This article compares the position of Edward Snowden vis-a-vis another prominent whistleblower, Bradley Manning. The author is critical of Bradley Manning’s disclosure – he is of the opinion that Manning failed to properly analyse the information that he revealed. On the other hand, he states that Snowden has been much more sensible while determining the nature of information that he released.

In this article, Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971, says that the machinery of the American democratic government is broken—and there is a need of whistleblowers like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden to inspire Americans to fight back against this invasion of privacy. Snowden’s whistleblowing gives us a chance to roll back what is tantamount to an ‘executive coup’ against the US constitution.

This article analyses the situation of Edward Snowden vis-à-vis Daniel Ellsberg. It identifies one major difference between the position of Snowden and Ellsberg: The Pentagon Papers revealed that the government had ramped up the war in Vietnam and lied to Congress and the public about it, which is clearly wrong. But in Snowden’s case, it’s still unclear whether the NSA’s spying was in fact legal and if what Snowden did was simply leak classified information because he objects to how the government has chosen to defend national security. The article concludes by stating that the status of Snowden as a heroic whistleblower will greatly depend on the balance between the apparent threat to national security and the danger of the USA becoming a surveillance state.

This article examines the argument that Edward Snowden is not a genuine whistle-blower. The basis of this argument is that if one divulges classified information to expose the government and one doesn’t reveal a clear legal violation, under current law they are not considered as a whistleblower. The federal Whistleblower Protection Act, passed in 1989, was written to shield government employees who reveal fraud and other wrongdoing. But it is riddled with exceptions. There is no protection so employees of the NSA or CIA. Snowden misses on protection on two counts: He seems to have exposed no actual crimes, and he worked for the NSA.

This article brings out the hypocrisy that is shown by governments in determining whether a leak is done for a political purpose or a heretic purpose. He likens the acts of Edward Snowden with that of Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning. The article concludes that the willingness of the government to punish leakers is inversely proportional to the leakers’ rank and status, which is bad news for someone so lacking in those attributes as Edward Snowden. But as the Snowden prosecution commences, a need has arisen to question his selective prosecution.

Booze Allen Hamilton, the company which Edward Snowden worked for has released that Snowden earned $ 122,000 a year. The Guardian’s Glen Greenwald stated that Snowden’s salary would not play a crucial part in his role as a whistleblower.

This article address the classic dilemma about whether Snowden can be regarded as a whistleblower and get protection accordingly. The article draws parallels to other noted whistleblowers, including Daniel Ellsberg.

Besides forcing government and national-security institutions to face the public about their spying efforts, Edward Snowden’s decision to release information on America’s massive public surveillance efforts has thrown another system into a flurry of self-examination: Snowden’s leaks raises the question of who actually qualifies as a journalist.

The Guardian’s Glen Greenwald has criticized the NSA Director Keith Alexander on his approach of collecting the whole haystack while gathering intelligence on the citizens of the United States. It was noted that noted former NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake said that “the continuation of Alexander’s policies … would result in the ‘complete evisceration of civil liberties.”

In light of Bradley Manning being held guilty on 20 out of 22 charges framed against him, this article asserts that the Guardian has a duty of care towards Edward Snowden. It accepts that news organizations rely on brave people to break ranks and tell all, but no editor can give a whistleblower a cast-iron guarantee. No editor can give a whistleblower a cast-iron guarantee. The most important issue in the relationship is to act honestly and fairly, taking every step to ensure that he or she has the best understanding of the consequences of his or her actions.

This article discusses the issue of grant of asylum to Edward Snowden. The author concludes that only the small nations of Latin America, committed to “Socialism of the 21st century”, stand up to the might of the United States, by offering to provide asylum to Edward Snowden. The rest of the world’s state establishments will show their inability to defy the US despite great sympathy for Snowden among their citizens.

This article discusses the issue about whether Edward Snowden can be classified as a whistleblower. It also touches upon the issue of public interest involved in the disclosure by Snowden.

This article discusses whether Edward Snowden can be labelled as a ‘whistleblower’ and thereby be entitled to protection. The article explains that identifying someone as a whistleblower portrays them in a positive way, as the person who exposes wrongdoing. However, a problem arises when the information leaked is something that is believed to be wrong, but not conclusively proved to be wrong, as is in Snowden’s case.