I'm not terribly upset about what's currently going on in Washington, but I'm getting frustrated with all the so called pundits who don't seem to have a clue.
Right now, as I write this, the Senate is debating a bill that would allow the continued enforcement of restrictions against our civil liberties - i.e. If the government names you a terrorist suspect, you will not have any right to defend yourself in court. That this information against you will be gathered by covert means despite the fact that the law clearly states such means are illegal seems to no longer be an issue. If it keeps America in business, it must be okay to spy on its own people. Right down the hall, in Congress, executives of HP are being grilled because they spied on their own corporate board members because of intelligence leaks to reporters. Their argument that if it keeps HP in business, it must be okay to spy on its own people, is being universally condemned.
The pundits can't understand where this corporate attitude might have come from and can't figure out why the executive officers would think this was an ethical and moral thing to do. Just in my own head, where ever they said Company, I replaced the word with Country. Guess what? It was the same exact argument.
Further, had the company been spying on its employees to determine who might be leaking information, there would have been no argument whatsoever. Court decision after court decision has backed up a companies right to investigate the privacy of its employees as it relates to corporate matters (I.E. if they think you're doing harm to the company via blogs, e-mails, phone calls, sleeping with employees of other corporations, whatever...)
So, then, the only reason HP is a shock to anyone is because it was Board Executives investigating Board Members... and... reporters (for whom its not illegal to do the same sort of investigation that the Board Executives were doing on them ;)
Secrecy and intelligence gathering is a shadow world where rules and ethics really don't apply. This should be the first thing we all know about the shadow world. The second thing is that you can't be squeamish if you want to play here. If reporters and Congress and the rest of the nation really thinks its okay to delve into this realm, they better plan on checking their rules and ethics at the door. We can't be for spying on our neighbors for the good of the country, if we're not also for spying on ourselves for the good of the country. These things go hand in hand. If reporters are going to attack the business of HP by publishing leaked material gleaned from dark and secret sources, then HP has every right to use the exact same tactics to stop those leaks from occuring.
Only next time, HP should use someone who won't get caught - or if they do, will allow HP to disavow all knowledge of this operation. Jeez, you'd think these Board Executives had never read a spy novel.
2 comments:
Hmmm...funny how it also translates well to BALCO and the Chronicle reporters, too.
Its kind of funny how the News Media thinks its the only entity capable and responsible enough to spy on alleged criminals. For every story we read about X politician doing something wrong, how many other politicians have been thoroughly investigated and spied upon?
BALCO and Chronicle... don't get me started, but yeah... same thing. Of course they don't want their sources of information to dry up. And really, we as the caring public don't want those sources to disappear as well. But we need responsible editors and journalists to know when and where to draw the line. The line was very clearly crossed in the case of Barry Bonds.
Post a Comment