Question

Prepare a 300-word post to the following: Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden leaked classified information to news sources (including Wikileaks). At least in Snowden's case, he insists that he did so as a whistleblower, and public reaction to their actions has been mixed. Some see their behavior as treason; others see the need for public scrutiny and openness to keep the government honest. How does one balance the potentials for harm? On the one hand, the government is embarrassed by the releases; on the other, not releasing the information allows the government to overstep its bounds under cover of classification. Can such behavior (i.e., unauthorized and deliberate release of classified material to news organizations) ever be justified? Under what circumstances?

Answer 1

The actions of certain people in their capacity as a whistleblower keeps Governments powers and practices in check i.e. Government policies be it confidential must be for the benefit and welfare of people rather than simple abuse of power. However, there needs to be a balance between what should be released to the public and what must remain confidential at any cost. This can be achieved by well drafted Federal policies earmarking information that can be released vis a vis information that must not be available in public domain. The Government itself can follow these rules and be more open with the citizens of the country. For example - Any policies and programs run by Govt for national security, defense and to counter terrorism must be kept under wraps. Information related to these matters must not be released in public domain as it threatens national security. On the other hand, if any programs/policies are run for personal benefit or corrupt practices carried out by Govt. Officials must be exposed out in open. There has to be a better whistleblower protection policies in place to empower people releasing information related to latter cases. For example- Snowden did not have any proper channels to release the information he had access to and retorted to going to the news organizations.

Yes, such behaviors can be justified if they benefit a larger set of the population rather than a select few. The citizens of the country have the right to know unjustified programs/policies in place and the reason behind it. Any corrupt practices by Govt or policies that abuse their power must be exposed. For example - Spying on own citizens was not justified unless there was a case of a threat to the country from people who were being spied upon.