Newsnight had a compelling interview with the middle man involved in passing on the details of MPs’ expenses. Henry Gewanter makes a very convincing case why he acted as he did and why anonymity matters:
I will say though that there were conditions which involved protecting the sources and that included the possibility of legal defence.
It is important that this whistleblower's protected from possible repercussions so I can't discuss anything about them.
Shame on the The Times and Daniel Finkelstein that the same principles are not adhered to by the Murdoch press. Both clearly felt it was the right and proper to out Nightjack as it is in the best interests of News International, no matter what the consequences for the individual concerned.
Does The Times think that Gewanter should have exposed the whistleblower on Newsnight or at any other time. Somehow, I doubt it.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment