Anonymous: 
After reading up on the group, Anonymous, it is clear that multiple people have their own interpretation of what the group is. For instance, on their Wikipedia page, it states that some refer to the group as "freedom fighters" while others think of them as, "cyber terrorists". Some even view the group as a social movement or simply a "brand". Therefore, it seems that the group sparks various reactions from the public. Overall, the group is known for being involved in cyber attacks and DDoS attacks, typically aimed at the government or other organizations that support censorship. Members of Anon seem to stand behind the idea that the web is a place for them to escape the boundaries that society has placed on people and to do whatever they feel like. In terms of whether or not the group is considered to be heroes or villains, I would have to say that they lean more towards villains than heroes. I say that because, yes I agree that people should have an outlet to speak their minds/the truth, however, there is a more rational way of going about it without breaking the law and abandoning morale. Even if they think that what they are doing is for the greater good, it still seems that they are not impacting society in a meaningful way. Overall, I do not think hacking and implementing cyber attacks is an effective way to get a message across.

Edward Snowden:
Edward Snowden obviously knew a lot of information that was not meant to be disclosed, but decided to disclose them anyway to the public. His main intention was to shine a light on global surveillance and overall, inform the public of NSA. Snowden stated that he wanted to inform the public of the intentions of the government and warn the public of surveillance programs. He also stated that he wanted to be an example for others to take a stand when wrongdoings occur. Despite Snowden wanting to protect and inform the public on a major issue, I still do no think it is fair to label him a hero, yet I am also not sure if it is fair to label him a villain either. Granted, what he did was wrong in the eyes of the government and possibly did more damage than good, however, I think he had good intentions but just failed in voicing his concerns in a more rational way.

Chelsea Manning:
This is one of those cases where there does not seem to be just black and white, but rather gray. Chelsea Manning leaked classified files to the public via WikiLeaks, in which showed footage of airstrikes overseas. Manning said that she leaked the information and the "war logs" to show the public that the U.S seemed to obsess over killing people; she simply wanted to make the world a better place by opening up the eyes of the public. Initially, Manning wanted to release the information  to reputable media outlets but when she never heard back from them, she decided to move forward with WikiLeaks. In general, I understand that Manning was trying to use her voice to speak on such a sensitive topic as war, but at the same time, I do not think it was her place to leak such sensitive material. I am sure there were other avenues that she could have taken without going against the law. However, I do admire her bravery in exposing the wrongdoings of our country.

Julian Assange:
Assange created WikiLeaks as a platform for people to post material while remaining anonymous. WikiLeaks has become a place where classified and secret documents can be uploaded via anonymous sources. WikiLeaks became more well-known after Chelsea Manning had leaked information to the site. Before WikiLeaks even existed, Assange was involved in hacking and was charged. Again, it seems that Assange wanted to created a platform that allowed people to speak freely without disclosing their identity, however, there is a fine line between informing and exploiting.

After reading up on these people, it made me realize that there really is no black and white because it could be argued that every decision/choice has a consequence but also a reward. In this case, it seemed that the people mentioned had good intentions in wanting to inform the public, but failed in effectively executing their message/ goal rationally and logistically. I think it is fair to say that some situations remain gray and are hard to label just black or white.

-Sincerely,
Sinead