3 ms·
I don't understand your point. The very article you cite states that Haugen (the Facebook whistle-blower) was praised by politicians from both sides. On top of
by cycomanic 3y ago
I don't understand your point. The very article you cite states that Haugen (the Facebook whistle-blower) was praised by politicians from both sides.
On top of that whistleblowing is inherently political because it implies an individual reporting on a (typically) much larger and powerful organisation, for moral, ethical or legal reasons.
When I read statements like yours I always wonder about the motivation. What are you trying to achieve? Is this part of a covert campaign to discredit some inconvenient organisation?
- gadders 3y agoLol. Yes, me and millions of dollars of Russian funding in a covert campaign. >>On top of that whistleblowing is inherently political because it implies an individual reporting on a (typically) much larger and powerful organisation Agreed, but if the organisation only supports you when you say things about a much larger and more powerful right-wing organisation then you're not for all whistleblowers. Here's a thought experiment for you - the Democrat email leak in 2016 or Hunter Biden's laptop or the Twitter files - if that was leaked by a whistleblower, do you think an organisation like this would have supported it? Or would they think "This may harm our favoured political candidate"?