> in fact, Uber drivers choose to drive for Uber, can choose to do something else instead

Funny that you take that as a "fact" and doubt exploitation. I'd wager most Uber drivers or prostitutes or maids or even staff software engineers would choose something else if they had a better alternative. They're "choosing" the best of what they may feel are terrible options.

The entire point of "market power" is to force consumers into a choice. (More generally, for justice to emerge in a system, markets must be disciplined by exit, and where exit is not feasible (like governments), it must be disciplined by voice.)

The world doesn't owe anyone good choices. However, collective governance - governments and management - should prevent some people from restricting the choices of others in order to harvest the gain. The good faith people have in participating cooperatively is conditioned on agents complying with systemic justice constraints.

In the case of the story, the initial agreement was not enforced and later not even feasible. The horror is the presumed subjective experience.

I worry that the effect of such stories will be to reduce empathy (no need to worry about Uber drivers - they made their choice).