The how and why of whistleblower smears

Image via Wikipedia

A brouhaha on Saturday has many people wondering if Julian Assange, founder of the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, is the target of a U.S. government smear campaign.  A week after WikiLeaks disclosed that it was preparing to release more Afghan war documents–a move expected to embarrass and enrage the U.S. military, and amidst a battle of words over redaction of the documents, a Swedish prosecutor issued an arrest warrant charging Assange with rape of an unidentified woman.  A Swedish tabloid newspaper disclosed the rape charge plus a charge of molestation by a second unidentified woman.  Assange, who immediately denied the charges, said he learned of them from the newspaper.  Within a few hours, the Swedish Prosecution Authority had rescinded the warrant.

There certainly is no shortage of precedents to be found.  Many individuals who exposed waste, fraud and abuse have been the subject of smear campaigns–slammed with untruths, half truths and inuendoes.  Smears, if successful, cast doubt on the whistleblower’s credibility, thereby casting doubt on the worth of the whistleblower’s claims.  Public attention becomes focused on the whistleblower rather than organizational wrongdoing that might affect millions of lives.  The prospect of one’s life being run through a public wringer discourages other witnesses from coming forward.

Even a personnel file filled with good appraisals is no protection from smears, as the case of Kernan Manion, illustrates.  Any potentially embarrassing information, including health records and other personal information covered by privacy laws, may secretly find its way into the hands of reporters.  The journalism profession’s inclination to hide the identity of sources without regard to the source’s motive sometimes undermines the public interest by allowing managers of corrupt organizations to retaliate with impunity.

In following whistleblower cases, one sees the same methods appear again and again, and frequently the same perpetrators, too.  But, that important context is rarely mentioned when whistleblower cases are reported in the press.  Depriving the public of that information makes it difficult to accurately assess the credibility of those behind the accusations, creating an uneven playing field for the whistleblowers. Of the handful of people who do blow the whistle, few obtain relief due to another uneven playing field:  the legal system.

Some very important disclosures have been threatened by smear campaigns.  Had those efforts succeeded in the following examples, millions of people today would be less healthy, less safe and less secure.

  • Jeffrey Wigand –  Exposed dangerously fraudulent practices of the tobacco industry.  Investigators hired by Wigand’s former employer, Brown and Williamson, “fanned out across the country looking for anything they could use to discredit the whistle-blower,” interrogating family and friends.  From their reports, B&W assembled a smear file chargingWigand with “a multitude of sins from fudging his resume to making a false claim three years ago for ninety-five dollars and twenty cents for dry cleaning.” (CBS 60 Minutes interview)
  • Frank Serpico – Exposed corruption in the New York City police department.  “Before Serpico publicly exposed payoffs to his Bronx plainclothes unit 40 years ago, the police department had painted him as a malcontent, a nut, a weirdo, with long hair and hippie friends. That’s what agencies do to whistleblowers.” (Huffington Post)
  • Daniel Ellsberg – Disclosed the Pentagon Papers report, revealing how government officials mislead the public about the Vietnam war.  On September 9, 1971, “President Nixon’s ‘Plumbers’ unit, tasked to plug media leaks from administration officials and outsiders to the media, burglarizes the Los Angeles office of psychiatrist Lewis Fielding to find damaging information on Daniel Ellsberg, the former defense analyst and patient of Fielding who leaked the “Pentagon Papers” to the media.” (History Commons)
  • Russell Tice –  Reported that a former co-worker appeared to be spying for China and later reported warrantless domestic surveillance.  His bosses at the National Security Agency used his security clearance as a ticket to the ultimate smear – a psychological evaluation conducted by a TSA-paid psychiatrist who labeled Tice “paranoid” and “psychotic.” (Sherrie Gossett, CNSNews)
  • Ralph Nader – As the consumer advocate was preparing an investigative report on the auto industry, General Motors reportedly hired private investigators to shadow Nader, harass him with threatening phone calls, and interrogate acquaintances about his personal life, and also used “attractive girls” to try to lure him into “compromising sexual escapades” (TIME).
Enhanced by Zemanta