Working in the corporate or government environment, employees sometimes witness things that are unethical to society or to the corporation. Many times these things are also illegal. The employee is then inadvertently put into a difficult situation. Should they speak up about the activities they witnessed or should they keep quiet for the sake of not causing problems or not losing their job? This is a very complex question to answer and each individual justifies their decisions differently depending on their morals, values, and principles.
The employee that decides to speak up and expose the violation is called a whistleblower. In many situations, there is no threat posed to national security, especially if the offence took place in corporations …show more content…
As a whistleblower, an individual promotes transparency as well as accountability by providing internal means to allow external checks, upholding checks and balances. They assist law enforcement’s efforts to detect and prevent crime by providing them with effective and reliable information which could lead to successful prosecution. These actors have played a major role in exposing some of the most controversial actions of the government. For example, Sergeant Joseph Darby and Sergeant Samuel, both exposed of the torture taking place in the Abu Ghraib prison. Sergeant Joseph Darby provided the pictures of the abuse that led to an investigation and resulted in dishonorable discharge and reprimands for 11 of the soldiers. Whereas, Sergeant Samuel Provance publicly revealed the role of the interrogators in the abuse and the tactics used to cover up the Abu Ghraib abuse. Similarly, Edward Snowden, exposed the NSA’s warrants domestic wiretapping program. It is important to acknowledge that if it weren’t for these whistleblowers, these activities may have never been …show more content…
Government agencies are given extraordinary powers, therefore, it becomes crucial that someone becomes the “eyes and ears” of what is happening in these agencies ensuring the government is effectively protecting the citizens and upholding the constitution. Government’s classification and clearance program seem to be acting as a shield for the agencies. These clearance programs help the agencies protect themselves and prevent information from reaching the public. In some instances, it is important to secure classified information if it possess the power to threaten the national security, but if the information is only aimed at educating the public about the wrongdoing of the agencies, it should no longer be prevented under the excuse of ‘national security’. Sergeant Samuel Provance clearly wanted to inform the public about the interrogation tactics used at the Abu Gharib. He shed the light on the matter of unethical means and methods through which soldiers were interrogating the prisoners. The military tried to cover the abuse. The public needed Sergeant Provance to reveal the necessary information to learn about the torture that was happening at the Abu Gharib prison, in order to prevent it from happening again. Even after this, few view Seargant Provance as a
The employee that decides to speak up and expose the violation is called a whistleblower. In many situations, there is no threat posed to national security, especially if the offence took place in corporations …show more content…
As a whistleblower, an individual promotes transparency as well as accountability by providing internal means to allow external checks, upholding checks and balances. They assist law enforcement’s efforts to detect and prevent crime by providing them with effective and reliable information which could lead to successful prosecution. These actors have played a major role in exposing some of the most controversial actions of the government. For example, Sergeant Joseph Darby and Sergeant Samuel, both exposed of the torture taking place in the Abu Ghraib prison. Sergeant Joseph Darby provided the pictures of the abuse that led to an investigation and resulted in dishonorable discharge and reprimands for 11 of the soldiers. Whereas, Sergeant Samuel Provance publicly revealed the role of the interrogators in the abuse and the tactics used to cover up the Abu Ghraib abuse. Similarly, Edward Snowden, exposed the NSA’s warrants domestic wiretapping program. It is important to acknowledge that if it weren’t for these whistleblowers, these activities may have never been …show more content…
Government agencies are given extraordinary powers, therefore, it becomes crucial that someone becomes the “eyes and ears” of what is happening in these agencies ensuring the government is effectively protecting the citizens and upholding the constitution. Government’s classification and clearance program seem to be acting as a shield for the agencies. These clearance programs help the agencies protect themselves and prevent information from reaching the public. In some instances, it is important to secure classified information if it possess the power to threaten the national security, but if the information is only aimed at educating the public about the wrongdoing of the agencies, it should no longer be prevented under the excuse of ‘national security’. Sergeant Samuel Provance clearly wanted to inform the public about the interrogation tactics used at the Abu Gharib. He shed the light on the matter of unethical means and methods through which soldiers were interrogating the prisoners. The military tried to cover the abuse. The public needed Sergeant Provance to reveal the necessary information to learn about the torture that was happening at the Abu Gharib prison, in order to prevent it from happening again. Even after this, few view Seargant Provance as a