Dean Baquet and the Ethics of Whistleblowing
By The president is having what is, sadly, a normal one:
As Jamelle says, this thread could be an article of impeachment itself.
In a not unrelated development:
BREAKING: Tonight, “60 Minutes” has obtained a letter that indicates the government whistleblower who set off the impeachment inquiry of President Trump is under federal protection, because he or she fears for their safety, reports @ScottPelley https://t.co/RbqsYIAFXR— David Begnaud (@DavidBegnaud) September 29, 2019
One news organization has, alas made the whisteblower easier to find and threaten:
The New York Times should be doing some soul-searching about how they missed a once-in-a-generation scoop because they were so obsessed with both-sides-ism.
Instead, they’re trying to out the whistle-blower. https://t.co/ABBEWJzvhS— Matt O’Brien (@ObsoleteDogma) September 26, 2019
There is an irony here not limited to the Times itself. Had the whisteblower illegally brought the information to the paper directly, they would consider protecting his or her identity sacrosanct, but since legal channels were followed they’re willing to at least risk identifying the individual:
It does seem like the incentives for whistleblowing are a bit perverse, because if you do it the proper, legal way, you become fairer game for journalists to identify you, whereas if you just leak the same stuff to journalists, we’ll generally conceal the source and protect you. https://t.co/UGossMOfxR— Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) September 26, 2019
This probably isn’t about to go away, so it seems like this is a problem that really should be thought through.