Marathon runners hit the wall. Writer’s block. But how can we define the moral dilemma faced by many bloggers and investigative journalists? The image of the whistleblower has recently been co-opted by Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden. By revealing information they were conditionally given access to, both individuals broke the law. Now, they’re living with the consequences. It’s a daunting topic. A person comes across confidential, secret, and potentially explosive information. In civilized societies, where a semblance of the rule of law is maintained, that person might consider becoming a whistleblower and leak the information to journalists. There will certainly be consequences. Even in countries where the rule of law is undisputed, using actionable information or intelligence has dramatic repercussions for those individuals.
Now let’s shift to the fate of whistleblowers in other nations. Alexander Litvinenko, Anna Politkovskaya, Sergei Magnitsky, Maria Elizabeth Macias Castro (just to mention one of the 31 people murdered in Mexico since 2010 for reporting on organized crime), and José Darío Arenas (the latest of 142 journalists killed in Colombia since 1977)… In developing countries, where the rule of law is largely absent, whistleblowing or reporting on organized crime comes at a steep price. While in advanced societies exposing the powerful can lead to long prison sentences, ostracism, or job loss, in developing nations it often results in death. Unfortunately, the days of the whistleblower like Mark Felt seem to be over.
As this site focuses almost exclusively on exposing corruption in underdeveloped Latin American societies like Venezuela, I find myself increasingly troubled by the information I receive from whistleblowers that I cannot use. Because if I did, people could die, including myself. This presents a significant moral dilemma. On one hand, revealing sensitive information could potentially help bring down Chavismo. Within Venezuelan borders, there wouldn’t be severe consequences for those exposed, as they have absolute control over state resources, the police, the judiciary, Congress, etc. However, outside their borders, those exposed could face sanctions, similar to those recently imposed on a handful of Putin’s associates. On the other hand, Tor and encrypted communications can only get you so far when what’s revealed could only come from a few sources. Even the unfortunate Chavistas can add two and two together and have whistleblowers, their families, or recipients of confidential information killed.
That’s not something I’m prepared to do. There is a significant amount of collusion between regimes aligned with Chavismo and organized crime. Similarly, there exists what I call a “network of facilitators,” composed of bankers, lawyers, PR people, companies, and governments eager to make quick money with Chavismo, regardless of politics. Members of this network would not hesitate to use their considerable firepower, figuratively speaking, to crush anyone who stands between them and the opportunity to profit from Venezuela.
So, what to do then? Comments welcome.