Question

Case 4: In 2013, computer expert and former CIA systems administrator, Edward Snowden released confidential government documents to the press about the existence of government surveillance programs. According to many legal experts, and the U.S. government, his actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identified the leak of state secrets as an act of treason. Yet despite the fact that he broke the law, Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to act. He gave a justification for his “whistleblowing” by stating that he had a duty “to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them.” According to Snowden, the government’s violation of privacy had to be exposed regardless of legality. Journalists were conflicted about the ethical implications of Snowden’s actions. The editorial board of The New York Times stated, “He may have committed a crime…but he has done his country a great service.” In an Op-ed in the same newspaper, Ed Morrissey argued that Snowden was not a hero, but a criminal: “by leaking information about the behavior rather than reporting it through legal channels, Snowden chose to break the law.” According to Morrissey, Snowden should be prosecuted for his actions, arguing that his actions broke a law “intended to keep legitimate national-security data and assets safe from our enemies; it is intended to keep Americans safe.”

safe.”

Questions of case 4:

a. What did Snowden do? Why did he do that? Was it ethical? Justify and explain.

b. What type of conflict is there? Explain.

Answer 1

Snowden leaked critical government information citing unauthorized surveillance done by the US government. In Snowden's point of view, he found this as a moral obligation to let the people know about the government's wrong doing and he leaked the documents to the press.

Was it ethical? I don't think so. If at all Snowden wanted to bring light of the issue, he should have followed proper channel. But that was not the case here. Hence, it might not qualify under being an ethical act.

The conflict here is intrapersonal. This is because the conflict here is between Snowden and CIA, i.e. the organization which he worked for. In this scenario, Snowden's vision of letting know the public did not go well with CIA and the policy makers. Therefore, this is an intrapersonal conflict being referred to.

Hope this helps. Do hit the thumbs up. Cheers!