Verified by 
29-year-old computer whiz Edward Snowden might have thought he knew what he was getting into when he leaked NSA data-gathering secrets, but it's hard to believe he could have foreseen the past week's events. Since Snowden revealed the existence of classified government programs that monitor phone calls and collect personal online data without targets' knowledge, his picture has been plastered across the front pages of newspapers and web sites all over the world. He has become the object of such intense interest that media outlets are eagerly dissecting the mundane details of his life, from his girlfriend's vocation (pole dancer) to his educational attainment (a GED) to his online forum posts (PG-13 geeky).
Is Snowden a hero? He has indicated that he willingly sacrificed the comforts of his life in Hawaii because he felt compelled to inform Americans of the scope of government surveillance and its threat to their privacy. As a result of his disclosures, he may never again enjoy a normal existence with family and loved ones in the United States. So far, though, public opinion is divided on the moral merits of his actions. A number of prominent voices on both sides of the political spectrum, including Michael Moore, Glenn Beck, and CNN writer Douglas Rushkoff, have hailed Snowden's whistleblowing crusade as heroic. But others, such as New York Times columnist David Brooks and New Yorker writer Jeffrey Toobin, have asserted that Snowden is a traitor, betraying his employers and the oaths he swore when he agreed to accept his current position. Some commentators have wondered whether Snowden might have been a double agent, colluding with the Chinese while employed by an NSA contractor. Even U.S. senators are at odds about how Snowden's breach of secrecy should be viewed.
Before he made his disclosures, Snowden anticipated he would receive plenty of blowback, and indeed, some degree of recrimination is almost par for the course if you're truly carving out an identity as an agent of social change. Psychologists Zeno Franco and Philip Zimbardo, who have defined various types of heroic action, note that so-called “social heroes” are those who have the courage to point out injustices at personal risk when many others are not willing to do so. “The goal of social heroism can be seen as the preservation of a community-sanctioned value or standard that is perceived to be under threat,” Zimbardo, Franco, and colleague Kathy Blau write.
Since Snowden did things that transgress social norms (betraying government secrets, breaking oaths, questioning top officials' judgment), it's a given that he can't expect overwhelming kudos—at least not right away. Predicting which bold activists society will later anoint as heroic, however, can get a bit murky. Susan B. Anthony, an advocate of women's suffrage and now a hero to feminists everywhere, was actually tried and convicted in a New York court for illegally voting in the 1872 presidential election. Daniel Ellsberg, the now-heralded former military analyst who leaked the Pentagon Papers about the U.S. government's doomed Vietnam policy, was forced to stand trial on espionage charges after releasing the papers, going free only after it became clear the government had subjected him to illegal wiretapping. On the other hand, while working toward a deeply-held moral ideal is an important part of social heroism, it's not sufficient on its own. The '60s and '70s-era Weathermen saw themselves as righteous defenders of peace and civil rights, but in the end they were largely reviled for planting bombs that endangered Americans. Not only must true social heroes act selflessly on behalf of an inner conviction, they must ensure the strength of the moral edifice on which their action is built. That involves carefully assessing what society stands to gain and lose as a result of their efforts—a convoluted process that may not yield easy answers.
Will Snowden eventually join the heroic ranks of people like Ellsberg? Or will his hero status remain a point of contention? Our collective opinion will continue to gel as we assess his motivations, as we digest the full substance of his revelations, and as we get a sense of how his disclosures will inform the ongoing debate about privacy and security. But if Snowden is firm in his convictions—and it appears he is—he'll tell you that his own internal verdict on his actions is what matters most.
