Whistleblowing is one of the most delicate constructs of our society, contradicting in ardor and antipathy. Though it has no clear definition regarding morality, it is most basically defined as a person who provides information on an illegal, immoral, or harmful activity being performed by an organization or government. Whistleblowing can fall anywhere from heroic to the highest federal crime in America. Though many laws, dating back to 1777, have been put in place to protect whistleblowers, many have their jobs taken away, personal lives destroyed, and have even gone to prison. The cause of such hypocrisy could be the highly subjective nature of the deed. Whistleblowing is an action that is hard to delineate as crime or benevolence due to …show more content…
If enough people join together, the government has little choice but to agree with them. The public can be harsh, but they largely speak their mind. Whistleblowing is no exception—once a whistleblower unleashes a scandal, their fate lies not only in the hands of the law, but in those of the public. Society can be a whistleblower’s saving grace, or their guilty verdict. When surveyed, the majority of people identified Edward Snowden as a whistleblower (versus a traitor). In the same survey, they classified Bradley [Chelsea] Manning as a traitor. They were equally treasonous from the government’s point of view, but the public gave little care to their [the government’s] conclusions. In the 1950s, whistleblowing was a no-go. After the war, big, flourishing corporations cultivated loyalty toward the company. The employees bought into this ideal, believing in the goals and benevolence of the company. Up until the sixties, the idea of big business was so glorified, it was unthought of to condemn the very hands that fed their family and supplied them with unprecedented benefits. As big business and government grew closer in the sixties and seventies, people began to question their comity. Whistleblowing became more acceptable and common. After that, whistleblowing began to be perceived as an important element of society, …show more content…
With these huge, 24/7 public forums, anyone can whistle blow anywhere, anytime, and about anything—and millions will hear about it. It is essentially impossible to cover anything up once it is out there, and squashing scandals is more difficult than ever. This means the stakes are higher for companies, for the government, and for the persons involved. In American culture, the media is typically seen as more trustworthy than the government. The media has immensely elevated the effectiveness of whistleblowing, which is both good and bad. On one hand, the public is more involved and informed about goings on, but on the other organizations and government are more secretive, and make it extremely difficult to uncover corruption. Another downfall is the fact that anyone can make a claim, be it false or true, and it will be spread either way. Generally speaking, it is more effective to blow the whistle internally than to go to the media (Apaza). In many cases, “anonymous” sources have gone to journalists to reveal misconduct—but that often doesn’t end well. In one case, the Federal Bureau of Investigations forced a journalist from the Times to reveal his source, controversially breaching his first amendment rights, and said source ended up in prison. This happens fairly regularly, most notably under the Bush and Obama administrations (Solomon). As much as the government and
Corruption is a persistent problem that plagues the world and it knows no boundaries. Transparency International defines it as the “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (2013). For the purposes of this thread, ‘corruption’ is defined as any individual, collective, or structural act or process that permits the use of public authority or position for private gain. This definition captures the broad and many ways individuals and institutions abuse power and the public trust. In regard to whistleblowing, much conflict stems from the context in which the whistleblower is viewed. We will examine the case of NYPD Narcotics Detective Frank Serpico who was regarded a snitch and a rat by fellow officers who were on the take and complete a what would you do dilemma.
After September 11th, Americans looked to the government for protection and reassurance. However, they did not expect to find out thirteen years later that the government did this by using technology to spy on Americans, as well as other countries. George W. Bush began the policy shortly after the terrorist attack and Barack Obama continued it. There have been many confrontations over the years about the extent of the N.S.A.’s spying; however, the most recent whistle-blower, Edward Snowden, leaked information that caused much upset throughout America (EFF). It has also brought many people to question: is he a hero or a traitor?
Everyday citizens often live unaware of their government’s inner workings. The knowing of political espionage is often too heavy of a subject to be inducted in conversation. True, prima facie, modest twists and turns of information may not be considered substantial, but this inconsideration leaves much to be uncontrolled. It is easy for political leaders to become power crazed, to not realize the massive implications that come of their actions. Only after all is said and done do the people actually realize their government is an opaque mask of deception. The Watergate Scandal substantially impacted Americans’ trust in their government.
Whistle blowing is a controversial topic in the professional industry. Whistle blowing is the act of speaking out against a fellow colleague or even a friend that has done something non-ethical or illegal in the workplace. A whistleblower raises concerns about the wrongdoing inside of the workplace. Employees hesitate to become a whistleblower because of the idea of becoming a snitch on fellow employees and having a bad rep around the office. This concern was lowered in 1989 with a law called the Whistleblower Protection Act that protects federal government employees in the United States from retaliatory action for voluntarily disclosing information about dishonest or illegal activities occurring at a government organization (whistleblowers.gov).
The term Whistleblower means “An employee who discloses information that s/he reasonably believes is evidence of illegality, gross waste or fraud, mismanagement, abuse of power, general wrongdoing, or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. When information is classified or otherwise restricted by Congress or Executive Order, disclosures only are protected as whistleblowing if made through designated, secure channels. (What is a Whistleblower?)” The idea behind whistleblowers is that they believe trying to inform the public of illegal acts within their businesses has the potential to protect the public from wrongdoing. The following studies analyze scholar’s findings on different factors related to whistle blowing as
Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (N.S.A) subcontractor turned whistle-blower is nothing short of a hero. His controversial decision to release information detailing the highly illegal ‘data mining’ practices of the N.S.A have caused shockwaves throughout the world and have raised important questions concerning how much the government actually monitors its people without their consent or knowledge. Comparable to Mark Felt in the Watergate scandals, Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, Edward Snowden joins the rank of infamous whistleblowers who gave up their jobs, livelihood, and forever will live under scrutiny of the public all in the service to the American people. Edward Snowden released information detailing the extent of the N.S.A breaches of American privacy and in doing so, became ostracized by the media and barred from freely reentering America, his home country.
In his essay “I Have Been to the Darkest Corners,” Glenn Greenwald attempts to convince the reader that Edward Snowden did not betray the U.S by leaking top-secret government documents proving that the government is spying on its citizens. He even goes as far as aiming to persuade people into believing that Snowden is actually a hero and martyr for enlightening the general public by focusing on the clear distinction between those in the know (the government) and the common people, who did not know they were being spied on. Charles Duhigg on the other hand, while still dealing with spying, focuses on companies spying on their customers while also touching on a (not so clear) distinction between the companies the consumers. While both essays seem to be about the power struggle between the spy-er and the spy-ee, they are truly about institutions manipulating
The rebuttal to the Snowden’s labeling as a whistleblower and patriot stems from the same ethical theory’s that would label him as a traitor and thief. The preceding is indicative of ethical dilemma which encompasses this case. Snowden’s work involved a large amount of responsibility in safe guarding the information that he had access to. Nonetheless, the information Snowden attained conflicted with the morals, reasoning and values that Snowden holds as an individual. The preceding traits are awarded with the same decency by many individuals within our society and this is why many people support Snowden’s actions.
It used to be that whistleblowers were applauded, and they still are in the private sector, but it seems as if government whistleblowers are criticized and many are even criminally charged. There is certainly a different take on their activities. In fact, some advocates counsel federal employees not to come forward with information because if they do, their lives will be destroyed (Shulman, 2007). What often happens is that they will never be able to work in their careers again in the same capacity (Shulman, 2007). Many whistleblowers not only lose their jobs, but they lose their families and friends, and much of their money ends up going to attorneys (Shulman, 2007). Indeed, in today’s day and age, there is a surge of whistleblowers prosecutions, and it is quite worrisome (Burghardt, 2011). Are the rights of citizens being eroded in order to protect bureaucratic secrets? Many case studies in this area support the notion that thing have gone awry. First, we shall look at the concept of whistleblowers
However, it may not be the best solution to be used first when dealing with unethical corporate practices. From more of a Utilitarian approach one should seek to do the greatest good. An approach that gives the company a chance to change its unethical behavior internally would follow this idea. Having the ability to change practices internally before outside intervention can have many positive effects. The company is able to make the changes, reestablish its integrity, maintain business, and retain employees. The whistleblowing option brings in outside forces that could lead to repercussions for the company which may include restitution or even being closed down. If the business is closed it effects more than just the corporate entity, all of the employees are also negatively impacted by this as well when they would lose their jobs. Sometimes however, when the company is unwilling to change its practices and do business in a more ethical manner people are left with little choice but to report to outside sources what is occurring within the business. Many see whistleblowing as law-breaking when employees are contractually obligated to
First I will be telling you about the pressure of being a “whistleblower”. In Fahrenheit 451 the pressure of being a “whistleblower” is so real, everyone is told to rat out everyone who has a book in their household, if they find out they have a book in the home it is burned to the ground. This is related to our society because we are pressured to do what is right, and part of my belief system is to do what is right and to point out what is wrong. For example if someone were to gossip behind their back I would try to stand up and tell them it is wrong and tell the person what the others said
The American government used to be able to keep the people in happy ignorance to the fact that they watch every move they make. After certain revelations of people like Edward Snowden, the public knows the extent of the government spying. On June 5, 2013 Edward Snowden leaked documents of the NSA to the Guardian (The Guardian 2). The whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed to the world how the American government collects information like cell phone metadata, Internet history, emails, location from phones, and more. President Obama labeled the man a traitor because he showed the world the illegal acts the NSA performs on US citizens (Service of Snowden 1). The government breached the people’s security, and now the people are afraid because everyone is aware of how the US disapproves of people who do not agree with their programs. Obama said that these programs find information about terrorists living in the US, but he has lit...
Edward Snowden. This is a name that will be in the history books for ages. He will be branded a traitor or a whistleblower depending on where you look. Many Americans feel that Edward Snowden is a traitor who sold the United States’ secrets aiming to harm the nation. Others believe that he was simply a citizen of the United States who exercised his right to expose the government for their unconstitutional actions. It is important to not only know the two sides to the argument of friend or foe, but to also know the facts as well. My goal in this paper is to present the facts without bias and to adequately portray the two sides of the argument.
It is likely to consider Edward Snowden as a whistle blower because he wanted the people to decide what the government can or can not do. According to the article, Man behind NSA Leaks Says He Did It to Safeguard Privacy, Liberty, Edward Snowden's believes that, “the public needs to decide whether these programs or policies are right or wrong.” (Barbara, Yan). M...
Whistle blowing is an attempt of an employee or former employee of a company to reveal what he or she believes to be a wrongdoing in or by a company or organization. Whistle blowing tries to make others aware of practices that are considered illegal or immoral. If the wrongdoing is reported to someone in the company it is said to be internal. Internal whistle blowing tends to do less damage to the company. There is also external whistle blowing. This is where the wrongdoing is reported to the media and brought to the attention of the public. This type of whistle blowing tends to affect the company in a negative way because of bad publicity. It is said that whistle blowing is personal if the wrongdoing affects the whistle blower alone (like sexual harassment), and said to be impersonal if the wrongdoing affects other people. Many people whistle blow for two main reasons: morality and revenge.