Snowden, Assange, Manning & the new knowledge cyberclass

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore and theorize on the motivations of a new class of whistleblowers or leakers stemming from the “abusive” cybersecurity practices of Western governments. This research primarily focuses on such practices of the US Government.

Design/methodology/approach

This work is designed as a case study research of cybersecurity whistleblowers or leakers on Western governments, involving data collection from primary and secondary sources. The method is a content analysis to determine the presence of certain themes within this primary and secondary data which this research can then make inferences about the messages within the texts.

Findings

The findings show a formation of a recent class of power brokers, with its own collective ethos, who will be known by a new term: the “New Knowledge Cyberclass” (NKC). The development of the NKC was revealed through the shocking data revelations by Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning. What separates the NKC from government “protectors” (i.e. President Obama, Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo), who argue that these leakers stole and leaked classified documents that endangered lives, is their definitions of what it means to be defenders of democracy, which here pertains to the rights to citizens’ online privacy and the degree of secrecy in US Government.

Originality/value

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study directed toward connecting, Snowden, Assange and Manning, to the birth of a new class of power brokers designed to directly challenge Western government malpractices with citizens’ online privacy and secrecy in foreign operations. This research explores both the birth of this new class and a collective ethos that binds this group together despite the tensions and conflicts within this new class.

Citation

Boussios, E.G. (2023), "Snowden, Assange, Manning & the new knowledge cyberclass", Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 402-419. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-12-2022-0147