Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
Financial confidentiality remains to be one of the most important aspects that bank are expected to safeguard for its customers. On the other hand, financial institutions are expected to ensure that their customer’s confidential information is kept as private information. In this regard, it is expected that a bank must ensure that all attempts that may expose its secret information to the public are thwarted. Perhaps, it is this desire that prompted the bank of America to play defence and block Wikileaks from enjoying its banking services as the repute associated with the anti-secrecy website may make it suspect.
Banks and Wikileaks
The anti-secrecy web site, Wikileaks, has faced a lot of decrying from various governments for releasing information that the government had considered confidential due to its sensitivity with regard to matters of national unity. Despite this, the whistle blowing website has not faced any legal prosecution from the justice department, but more animosity has emanated from an unlikely territory, the financial industry. It is crystal clear that a number of financial institutions have attempted to shut down operations of Wikileaks by adamantly refusing to make any payments that are related to this anti-secrecy agency. The bank of America has also joined the list of financial institutions that have refused to do business with Wikileaks. In their refusal to do business with Wikileaks, the management of the bank of America was justified by reason that the actions of Wikileaks were inconsistent with the internal policies of the bank, and therefore, it was working towards mitigating possible risks that were likely to be faced by the institution in case Wikileaks decided to release some of its confidential information.
Analysis of the Bank of America refusal to process payment for Wikileaks based on utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is one of the many theories that have been formulated in ethics in an attempt to dissect the issue of ethics in the society. It is evident that many philosophers have come up with contrasting opinions with regard to ethics, but apparently, the paper will concentrate on utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a theory of ethics postulates that motivating factors in a course of action that is embarked on by any individual should be always to maximise the benefits that can be reaped from the action by majority of people in the society. A close analysis of the theory depicts that all actions should be guided by their outcomes in which everyone is expected to do what constitutes the greatest good (Kagan, 2001).
The threat by Wikileaks to release information that is confidential to the public about the Bank of America will be in great violation of some of the cardinal internal controls of the financial institution. Therefore, its refusal to do business with Wikileaks is justified because it would safeguard the interests of its customers to have their financial information kept secret. With a closer look at the actions of Wikileaks, it becomes evident that the company is motivated by malice. For instance, soon after financial institutions such as MasterCard, PayPal among others had cut ties with Wikileaks, their websites were attacked by hackers who were in support of Wikileaks’ actions to release information that is deemed sensitive. The founder of the anti-secrecy website urged hackers to attack these institutions thus crumbling their websites for a few days promoting the financial institutions to update their firewalls so that they could shield their websites from the massive attacks that they were facing. The whistleblower website founder had urged customers of the Bank of America to stop banking with it and that transfer their funds to other banks. From a utilitarian point of view, this is unacceptable because such acts result in more harm than good (Sifry, 2011).
On the other hand, the actions by Wikilieaks would be justified if it aims to bring greater benefits to the general public. For instance, if the actions of releasing secret information would have helped stop any form of malpractice by the bank’s employees, then it would be justifiable under the utilitarian ethics for wikileaks to expose such malpractices. this is because such an actions would be for the benefit of the larger populace. For instance, by exposing some emails that were concealing corrupt dealings at the bank of America, Wikileaks’ actions are justified on the basis that the anti-secrecy website demanded for accountability thus saving the populace as opposed to harming it. This released information had intended to put the customers of this bank at a better position to discern how their funds were used and whether the services that they were receiving from the bank were fraudulent as the whistle blower website had purported. If the information that had been released was the truth, then actions of Wikileaks benefited the customers of this bank and therefore, it should continue with its mission of making information available to all at all time. Therefore, the Bank of America action to terminate any kind of financial transaction with Wikileaks is not justified with regard to utilitarianism (Sifry, 2011).
Analysis of the Bank of America refusal to process payment for Wikileaks based on deontology
Deontology is one the popular classical theories of normative ethics. Deontology advocates adherence to rules and obligations that have been put forth by the governing forces. It concerns itself with judging people’s actions based on how right or wrong, bad or good, or any other facet that is used to measure the correctness or otherwise of an action. This theory negates the utilitarianism approach to morality in which actions are judged based on the consequences they have on the society. Deontologists are moral absolutists. Therefore, any action that does not follow the set moral rules no matter its benefits, is judged as wrong and is thus punishable (Kagan, 2001).
Therefore, the application of deontology in the case of Wikileaks and the Bank of America is judged, in the context of this theory as a wrong act. This is because the Bank of America is under no legal obligation to open an account for Wikileaks if it deems the firm a high risk entity. The bank had exercised its liberty to cut out its connection with the anti-secrecy website with the opinion that it was safeguarding its operational interests and those of its customers. Deontologists would not hold the bank liable as having wronged Wikileaks. The actions of Wikileaks are constitutionally wrong because they sabotage the privacy that everyone is entitled to. The whistle blowing website has in the past release individual opinion of the United States diplomats who work in foreign countries (Sifry, 2011).
References
Kagan, S. (2001). Normative ethics: Dimensions of philosophy series. Colorado: Westview Press.
Sifry, M., L.(2011). WikiLeaks and the Age of Transparency. New York: OR Books.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.