Dr. Klitzman rightly asserts that Facebook's experiment was unethical. He cites violations of the 1974 National Research Act (but also correctly notes that Facebook is not legally required to follow this law), which mandates informed consent of subjects in research studies. He skewers Facebook's claim that the experiment was ethical because the Facebook user policy states that Facebook may use information added to the website for research purposes. He notes that two of the three principal investigators for Facebook's experiment "are affiliated with universities - Cornell and the University of California at San Francisco - that publicly uphold" the National Research Act guidelines. He explains that the journal that published the article that presented the study to the scientific community (The Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, commonly referred to as PNAS) ignored its own editorial standards that require experiments to follow the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines, which also mandate informed consent of subjects in research studies. Finally, he informs the reader that experiments that do not need informed consent typically "debrief" the subjects afterwards, which Facebook also did not do. Strong work Dr. Klitzman.
Yes it is clear that Facebook's experiment was unethical but legal. I should find out if I was a victim of this malfeasance and, if so, I should seek damages - by informing my dispute resolution organization (DRO) of my victimhood so it can negotiate with Facebook's DRO. What? Did you say my DRO is the same as Facebook's DRO (the American State) AND Facebook is a fascist organization that collaborates extensively with our mutual DRO AND therefore I can't get no relief? Yes there truly is nothing new under the sun.