A secret investigation of news leaks at Hewlett-Packard was more elaborate than previously reported, and almost from the start involved the illicit gathering of private phone records and direct surveillance of board members and journalists, according to people briefed on the company's review of the operation.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-23
---------Curiously, nobody seems to be asking, "Did HP have a good reason to want to know what board members were saying to the media?"-----------
If the source were Foxnews, could you bring yourself to look past it?
I have to say that for the most part, I agree with you. But leaking has become so common in the past few years that it's gotten to the point that it depends on who and what you are leaking about. If it's a leak that the media approves of, they themselves will lionize the leaker and characterize them as a whistle blower. And.... again, the plame case..... They for the longest time thought they could take down (part of)the admin so they characterized it as an evil leak. Now that they find out it was Armitage, the leak isn't so evil.
-----------As for the media, they don't care about 'dog bites man' stories. They sell sensationalism, conflict, greed, and wrongdoing. They love scandals, cover-ups, and malfeasance. It's in their DNA.----------
Not true.
If they loved scandal they'd still be on the case of who leaked valerie plame. Now that they found out that it's one of their own, an anti war guy, they'll sell any excuse they can in order to not scandalize the guy. He's one of their allies.
Investigation. That's not what journalists do.
Member since:
2006-01-06
Curiously, nobody seems to be asking, "Did HP have a good reason to want to know what board members were saying to the media?" I know that what I'm going to say is pretty contrarian but ... I DO think that HP had good reason to want to know who was leaking information to the media. Board members are supposed to represent the interests of the company and shareholders. When board members actively undermine their company, they shouldn't be "serving" on the board anymore. Granted, I'm not talking about a board member exposing corruption or trying to seek positive restructuring of the company by talking to the media. But it appears in this case that one or more board members was working against the interests of the company. I can at least understand the motivation of the top board members in rooting out the culprit. So, in my view, the real scandal here isn't the fact that HP wanted to find out the leaker(s) but, rather, how they went about doing it. I would assert that there were probably better (legal) ways of finding the culprit (ie. compartmentalizing some information disclosures to the board and determining who leaks what).
As for the media, they don't care about 'dog bites man' stories. They sell sensationalism, conflict, greed, and wrongdoing. They love scandals, cover-ups, and malfeasance. It's in their DNA.