Edward Snowden's decision to leak classified information from the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2013 presented a complex ethical dilemma. On one hand, Snowden believed that the NSA's mass surveillance programs, which involved the collection of phone and internet data from millions of individuals without their knowledge or consent, were a violation of privacy and a threat to civil liberties. He argued that the public had a right to know about these programs and that his actions were necessary to expose and halt their illegal activities.
On the other hand, Snowden's actions also had the potential to cause harm. By revealing classified information, he potentially jeopardized national security and put the lives of individuals at risk. He also violated his oath to protect classified information and broke the law by disclosing this information to the public.
The ethical dilemma in Snowden's case can be viewed through the lens of several different ethical theories. From a deontological perspective, Snowden's actions may be seen as immoral because he broke a moral rule (the oath to protect classified information) in order to achieve a greater good (exposing the NSA's mass surveillance programs). However, from a consequentialist perspective, his actions may be seen as moral because they resulted in a greater overall benefit (increased transparency and accountability of the government, as well as potential reforms to mass surveillance programs).
Ultimately, whether Snowden's actions were ethical or not will depend on one's personal values and beliefs about the balance between national security and civil liberties. Some may argue that his actions were necessary to protect individual privacy and hold the government accountable, while others may argue that his actions were irresponsible and put national security at risk. Regardless of one's perspective, Snowden's case highlights the complex ethical considerations involved in the disclosure of classified information and the importance of finding a balance between transparency and security.
Ethical dilemmas surrounding Edward Snowden
The USA Freedom directly addresses issues that are included in the USA Patriot Act, an act that was created to combat and to create protection against the threat of terrorism, which was a fear that heightened in response to the 2001 September 11 attacks Savage. The good for the majority outplaced the harm on the individual. He was obligated to do as he was told by his superiors, even if he disagreed. . . Snowden only had to consider his duties as a citizen, a member of the spied society and a contractor to NSA.
. While Snowden was diagnosed with epilepsy, the film hinted that the stress of protecting his country made his seizures worse. Throughout the history of humanity, people have faced such dilemmas, and philosophers aimed and worked to find solutions to them. In the case of Germany, with some of the strongest privacy laws in Europe, Berlin has expressed its unhappiness with the program. However, a major difference was that in the Kantian ethics option, the duty of the induvial was considered, where the benefits to the majority were brought in as part of the obligation.
. . The 2005 London bombing was a vector towards increasing security at the expense of privacy. Some other constructive HUMINT case is the during the Operation Marketing Communication in the Hospitality Industry Table of Contents 1 Introduction. .
The structure of this report will include an analysing of Edward Snowden case study by using the doing ethics technique. The PATRIOT Act is walking a dangerous line and it would be irresponsible to accept it without research into the pros and cons, which are not equal. . Some companies and professional organizations e. His actions would be pleasing to journalists keen to show that they are being critical of government action. .
However it could have been because he was in fear of his safety. Shortly after he was found that he disclosed information, he seeked refuge in Russia. . . Framing the issue of research misconduct as the bad act of an individual scientist, student, or staff member simply protects the myth that institutions and the incentive structure in science are blameless and that research subjects and patients are not harmed. Despite the fact that Snowden broke a few laws, Edward Snowden did the world a favor.
Edward Snowden's Ethical Dilemma extended webapi.bu.edu
While it is clear that the balance of power has shifted towards law enforcement , it is also clear that the surveillance does not end within districts or township libraries. Is whistleblowing inherently ethical or is there a line that needs to be drawn? But the truth of the matter is people panic and information like that being leaked can cause a frenzy which is the reason why the NSA did not release the information publicly. As Greenwald indicates in his analysis of the Snowden case, refusal to dissent is a sign of character flaw or moral failure. No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U. . . Though arguments can arise for both sides and yes he did essentially break the law by breaching the National Security Agency, Snowden was right in genuine thoughts which were that citizens assumed they had privacy.
. The discussion considers whether under the deontological and consequentialist theories of ethics, the actions would be justifiable. . To take a case in point, Edward Snowden had Edward Snowden Ethical Issues Snowden revealed hard evidence of the NSA lying about collecting location data which is in violation of the regulations set within the FISA Amendments Act. I believe his actions were unethical, self-serving, and a demonstration of his narcissism.
The world politics was thrown into turmoil with role of U. . I chose to focus my analysis on Edward Snowden and his disclosure of classified domestic surveillance documents. . . One example would be the bombing on September 16, 1920.
