He observed documented proof of acts, committed by the NSA, which violated the public’s privacy and were initiated illegally. Disturbed by what he saw, he had a choice to make: 1.) Report his findings through appropriate government channels, 2.) Report his findings publicly or, 3.) Keep quiet all together. Unfortunately, Edward Snowden made the unethical decision to expose his discovery through the media. Revealing the NSA’s secret activity, in the manner that he did, put Americans at risk and wasted years of work and the funds spent on this endeavor. I don’t believe Edward Snowden lacked moral sensitivity, which is a component of ethical decision making (Johnson, 2011, p. 236). According to Johnson (2011), Rest states “problem recognition requires that we consider how our behavior affects others, identify possible courses of action, and determine the consequences of each potential strategy” (p. 237). The effects of his betrayal reached beyond American soil. I struggle to understand how he concluded that the path he choose was the best option benefitting the masses. He had the option to voice his objections over the activity to NSA officials. Doing so would have maintained the secrecy of the technology and methods utilized, thereby, preserving the fortification of Americans and our …show more content…
This made me cringe. He is the farthest thing from my definition of hero. I believe his actions were unethical, self-serving, and a demonstration of his narcissism. Therefore, following my assessment, I feel confident that I would choose different actions then Edward Snowden. If I was in Edward Snowden’s shoes, I would have taken my concerns to the appropriate officials at the NSA and allow them to address my concerns. If I felt unsatisfied with the explanation, I would resign from my position. I wouldn’t have leaked any information to the press due to its highly sensitive