> a privately held company, accountable only to itself and its investors.
Well, no. Companies are also accountable to their customers and to society. If they were dumping large amounts of toxics into rivers, that's something society has a stake in and where the company is accountable to it.
If Twitter were to sell access to protected updates, that's something their users need to know. If they were doing so illegally, that's something that society must know.
It all depends on the information that will be revealed whether or not it's ethical. I'm inclined to not give an "unethical" verdict too quickly. TC is at least caring about individual persons that may be damaged by the revealing of some information.
I agree with you about the customers needing to know about Twitter selling private data, but the TC article mentioned nothing about any nefarious going on inside of Twitter. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to be a whistleblower, but in this case, publishing those docs would amount only to gossip. And that's why this is a totally different situation from Watergate.
Well, no. Companies are also accountable to their customers and to society. If they were dumping large amounts of toxics into rivers, that's something society has a stake in and where the company is accountable to it.
If Twitter were to sell access to protected updates, that's something their users need to know. If they were doing so illegally, that's something that society must know.
It all depends on the information that will be revealed whether or not it's ethical. I'm inclined to not give an "unethical" verdict too quickly. TC is at least caring about individual persons that may be damaged by the revealing of some information.