Scenario #1

A manufacturer advertises that its hand sanitizer kills the "Covid-19 virus on contact." The manufacturer has tested its hand sanitizer for effectiveness against other viruses, but not Covid-19. It uses the same marketing material for Covid-19 as other viruses, such as influenza and the common cold.

Scenario #2

Recently, Microsoft filed a patent application for a "meeting insight computing system" that would monitor body language, facial expressions, and other features of participants in order to assign a "quality score" to workplace meetings. According to the filing, the system could be applied both to in-person and remote meetings. Microsoft also introduced a "Productivity Score" that allows organizations to monitor employees' use of Microsoft products.

Microsoft quickly backtracked in response to public outcry and eliminated the individualized tracking feature. Worker surveillance has rapidly increased with the transition to remote work due to COVID-19, and many organizations with on-site workers are instituting surveillance systems with the stated goal of protecting public health.

Topic Questions (answer both scenarios):

1. Using IRAC regarding the first scenario, is this advertisement deceptive? Why or why not?
2. Using IRAC regarding the second scenario, is this type of employee monitoring legal? Why or why not?

Reflection Questions:

1. Describe something from the learning materials in this module that you found the most confusing at first. In what way(s) did you resolve your confusion
2. Describe how something that you learned in this module will most likely change your behavior now or in the future.