5 ms·

Whistle blowing journalism implies you are reporting on acts breaking the law. Reporting things that are juicy but not illegal, is effectively gossip / tabloi

Whistle blowing journalism implies you are reporting on acts breaking the law. Reporting things that are juicy but not illegal, is effectively gossip / tabloid material. You don't get to break the law in order to effectively gossip. Case in point. You don't get to break into the King of England's cell phone to report he's infertile, even if you think means English citizens have a right to know that the country will never have a Prince-heir. That is not legitimate journalism, and its certainly not whistle-blowing. Its repugnant and tabloid journalism. Personal privacy is never second to the mob. Period. EDIT: unsafe, fraud, abuse, corruption, malfeasance of government/company funds, are almost always also breaking fed/state/opco policy or regulations, and as such they are illicit and fall within the spectrum of whistle-blowing.

cdolan 5y ago
Well said, take my upvote. Personal privacy and the belief that you are innocent until proven guilty (no matter how "obviously guilty" you are), are two things we've really forgotten in the USA and perhaps the modern world in general.
- machinebun 5y ago
  The innocent until proven guilty only applies in criminal court, not in civil court by the way. Personal privacy is good, but there are some societal things that should supersede the right to personal privacy in my opinion - I don't think any single right should be absolute.
  - cdolan 5y ago
    The US Constitution would disagree with you. Edit- the “Bill of Rights” sorry
    - machinebun 5y ago
      Whenever two people have conflicting absolute rights, who's right is more absolute? That's why rights are always relative. The Bill of Rights is a good starting place, but any law should pass the common sense/reasonableness standard - we already make many [reasonable, common-sense] exceptions to the right to free speech (i.e. shouting Fire! in a theatre for a cliche example, or incitement to violence)
- sumedh 5y ago
  > are two things we've really forgotten in the USA You should one more point to that list, "Rich people should pay their fair share of the taxes" has been forgotten as well.
luffapi 5y ago
There is no requirement for whistle blowing to be strictly about illegal activity. Mismanagement, corruption, unethical behavior… are all considered under the term. It’s in the public’s benefit for this information to be public. All billionaires should be under far more scrutiny then they are. There’s no benefit to the rest of us for them to operate with impunity in the shadows.
andrepd 5y ago
> A whistleblower (also written as whistle-blower or whistle blower)[1] is a person, usually an employee, who exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, or a waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds. Morality ≠ lawfullness. Many things are perfectly legal but profoundly immoral or unethical. The public has a right to know that they're being cheated like this, that working class people have to pay their taxes but the very rich don't. It's very slimy that you try to equate this to curiosity about royalty.

cdolan 5y ago

Well said, take my upvote. Personal privacy and the belief that you are innocent until proven guilty (no matter how "obviously guilty" you are), are two things we've really forgotten in the USA and perhaps the modern world in general.

machinebun 5y ago
The innocent until proven guilty only applies in criminal court, not in civil court by the way. Personal privacy is good, but there are some societal things that should supersede the right to personal privacy in my opinion - I don't think any single right should be absolute.
- cdolan 5y ago
  The US Constitution would disagree with you. Edit- the “Bill of Rights” sorry
  - machinebun 5y ago
    Whenever two people have conflicting absolute rights, who's right is more absolute? That's why rights are always relative. The Bill of Rights is a good starting place, but any law should pass the common sense/reasonableness standard - we already make many [reasonable, common-sense] exceptions to the right to free speech (i.e. shouting Fire! in a theatre for a cliche example, or incitement to violence)
sumedh 5y ago
> are two things we've really forgotten in the USA You should one more point to that list, "Rich people should pay their fair share of the taxes" has been forgotten as well.

luffapi 5y ago

There is no requirement for whistle blowing to be strictly about illegal activity. Mismanagement, corruption, unethical behavior… are all considered under the term. It’s in the public’s benefit for this information to be public. All billionaires should be under far more scrutiny then they are. There’s no benefit to the rest of us for them to operate with impunity in the shadows.

andrepd 5y ago

> A whistleblower (also written as whistle-blower or whistle blower)[1] is a person, usually an employee, who exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, or a waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds. Morality ≠ lawfullness. Many things are perfectly legal but profoundly immoral or unethical. The public has a right to know that they're being cheated like this, that working class people have to pay their taxes but the very rich don't. It's very slimy that you try to equate this to curiosity about royalty.