When you are leaking something illegal there are laws usually in place to protect your job or compensate you if it can't be protected. However there is no way to protect you when leak what you think is unethical but is not illegal (yet). The recommended course action in that case participate in legal actions which help make such unethical actions illegal i.e. change the law, until then you are essentially committing a crime.
You may consider committing a such crime lesser cost morally than actually partaking in the unethical activity, this by design comes at a cost. Morality to reflect in laws comes at a great cost. Slavery was not made illegal just because it the right thing, it was made illegal because people fought and died for it.
You, as an employee, should attempt to change the laws such that the unethical actions become illegal? That sounds so farcical. Bringing light to the unethical practices (leaking) is the quickest way to get them under public scrutiny and possibly begin the process of legal change.
>You, as an employee, should attempt to change the laws such that the unethical actions become illegal?
This is something that large-scale strikes have historically accomplished. The 8-hour workday and the existence of the weekend are both results of that approach.
It doesn’t always fit, and whistleblowing can be powerful too.
The best way to mobilize large-scale demonstration and action is by informing the public. Try to do that through "legal" channels and see how far you get. Strikes and other worker-organized rallies were ruthlessly suppressed by the law before we arrived where we are today. Massive corporate entities will use every legal avenue available to silence you
The law is the legitimate consensus of the people on the matter of morality. If you think an action is unethical and the majority does not think that, then perhaps that action isn't unethical after all. In such a situation, you have every right to refraim from that action, but no excuse to force others to do so or to leak.
Nah whistleblowing is a simple way to bring light to unethical behavior and put these actions in front of the public so laws can be created and changed. Many of the unethical behaviors are completely new ground from the pov of the court system as we've trailblazed our way into the information age, mass surveillance, and data-mining. Maybe the majority doesn't think it's unethical yet because they simply don't know that it's occurring or the scale of the problem
Civil disobedience is always an option, but those who use this tactic need to accept that the law will temporarily punish them pending some societal realignment. It's a big bet. It's still unreasonable to expect an exemption from the law because one feels that one's cause is just.
> The recommended course action in that case participate in legal actions which help make such unethical actions illegal i.e. change the law, until then you are essentially committing a crime.
> Slavery was not made illegal just because it the right thing, it was made illegal because people fought and died for it.
These are two wildly incompatible assertions. All of those people fighting to end slavery in the US before the Emancipation Proclamation were committing crimes. Should the underground railroad not have started until they got the OK from the president?
