FOR THE FIRST time since 1992, the
ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (the Code) is being updated. The Code Update Task Force
in conjunction with the Committee
on Professional Ethics is seeking advice from ACM members on the update. We indicated many of the motivations for changing the Code when
we shared Draft 1 of Code 2018 with
the ACM membership in the December
2016 issue of CACMb and with others
through email and the COPE website
( ethics.acm.org). Since December, we
have been collecting feedback and are
vetting proposed changes.
We have seen a broad range of concerns about responsible computing including bullying in social media, cyber
security, and autonomous machines
making ethically significant decisions.
The Task Force appreciates the many
serious and thoughtful comments it
has received. In response, the Task
Force has proposed changes that are
reflected in Draft 2 of the Code. There
are a number of substantial changes
that require some explanation. In
this article, we discuss these, and we
explain why we did not include other
requested changes in Draft 2. We look
forward to receiving your comments
on these suggested changes and your
requests for additional changes as we
work on Draft 3 of the Code. We have
provided opportunities for your comments and an open discussion of Draft
2 at the ACM Code 2018 Discussion
website [ http://code2018.acm.org/
discuss]. Comments can also be contributed at the COPE website https://
ethics.acm.org, and by direct emails to
chair@ethics.acm.org.
a Corresponding author and chair of Code 2018
project chair@ethics.acm.org
b http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/12/
210366-the-acm-code-of-ethics/fulltext
The Nature of an Ethics Code
ACM members are part of the computing profession and the ACM’s Code
of Ethics and Professional Conduct
should reflect the conscience of the
computing profession. When the Code
adequately reflects the ethics of the profession, it also clarifies what that profession should strive to be. A code provides
positive direction for its members.
The current update of the ACM
Code begins positively; “Contribute to
society and to human well-being, acknowledging that all people are stakeholders in computing.” As computing
professionals, we are asked to promote
good while working within ethical constraints including: be honest, don’t
cause harm, and avoid conflicts of interest. As the areas in which computing can make a positive impact have increased so has the range of our moral
responsibility.
In Draft 1, the Task Force’s suggested modifications reflected the need for
members to better understand how
computing technologies and artifacts
impact the social infrastructure and
how they ought to promote the common good. Professionalism in computing requires us to improve our abilities
to anticipate broader impacts, both
positive and negative, and to accept responsibility for those impacts.
This understanding of a code helps
address concerns expressed by many
commenters who noted a lack of clarity about to whom the ACM’s Code
applies. There were places where the
Code seemed to apply to computing
professionals more generally and other
places where it seemed to apply only to
ACM members. There were even a few
places where the Code seemed to apply
only to ACM members who were also
computing professionals.
These concerns are addressed in
Draft 2 in three ways. First, the Pre-
amble now identifies what is meant by
“computing professional.” We intend
for this term to be interpreted broadly,
including students, software engineers,
software architects, managers, leaders,
and computer science teachers and
scholars. Given the ubiquity of comput-
ing and the aspirational nature of the
Code, we therefore aim to include those
who may consider themselves profes-
sionals in the area of computing from
non-standard backgrounds as well as
those more traditionally considered
computing professionals.
A second change intended to reflect
that the Code provides aspirational
guidance to a broad community involved replacing the categorical language of “moral imperatives” with the
less prescriptive “ethical principles.”
Each of the principles in the Code is
to be used to help us understand our
ethical responsibility and to guide our
decision making in varying and complex situations, rather than provide a
rigid set of rules to follow unthinkingly.
These principles are to be considered in
our deliberations as we set professional
goals for ourselves and carry out our daily activities. Section 1, especially, sets
forth principles that need to be given
special weight in those deliberations.
A third change was to clarify that every principle applies to computing professionals, regardless of their affiliation
with the ACM, with the exception of the
guidance given in Section 4. In principle 4. 1, ACM members take on the additional responsibility of encouraging
and supporting adherence to the ACM
Code by all computing professionals. In
the guidance for principle 4. 2, we have
retained the language whereby ACM
members who violate the Code may
have their membership terminated.
Requested Changes Made
One of the primary reasons for updating the Code is the increased influ-
Listening to Professional Voices:
Draft 2 of the ACM Code of Ethics
and Professional Conduct
DOI: 10.1145/3072528 Bo Brinkman, Catherine Flick, Don Gotterbarn,a Keith Miller, Kate Vazansky, Marty J. Wolf