@Medium
A lot of public interest stories - a lot of political- and business related whistle-blowing - involves putting in the public domain communications that the rich or the powerful made in private thinking that they would never be made accountable for them.
A lot of public interest stories - a lot of political- and business related whistle-blowing - involves putting in the public domain communications that the rich or the powerful made in private thinking that they would never be made accountable for them.
The leaked Labour Report is a good example of this. We would not know about the casual racism of staff members, their attempt to gerrymander a leadership election, their sabotage of the 2017 campaign without access to their private wotsapp messages and emails.
@AmyDyess placed with you a telling and important article Prodigal Butch about how senior figures within the trans-hostile wing of UK and US feminism attempted to recruit her as a young and charismatic lesbian speaker. She has been accused by people she named of lying and madness
It is doubly important to her story that she produce the evidence both because it is shocking in itself and because she has been accused of inventing a group of women with power and few scruples... Her article had that evidence when I read it.
You have now hamstrung an important story which could only enhance your reputation by removing all her screenshots send the crucial evidence they contain on the transparently silly pretext that she didn't have the permission of the people she is exposing as liars and worse.
It is the nature of whistle blowing that it happens without permission. Who is going to bring you important stories in future if you remove half of the evidence? Presumably because of threats from someone's lawyer wife?
If you crumble this easily, to a few cranks, how will you stand up to, say, the US president if you get the crucial dirt?
You are acting in a cowardly manner. Replace the screenshots.
You are acting in a cowardly manner. Replace the screenshots.