Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Pinckney 2363 days ago
Maybe this is off topic, but am I the only one uncomfortable with the Post seeking names of interviewees?

> The reports also omitted the names of more than 90 percent of the people who were interviewed for the project. While a few officials agreed to speak on the record to SIGAR, the agency said it promised anonymity to everyone else it interviewed to avoid controversy over politically sensitive matters.

> ...

> The Post has asked a federal judge to force SIGAR to disclose the names of everyone else interviewed, arguing that the public has a right to know which officials criticized the war and asserted that the government had misled the American people. The Post also argued the officials were not whistleblowers or informants, because they were not interviewed as part of an investigation.

One of the key problems identified by this report is that military and government officials didn't want to hear bad news. People on the ground felt like they had to paint an overly rosy picture. The SIGAR report seems like an attempt to address that by enabling them to speak anonymously, but the Post doesn't seem concerned that publicizing identities may hamstring such internal government investigations in the future.