Ethical Issues about Edward Snowden Case
Ethical Issues Surrounding the Edward Snowden Case
Edward Snowden was seen as a trustworthy person by his peers and superiors. This trust was the major downfall of the NSA; because of this trust Snowden was given certain privileges which should not have been given to him. When this case broke many people were resolute that he was guilty, some thought that his actions were justified and others were simply on the fence. We need to ask the question was Edward Snowden really wrong in his actions? Why did he do it? Did he really betray his country? When it came to his realization that the NSA had systems in place to "spy" on citizens he became worried. The fact of privacy infringements was what worried Snowden. He did not want to sell government secrets but rather blow the whistle on what the NSA was secretly doing. Of course the government did not see it that way; they deemed him as a threat to the state. 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. However, his course of action could have been better. If there was a whistle blowing system in place then he could have used that. Finding out this type of information can send anyone "off their hinges" which is why one can rationalize with Snowden to a point. The arguments made that he betrayed his country because he fled to Russia where he was granted temporary asylum is a good argument because it made him look guilty. However it could have been because he was in fear of his safety. He did make it clear that he did not want to expose the blueprints of the NSA system so that other countries can have better technology to spy on their people but just that he felt people had a right to know, which makes sense to the common man. 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
Edward Snowden was seen as a trustworthy person by his peers and superiors. This trust was the major downfall of the NSA; because of this trust Snowden was given certain privileges which should not have been given to him. When this case broke many people were resolute that he was guilty, some thought that his actions were justified and others were simply on the fence. We need to ask the question was Edward Snowden really wrong in his actions? Why did he do it? Did he really betray his country? When it came to his realization that the NSA had systems in place to "spy" on citizens he became worried. The fact of privacy infringements was what worried Snowden. He did not want to sell government secrets but rather blow the whistle on what the NSA was secretly doing. Of course the government did not see it that way; they deemed him as a threat to the state. 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. However, his course of action could have been better. If there was a whistle blowing system in place then he could have used that. Finding out this type of information can send anyone "off their hinges" which is why one can rationalize with Snowden to a point. The arguments made that he betrayed his country because he fled to Russia where he was granted temporary asylum is a good argument because it made him look guilty. However it could have been because he was in fear of his safety. He did make it clear that he did not want to expose the blueprints of the NSA system so that other countries can have better technology to spy on their people but just that he felt people had a right to know, which makes sense to the common man. 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