethics Inf Technol 11, 155–162 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-009-9194-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Corporate social responsibility
  • Ethics
  • Information
  • Transparency
  • Visibility