Competitive Intelligence

Tactical, Operational & Strategic Analysis of Markets, Competitors & Industries

Kroll's "Investigative Journalist" Illegal? Unethical? What do you think?

Views: 85

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Melanie,

This is not unethical according to SCIP's guidelines, nor is it illegal according to the Economic Espionage Act. If we take CT's motive at face value, they simply want to verify the reliability of a research method. Now you and I both know they have other motives as well, but that's beside the point. Frankly, this is typical protocol, they have legitimate cover for their operative to gather HUMINT, this is all pretty white hat if you ask me. Want real black hat Ops ? Read Eamon Javers.......

My thought on this is CT is pretty stupid to think this is going to do much for them. Ok, so what if the research method was flawed and they cherry picked respondents ? So it may play out that the incidence rates are skewed, but then we STILL come right on down to primary causation of ailments, similarities, manifestation time-lines, other environmental evidence......I think it demonstrates they have a pretty weak legal defense and are grasping at straws.
A good article. What he is asked to do by Kroll is seemly harmless and under the curcumstances fair, but then there is the larger picture of Chevron's fault which his article would legitimize indirectly.Maybe he saw that he could sell the story to the Atlantic monthly as a partial recompensation.

The "spy journalist" problem is complicated. Many journalist in the Nordic countries take freebies if and when they can, trips to Davos all inclusive, to seminars abroad, dinners, christmas presents etc. Nothing is said, but the companies expect good coverage and usually get it, if they don't cock up. The line is sometimes fine.

Klaus
Pre-litigation and Litigation requires Evidence to win a case or reach out of court settlement.
So, to take this author's point:

Gathering, analyzing and disseminating information sponsored by a major media source financed directly by a combination of pharma, oil, and automotive companies: ethically honorable.

Gathering, analyzing and disseminating information sponsored by one single company known to you beforehand: ethically dubious.


I find the notion of the totally impartial journalist a bit quaint, frankly, in this day and age. This sounds like the author found it distasteful to be on an assignment using her skillset for a direct commercial impact. The indirect service of selling painkillers and SUVs likely never caused her to lose much sleep, obviously. That she chose to follow her values is admirable, but I hope she doesn't expect anyone to name a day after her for resisting the epic temptation of dinner at a Peruvian restaurant.

I agree with Monica, if you want to hear about the really fun, shocking Black Hat stuff, go back and read Eamon Javers - those guys were ex-Spetznaz and KGB, not ex-hip-hop journalists.
Hey Eric,

Very nice, I really like your critical dissection of the author's convoluted and ultimately flawed, thought process which you laid out very articulately. Precisely right, what exactly is the difference here? The issue of direct vs indirect involvement? The money is, at the end of the day, coming from precisely the same place.....

Yours,

M

RSS

Free Intel Collab Webinars

You might be interested in the next few IntelCollab webinars:

RECONVERGE Network Calendar of Events

© 2024   Created by Arik Johnson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service