An Ethical Analysis of BankAmerica and WikiLeaks
Companies often reserve the right not to do business with some potential customers. The sign, "no shirt no shoes no service" provides an example of this. However, companies generally cannot refuse to serve protected classes of consumers, such as those based on race or gender. Thus the "whites only" signs that were once found in companies are no longer posted. Aside from legal considerations, there are ethical concerns regarding when companies do and do not conduct business with certain companies or individuals. Thus an investment firm may choose to invest only in companies that it considers "green" or "socially responsible" according to their definition. This research considers the specific relationship between Bank of America and WikiLeaks, and the ethical considerations associated with that relationship.
WikiLeaks debuted on the Internet in December 2006. The site facilitates uploading files confidentially and anonymously, and a team of reviewers decides what is ultimately posted on the site. WikiLeaks uses servers and technological resources around the world, and also uses personnel in various countries to take advantage of such legal protection as it can given its activities. The site has been called the first "stateless news" organization, and works hard to protect itself and its sources from prosecution (Fildes, 2010).
The company departed from its traditional operational mode in late 2010 when it used mainstream media outlets including the New York Times and Der Spiegel to release some of the American government documents, including confidential cables and military procedures. The nature and magnitude of this leak also prompted increased scrutiny and debate about the site. Its founder, Julius Assange, came under scrutiny for his activities, and was also accused of sex crimes in his native Sweden. One of the alleged sources for the Ameri...