Analyzing Edward Snowden Case Study: Business Ethics Perspective

This case study delves into the ethical complexities of Edward Snowden's actions, examining the conflict between national security and individual privacy. The analysis explores the values at stake, including confidentiality and the public's right to information. It questions the ethical justification of Snowden's actions, weighing the potential harms and benefits, and considering alternative courses of action. The study also discusses scenarios where whistleblowing might be ethically ideal or prohibited, emphasizing the importance of legal frameworks and the potential consequences of actions on a national level. The analysis concludes with a discussion on the impact of Snowden's actions on the CIA operatives and the stability of the country.

BUSINESS ETHICS
TASK 1

CASE STUDY
1. What values are in conflict in this case? What harm did Snowden cause? What benefits did his
actions bring?
The values pertaining to confidentiality and privacy of the citizens as well as government bodies
are demonstrated within the given case. The fact that Snowden released the official governmental
statements within the public domain can cause potential harm to the nation. The major benefit
that can be derived out of the situation can be characterised as the awareness generated within
the citizens regarding access acquired by the government in context to the personal information
and data of the citizens residing in the country.
2. Do you agree that Snowden’s actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited? Why
or why not? Make an argument by weighing the competing values in this case.
I believe that Snowden‘s actions were not ethically justified as it is the moral duty of Snowden to
work in accordance with the legal format prescribed by the governmental bodies. According to
my opinion, the action demonstrated by Snowden was very insignificant as it could lead to
severe harm and threat to the nation’s security at the global domain. Secrecy agreement is
required to be very confidential as it can impact upon the political and legal environment
regulated within the country. Hence, the illegal act cannot be justified in the name of ethical
concern at all.
3. If you were in Snowden’s position, what would you have done and why?
If I was at Snowden’s position, I would have dealt with the situation in a more justified manner. I
would have not leaked out the confidential documents in the public domain. I would have
capitalised upon a systematic legal channel and report the issue to the higher authority. I would
have taken the assistance of law and order in the country rather than just leaking the significant
documents at a national level and risk the political stability of the country.
4. Would you change your position if you knew that Snowden’s leak would lead to a loss of life
among CIA operatives? What about if it would save lives?
The fact that the availability of essential and private government documents within the press and
public domain can risk the lives of millions residing in the country can be extremely regretful

choice made by an individual. The possibility of losing a life among the CIA operatives just
because of an inconsiderate act of foolishness can be termed as immoral and unjustified in every
context. The behaviour and actions demonstrated by Snowden can only impose danger to the
national concern and cannot save any life. The government leads its operations so as to work
towards ensuring the safety and security of millions in order to promote stability within the
country.
5. Is there a circumstance in which you think whistle blowing would be ethically ideal? How
about ethically prohibited?
According to my perspective, whistle blowing cannot be considered ethically ideal as it can lead
to various crimes in the name of ethical and moralistic duty. There are certain rules and
regulations that have been formulated by the legal bodies in order to protect and preserve the
rights of citizens and promote justice and equality within the nation. Every citizen should abide
by the formulated principles of behavior guided by the legal frameworks within their country
rather than violating the same. Whistle Blowing should consider to be ethically prohibited
because even if it has been done in order to create a positive influence, it may be used in an
adverse manner by the rivals and enemies of the nation. Hence, the citizens and officials need to
be very careful with their actions within the country as a minor mistake can lead to severe
implication for the country.