Readily accessible information over the internet and the curiosity to know more has instigated the sense of accountability in people which has led to many whistle blowers being born. Be it government or corporate giants, people consider themselves liable to have transparent information and statistics as any actions taken by these institutions have a trickle-down effect on the entire economy.
In Hong Kong during 2013, Edward Snowden leaked information regarding National Security Agency’s programs called “PRISM” through which the United States government was collecting data from U.S. phone call records and inspecting online communications to and fro from foreign targets; which fall into the category of highly sensitive data. It started a heated debate that has not ended even now. When it comes to whistle blowing, an individual’s ethics are questioned more than the organization he works for but whatever intention the whistle blower has, the impact of his action is far-flung and does not fizzle down quickly (Andrukaitus).
Snowden was an employee of a government consulting firm called Booz Allen Hamilton; therefore, he was required to comply with the Code of Ethics of “The Association for Computing Machinery”. An overview of these showcases how Snowden was faced with a predicament; to obey the rules or take a risk. Clause 1.2 states that if any computing professional’s superior does not take action regarding some serious danger then he is allowed to follow the path of “whistle-blowing”. But what happens if the people at the highest level are involved in it? What other option did Snowden and many others like him have? Similarly, Clause 1.7 is about respecting the privacy of others which again contradicts what the government was carrying out through the PRISM programs.
Every professional is required to honor contracts, agreements, and assigned responsibilities as per Clause 2.6 which clearly states that “However, performing assignments ‘against one's own judgment’ does not relieve the professional of responsibility for any negative consequences.”(acm.org). It means that whatever ethical belief an employee has on individual basis can never surpass those of the organization. Snowden believed he was saving the public’s interest when he leaked the information.
He was also accused of criminally getting hands on the documents as Clause 2.8 states that access to computing and communication resources can only be done when authorized for it. Snowden claims to have the access to the highly classified documents while the authorities say otherwise. It is apparent that Snowden breached the law and the Code of Ethics when he took that life-altering step, but the question remains if he did the right thing.
Ever since the breach of information by him, Snowden has been the topic of discussion everywhere. Some hail him as a hero while others call him a traitor. I believe he took the right step. Today, all of us are so engrossed in social media that we blindly trust the authorities with our information. We share private and confidential data over the internet without thinking twice of the level of surveillance being carried out. But is our naivety our crime? Do we deserve to be observed all the time without any privacy? It makes one wonder where does it all stop?
According to Snowden, the government has the ability to listen to all phone calls and read emails of all Americans (businessinsider.com). Nobody knows when this data may be used inappropriately. Another point to ponder is, if one 29 years old can leak such top-secret information, what is the credibility of these national security institutes? As per the Wall Street Journal, around 1.4 million people have access to the country’s most sensitive information. One can only imagine the enormity of the damage caused if an outsider gets his hands on such classified information.
Therefore, it is highly imperative for the governments to draw a clear line between privacy and security. If such practices are carried out in future without any accountability, many more whistle blowers will be forced to take things into their own hands. Reforms need to be introduced where such sensitive information is not misused and stays in the hands of a trusted few only.
Works cited
Andrukaitus, Jason. “The Whistleblower’s Dilemma”. EBSCO Corporate Learning. 10 Jun. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2014.
Acm.org. “Code of Ethics”. n.d. Web. 7 Dec. 2014.
BusinessInsider.com. “5 Reasons Why The NSA’s Massive Surveillance Program Is No Big Deal (And 2 Reasons It Is)”. 11 Jun. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2014.
