In addition to rising levels of transparency within government and corporate practice, there has been a drastic rise in the number of whistleblowing cases internationally across a multitude of fields. In the 2020 Annual report to Congress by the SEC, The commission reported since the beginning of their Whistleblower compensation program in 2012, that they have witnessed a 130 percent increase in whistleblower tips resulting from their program. With 2020 setting a record of 6,911 tips within the fiscal year (SEC 27). The discrepancy between increased transparency and continued levels of whistleblowing activity may insinuate that the actions taken by whistleblowers aren’t effective enough relative to the possible risks they create. However in reality it is the increase in whistleblowing activity that actively pressures corporations and government to be more transparent in their operations. As information accessibility increases, the number of individuals willing to research and hold government organizations and corporations accountable for their actions means that these bodies must respond accordingly to maintain the favor of an increasingly aware population. A large part of this rise in accessibility and transparency has resulted from the increase of whistleblowing activity following major whistleblowers like Edward Snowden, who inspired people to expose information on broken or unethical systems and practices. While that is not to say that all whistleblowers act in response to an ethical dilemma, as many act in response to monetary reward, all the same these individuals contribute towards a common cause.
Knowing this information in regards to the general public’s understanding of whistleblowers and the rise in whistleblowing activity within the past decade, It is important to maintain perspective in that Whistleblowing is not definitively black and white. The practice of whistleblowing is built on the moral gray that while a whistleblower may expose information on bad systems or activities being conducted by corporations and government, it can come at the risk of endangering other people's lives and livelihoods. However the information provided thus far demonstrates a narrative being constructed around whistleblowers through sources like general news media, word of mouth, and so forth that inaccurately depict the motivations and values of those who blow the whistle. Various examples of this phenomenon exist outside of Snowden including Grigory Rodchenkov of the Russian Olympic doping scandal, Li Wenliang of the COVID-19 leak, and historically Muckrakers like Upton Sinclair who famously authored “The Jungle” which exposed malpractice in the meatpacking industry. The number of whistleblowers whose motivations and values for blowing the whistle have been oversimplified and characterized by news media are vast. Many facing reputation tarnishing comments within their domestic news media, with some media even being government backed in the case of Li Wenliang.
Moving forward, repairing the relationship in which the general public has with the identity of “whistleblower” is essential in ensuring the continued trend of transparency within corporate and government practice. This would mean restructuring stories surrounding whistleblowers to more accurately align with the values and message they hope to send when blowing the whistle. Another facet of this is striving to increase protections and incentives for whistleblowers. For as much as the title of whistleblower hopes to be associated with ethical ideals of justice and morals, many whistleblowers are driven by a monetary incentive, and these remain to be critical in contributing towards continued transparency.
Citations:
Securities and Exchange Commission. “2020 Anual Report to Congress: WhistleblowerProgram”
Securities and Exchange Commission, 2020, https://www.sec.gov/files/2020% 20Annual%20Report_0.pdf