In general, a defamatory statement is a false statement of fact that is negligently or intentionally communicated or published to a third party, and that causes injury or damage to the subject . Yes, libel and slander are different types of defamation. Libel is a written defamatory statement, and slander is an oral defamatory statement. However if the statement and the context of information are true, ...this is called an awareness by a whistle-blower or revelation of secrets informing everybody that terrorism can be done by an slanderer to destroy a family relationship, religious hatred ect... and who is far from anybody's reach. so, we have the rights to collects, writes a true story, or distributes information to aware the public that this man is a culprit.
A whistle-blower or an informer of secrets is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, dishonest, or not correct within an organization or private person that is either private or public. The information of alleged wrongdoing can be classified in many ways of violation. Those who become whistle-blower can choose to bring information or allegations to surface either internally or externally.
Internally, a whistle-blower or an informer can bring his/her accusation to the attention of other people within the accused person or organization. Externally, a informer can bring allegations to light by contacting a third party outside of an accused individual or organization. He/she can reach out to the media, government, law enforcement or those who are concerned. But be ready to face stiff reprisal. retaliation, harrasment, and death treat from those whom are accused or alleged wrongdoing. We also prone to face legal action, criminal charges, social stigma and termination from any position of office, job or declared as 'persona non grata' . A whistle-blower who chooses to accuse a private sector, individual or organization is more likely to face termination, legal and civil charges like William McNeilly and Bradley Manning. Deeper questions and theories of whistle-blowing or revelation of secrets and why people choose to do so can be studied through an ethical approach.
Whisttleblowing or revealation of secrets is truly an entirely ethical decision, and action. In the case of many like, Edward Snowden, Daniel Ellsber, Jullian Asanges, Cynthia Cooper, ect...revealation of secret through wisttle-blowing is seen as the last ethically right thing to do. Legal protection can also be granted to protect whisttleblower, but that protection is subject to many stipulations. Hundred of laws grant protection to whisleblowers or informers, but stipulations can easily cloud that protection and leave whistleblowers vurnerable to retaliation and legal trouble. Whistleblowing is not a new phenomenon. In fact it is thousand of years old. However, the decision and action has become far more complicated with the recent advancement in technology and communication.
Whistleblower who reveals secrets frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the organization, group and private individual which they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and sometimes under the law. Questions about the legitimacy of whistle blowing are part of the field of political ethics.
And If any information and revealation of secrets considered defamation, libel, and slander. The subject can file to any court of law to prove himself of his innocent. But if our collected evidence are true, everybody "have the rights to remain silence."
So, helps us GOD.
A whistle-blower or an informer of secrets is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, dishonest, or not correct within an organization or private person that is either private or public. The information of alleged wrongdoing can be classified in many ways of violation. Those who become whistle-blower can choose to bring information or allegations to surface either internally or externally.
Internally, a whistle-blower or an informer can bring his/her accusation to the attention of other people within the accused person or organization. Externally, a informer can bring allegations to light by contacting a third party outside of an accused individual or organization. He/she can reach out to the media, government, law enforcement or those who are concerned. But be ready to face stiff reprisal. retaliation, harrasment, and death treat from those whom are accused or alleged wrongdoing. We also prone to face legal action, criminal charges, social stigma and termination from any position of office, job or declared as 'persona non grata' . A whistle-blower who chooses to accuse a private sector, individual or organization is more likely to face termination, legal and civil charges like William McNeilly and Bradley Manning. Deeper questions and theories of whistle-blowing or revelation of secrets and why people choose to do so can be studied through an ethical approach.
Whisttleblowing or revealation of secrets is truly an entirely ethical decision, and action. In the case of many like, Edward Snowden, Daniel Ellsber, Jullian Asanges, Cynthia Cooper, ect...revealation of secret through wisttle-blowing is seen as the last ethically right thing to do. Legal protection can also be granted to protect whisttleblower, but that protection is subject to many stipulations. Hundred of laws grant protection to whisleblowers or informers, but stipulations can easily cloud that protection and leave whistleblowers vurnerable to retaliation and legal trouble. Whistleblowing is not a new phenomenon. In fact it is thousand of years old. However, the decision and action has become far more complicated with the recent advancement in technology and communication.
Whistleblower who reveals secrets frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the organization, group and private individual which they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and sometimes under the law. Questions about the legitimacy of whistle blowing are part of the field of political ethics.
And If any information and revealation of secrets considered defamation, libel, and slander. The subject can file to any court of law to prove himself of his innocent. But if our collected evidence are true, everybody "have the rights to remain silence."
So, helps us GOD.
No comments:
Post a Comment