The Challenger disaster. On January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded 72 seconds into its flight, killing all 7 crew members. The flight had received unusual publicity due to the presence on board of a teacher, Christa McAuliffe, who had been chosen following a nationwide competition. The explosion was caused by failure of the O-ring seals between segments of the booster rockets. A subsequent investigation revealed that several employees of the manufacturer, Thiokol, had been aware of O-ring deficiencies.  »

In early 2000, allegations surfaced that the White House was concealing e-mail that could have helped reveal the extent of Vice President Gore's involvement in campaign fundraising controversies, and whether the Clinton administration had sold trade-mission seats in exchange for campaign contributions. A Northrup-Grumman contractor, Betty Lambuth, said that she was threatened with loss of her job and other consequences if they disclosed the existence of the e-mail messages. Note: If you are really interested in this case, you might want to read my report on it. The other articles linked below are shorter, however, and should provide enough background for the discussion.

1. Did Betty Lambuth have an ethical duty to tell her boss, Steve Hawkins, that the White House did not seem willing to fix the problem that kept the e-mails from being searched?
2. Did the White House have an ethical duty to tell law-enforcement officials and Congressional committees about the discovery of e-mails that they had earlier reported lost?
3. On the other hand ... The contractors undoubtedly signed a nondisclosure agreement, which pledged them not to reveal any nonpublic information they encountered while in the White House. In private industry, the purpose of nondisclosure agreements is often to protect trade secrets. In the White House, the agreements could be expected to protect information that was politically sensitive or related to national security. Contractors were obligated not to reveal such information unless they had the right to do so, regardless of whether the other party had the right to know. Would Lambuth have violated these obligations by telling her boss of the problem?
4. Do contract employees have an ethical duty to their employer to keep their mouths shut in situations like this, where revealing information will create an organizational conflict of interest that may disqualify their employer from competing for future contracts? In other words, if Northrop Grumman employees opened their big mouths about this problem, wouldn t they be placing their co-workers jobs in jeopardy?
5. In view of the large number of investigations that were potentially being impeded by the missing e-mail, should Lambuth and Hall have gone public sooner, even if it might have cost them their jobs? Or was it a reasonable tradeoff to wait until they were out of the "line of fire"?
6. Is it possible that these charges were just "politics as usual" from Republicans jockeying for a winning position in the 2000 election campaign? How would you defend the Clinton administration against these charges? See Section 8 of my report for some suggestions.
7. Back during the Nixon administration, all conversations in the Oval Office and other locations in the White House, as well as telephone conversations were recorded without the knowledge of most participants. Not only was this shortsighted from a political point of view, since it led to the downfall of the Nixon presidency, but it was criticized as being an invasion of privacy of the participants. Does the same issue arise with regard to the logging of e-mail sent to and from the White House?
8. Noting that the Nixon-era tapes were preserved, would it have been a good idea for the Clinton administration to preserve e-mail archives, rather than destroying them, as suggested in this article on the case?
9. In politics, whatever side you are on, you will hear credible allegations of "dirty tricks" by the other side. It may even be that one cannot win an election without engaging in dirty trickery. If you were a computer professional serving a public official or candidate for office, would you participate in such operations? Should you? »