Data is collected everyday whether it is given willingly or not. People do not think about about the amount of their information that is available on their electronic devices. With the rise of the digital era happening so rapidly, humans are not able to realize the implications on their privacy and personal information. In 2013, information was leaked to the press about PRISM, a government surveillance program used by the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect data from the American people and international groups. Three days later after the first leak, it was revealed that it was actually Edward Snowden, a contractor for the NSA who was responsible for copying numerous classified documents and leaking it to the public. His actions sparked a national debate about the tradeoffs between privacy and security. Government officials claim that these leaks had put national security at risk. In addition, due to the scope of the surveillance programs international diplomatic relationships with allies had been strained. However, Snowden stated that his reasoning was to bring these surveillance methods to light so that the American people understood that their privacy was being breached by an organization they are supposed to trust, their own government. Snowden’s actions, while not ethical, were justified due to the fact that he was revealing the breach of privacy on specifically the American people and also revealing the future implications of continued government surveillance.
Before he became known as a whistleblower, Edward Snowden had a comfortable life with a six figure salary, a home in Hawaii with his girlfriend, and a successful career . Being employed by defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton and a variety of other companies, he was able to work at the NSA as a computer systems administrator for four years up to the point to the leaks. With this background, it is surprising that he would leak this classified information that compromises his position and lifestyle. In Citizenfour, the documentary that followed the unraveling of Snowden’s leaks, Glenn Greenwald asked Snowden why did he decide to leak the information. His response was that did not want the restriction of citizens and intellectuals. The fact that people have that expectation of being watched reveals the shift of privacy. Due to this mindset, it limits intellectual exploration because people are afraid of what they type is being kept on record. Snowden was willing to sacrifice his freedom for the good of others and their intellectual freedom by leaking these documents.
One of the most significant discoveries of the Snowden leaks is presentation slides for PRISM. This program is utilized by the NSA to collect people’s data from nine Internet companies: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, and Youtube. According to the slides, the program also uses “Upstream” which collects from a fiber cable network that carries flowing Internet and phone data. Another slide dictated what that the NSA is provided, which is email, chat, videos, photos, stored data, VoIP, file transfers, video conferencing, social networking details, and also activities like logins from those nine Internet companies . The creation of this program originated in The Protect America Act of 2007 led to the creation of the NSA’s secret program called US-984XN, or PRISM. This specific program streamlines the process of the surveillance techniques that were used after the events of 9/11 under the “Terrorist Surveillance Program.” In addition to this find, Snowden leaked more classified information where some involved allies and drone practices.
Classical and contemporary ethics revolve around two dimensions: rule-based vs. consequences-based, and individual vs. collective . Those who align with the ‘rules’ base their decisions off those general rules. Good actions are in result of correct rules of behavior that are universal based on their religion, intuition, or beliefs. On the other hand, those who rather look at the consequences believe that the rules are not enough to guide good actions but consequences are. For them, the correct action would produce the best consequences. The next dimension looks at whether moral authority lies with the individual or with the whole. With the latter, whatever is good for the whole is the best decision. The intersection of these dimensions create four schools of thinking: collective rule-based, individual rule-based, collective consequentialist, and individual consequentialist.
Out of those four schools, Snowden can be categorized as the collective rule-based and the collective consequentialist. The school of collective rule-based ethics argues that good actions are based on rules that apply universally. Privacy can be thought of as universal right. The Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures without warrant for their homes and belongings. In the documentary, Snowden spoke about how in the past people were able to converse with each other from all walks of life for intellectual expansion and search online without fear. However, this has changed now that people are being monitored. American citizens’ metadata and content are being searched by the government under the reasoning of prevention of crime and terrorism, but is it actually necessary for the government to be so excessive in their surveillance? In some sense, this is an unnecessary search and in violation of the amendment. Through this perspective, Snowden is utilizing that rule and right as the basis of his decision, and so, aligns with the thoughts of this school of ethics.The collective consequentialist looks at the consequences and does what is best for the whole. This school suggests when faced with an ethical decision, especially in IT ethics literature, an individual should consult with the collective, whether it be the firm or professional group, for the advice they should follow. In Snowden’s case, is the collective considered the American people or his employer, the NSA? If the collective is considered the American people, then his sacrifice of losing his home, family, and career would not be in vain since it was to inform everyone of this breach of privacy. Thus, the consequences of his actions were for the good of the collective. If the definition defines it as the latter, the consequences of his actions go against the collective and does not coincide with this school of thought. There is a group of people who do not believe that Snowden should be glorified for his actions, but claim that it did more harm than good.
At the Senate’s annual hearing on the nation’s most significant security threats, then Director of National Intelligence James Clapper addressed the consequences of Snowden’s leaks. The first was that the nation had become less safe for its citizens. Terrorists and enemies of the country are able to search through the documents and gain insight on the U.S.’s methods and practices. The knowledge they obtain puts the lives of the intelligence community, armed forces, assets, and citizens at risk. Director Clapper even states that significant foreign intelligence collection sources had even been lost. This is in result that these enemies changed their communication ways. Besides these consequences, relationships with allies became strained as they learned about the U.S.’s surveillance in their own countries. While Snowden thought he sacrificed his freedom and leaked the information for the sake of the American people, others found it simply destructive and has heavily affected the U.S.’s national security.
While what Snowden did was not ethical due to the fact that he stole classified information and jeopardized national security, his intentions and actions were justified. With how rapidly technology changes, it has “transformed methods of governance and surveillance as a tool of governance. . .” Regular surveillance is expected by all individuals now, and they do not realize the effects it has on their lives. By it becoming a commonality, the boundaries of privacy and private data is constantly shifting and becoming smaller. Snowden’s leaks showed the expanse of the U.S. government’s grasp on citizens’ lives and probably has grown since this event happened four years ago. What American citizens can take away from Snowden’s actions is realize how powerful data is and how they should be cautious with their private electronic data.
Works Cited
Appelbaum, Binney, Greenwald, MacAskill, Poitras, Scahill, Snowden, Appelbaum, Jacob,
Binney, William, Greenwald, Glenn, MacAskill, Ewen, Poitras, Laura, Scahill, Jeremy, Snowden, Edward J., Anchor Bay Entertainment, Inc., Publisher, and HBO Documentary Films, Production Company. Citizenfour. 2015.
Borger, Julian. “Booz Allen Hamilton: Edward Snowden's US Contracting Firm.” The Guardian
, 9 June 2013, www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/booz-allen-hamilton-edward-snowden.
“Fact Sheet: The Protect America Act of 2007 .” National Archives and Records Administration,
National Archives and Records Administration, 6 Aug. 2007, georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070806-5.html.
Greenwald, Glenn, et al. “Edward Snowden: the Whistleblower behind the NSA Surveillance
Revelations.” The Guardian , 11 June 2013,
www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance.
Hu, Margaret. “Taxonomy of the Snowden Disclosures.(Edward Snowden).” Washington and
Lee Law Review, vol. 72, no. 4, 2015, pp. 1679–1767.
Kenneth C. Laudon. 1995. Ethical concepts and information technology. Commun. ACM 38, 12
(December 1995), 33-39.
“NSA Slides Explain the PRISM Data-Collection Program.” The Washington Post, 6 June 2013,
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-collection-documents/.
Sottek, T.C. “Everything You Need to Know about PRISM.” The Verge, Vox Media, 17 July
2013, www.theverge.com/2013/7/17/4517480/nsa-spying-prism-surveillance-cheat-sheet.
“The 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.” National Constitution Center , National
Constitution Center,
constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-iv.
TOXEN, BOB. "The NSA and Snowden: Securing the All-Seeing Eye." Communications of the
ACM, vol. 57, no. 5, May 2014, pp. 44-51. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1145/2594502.
“Transcript: Senate Intelligence Hearing on National Security Threats.” The Washington Post,
WP Company, 29 Jan. 2014.