Test 1 Essay

Essay

[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]

[Institutional Affiliation(s)]

Author Note

[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

Comparing and contrasting government leaks

Pentagon papers, WikiLeaks and NSA data collection are kind of similar episodes involving leaks pertaining to crucial events. The Pentagon papers are related to the disclosure of matters of United States political and military involvement in Vietnam during the years of 1945 to 1967. These papers were published by Daniel Ellsberg through an article published in the New York Times in 1971. Further through an article published in 1996, the author brought to the notice of the public that President Johnson administration was involved in presenting false facts before Congress. Similarly, WikiLeaks has at present taken form of an international organization led by Julian Assange. This website being administer from Australia or from an unknown country is involved in publishing News Leaks which contains crucial information.

The NSA Data collection is being codified as PRISM, which is aimed at gathering information from internet communications. In doing so, the American Security Agency traces crucial data, preserves that and consume this data on the basis of where and when required. Normally, this data is used in targeting communications and to alter Google Searches. A comparative analysis of three modes of data leakage suggests that this is being done willfully, and any chances of heavy financial returns cannot be eliminated. Another similar aspect in these three episodes is of ethical concern, such leaks effects in one way or another the privacy of a normal citizen. Finally, it can also be argued as a comparative factor that there appear no solid justifications in either case, which could categorize these leaks as justifiable.

In the case of Pentagon Papers and WikiLeaks, there appears no strong legal or simply a justifiable reason for such whistleblowing. This then leaves the space to think that the perpetrators behind have worked to sort out some financial gains, as apparently there is no reason to think otherwise these two as conforming the ethical standards. The PRISM program, on the other hand, appears some bit justifiable. Since the internet world has broadened the scope of the state's vulnerability, therefore one may not specifically argue about its nature of legality. States have such legal paradigms which allow them to carry on with the surveillance activities.

The comparative analysis of leakers suggests that Daniel Ellsberg and Julian Assange have worked over such sensitivities to highlight the state's false sense of functioning in cases pertaining to ethical standards. In the NSA case, in the hindsight it appears that the state is working for minimizing the vulnerability of its citizens.