The Ethical Dilemma: Edward Snowden - Hero or Traitor?

This presentation analyzes the ethical dilemma surrounding Edward Snowden, examining whether he should be considered a hero or a traitor. It delves into Snowden's actions, including his exposure of classified information related to global surveillance, and presents arguments from both sides of the debate. The presentation applies deontological and utilitarian ethical principles to evaluate Snowden's behavior, considering the legal and ethical implications of his actions. It explores the perspectives of those who support Snowden as a hero, highlighting his role in exposing weaknesses in the surveillance system and the service he rendered to the citizens. It also presents the views of those who consider him a traitor, emphasizing the violation of laws, potential risks to national security, and diplomatic consequences. The analysis further includes a discussion of the positive and negative impacts of Snowden's actions, alternative approaches, and the ultimate conclusion that, based on the ethical frameworks, Snowden is a traitor. References from various sources support the arguments and conclusions presented.

IS EDWARD
SNOWDEN A HERO
OR A TRAITOR
PRESENTED BY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Edward Snowden was a NSA employee
• He handle classified information related to global surveillance
• Against ethics and legal expectations, Snowden decided to reveal such
classified information and secrets.
• His revelation sparked debate as to whether he is a hero or a traitor.
• This question is the focus of the presentation
• The presentation will apply deontological and utilitarian ethical principles to
determine who Snowden is

INTRODUCTION
• Edward Snowden revealed to the public on how the US National
Security Agency monitor the public communication.
• This sparked a lot of debate as to whether he did the right thing.
• Different people have different views related to the issue
• There are those who consider him as an hero and those who dubbed
him a traitor

THOSE WHO SUPPORT SNOWDEN AS A HERO
• Steffen Schmidt believes that Snowden enabled the NSA know some of the
weaknssess of the spy system and hence may compel them to take necessary
measures.
• Daniel Ellsberg, believes that Snowden has rendered priceless service to the
citizens.
• Julian Assange, the founder of Wiki leaks consider Snowden as an hero
• Survey conducted by Times magazine shows that more than 50 percent of
those interviewed believe that Snowden did something good (Scherer &
Shuster, 2013)

THOSE WHO CONSIDER SNOWDEN AS A
TRAITOR
• Steffen Schmidt seems to suggest that Snowden was working with
Russians and Chinese and that even if he was not, he shouldn’t have
shared information with the two countries.
• John Boehner believes he is a traitor because he revealed the existence
of two programs that are under the protection of the Constitution and
American laws.
• Dianne Feinstein consider Snowden’s actions as act of treason.

MY ARGUMENTS
• Although Snowden’s action challenged the affected parties to adjust
laws related to the privacy of the public, his overall behavior and
actions are not good because it expose the Americans to terrorist and
diplomatic problems.
• His actions does not bring much benefits to the citizens apart from just
letting them know how their privacy is violated
• On the other hand, his actions may send a warning to terrorist and
hence enable them come up with new tactics.

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE USING
DEONTOLOGICAL APPROACH
• Deontological approach believes that an action is ethical and good if it
is in line with existing laws.
• Snowden violated many laws.
• It is not right for a government employee to leak confidential and
classified information that is designed to be used to ensure national
security.
• He violated Espionage laws.

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE USING
DEONTOLOGICAL APPROACH
• Deontology expects all employees to adhere to both company and
organizational laws and to use appropriate channel to address issues.
Snowden did not do this.
• Deontological principles expects employees to be responsible and
follow organizational rules- Snowden was not responsible
• Espionage laws does not encourage people to violate crime and seek
refuge in other countries

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE USING
DEONTOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: CONCLUSION
• Deontological principles would consider spying unethical act and hence
does not support the Snowden’s action.
• Snowden engaged himself in this crime and it is against deontological
principles.
• Generally, any deontologist would consider Snowden is a traitor
(Epstein, 2017, p. 23).

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE FROM
UTILITARIANISM PERSPECTIVE
• Utilitarianism is a philosophical doctrine that postulates that every
person should always do an act that has more benefits than
shortcomings
• The consequences should be beneficial to many people
• According to utilitarianism, we need to ask question such as: Does the
Snowden’s action benefits the public?
• By applying this principle, we need to evaluate and gauge the
consequences of Snowden’s actions on the public.

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE FROM UTILITARIANISM
PERSPECTIVE: POSITIVE IMPACT OF SNOWDEN’S ACTION
• Snowden’s actions helped citizens indirectly because they were able to
know how their information is used.
• Snowden’s actions challenged the responsible parties to amend laws in
favor of the citizens.
• Snowden’s action facilitated the improvement of confidentiality and
privacy.

ANALYZING SNOWDEN’S CASE FROM UTILITARIANISM
PERSPECTIVE: NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES
• The move Snowden took has forced him to seek refuge in other
countries.
• The move Snowden took has revealed his ethical and moral
weaknesses and may not be trusted anymore.
• When flying from China to Russia, Snowden has generated a diplomatic
flicker between the three great powers and Ecuador.
• His move has created geopolitical tensions due to espionage.