It's possible that there really is fire here, but that's a textbook example of how not to blow the whistle and be seen as credible.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/05/19/florida-heal...
For some reason, this statement strikes me as being cruel to someone who is willing to take a stand on moral principles. For someone to buck the orders, it takes a lot of courage and be able to stand up under pressure. There are no textbook examples of how to whistleblow and I think we owe these people who are willing to call out problems as they see it a more charitable hearing.
In this case, it sounds like they told her to make a change, she said she disagreed but made the change anyway. And then they fired her? For what? This just doesn't ring true.
The coverup idea doesn't make much sense either. Apparently the "deleted" data was minor detail that would be published in a day or two anyway. Is it even material? Would anyone even be looking at it, aside from this scandal? Also sounds off.
My guess is that (right or wrong), she was already on someone's shitlist, and this was the last straw. The "my successors will be liars" thing certainly wouldn't make me want to work with her.
There will be an investigation, as there should be. I suspect there's little or no fire.
In general, whistleblowers should be attended to, due consideration should be given to what they are risking.
But if you're going to do it, you need to build up a case and make it carefully and dispassionately, and above all maintain your professionalism. This reads more like a divorce proceeding.
Last time I checked, the whistleblower wasn't raving or cursing on the way out.
It sounds like you're just generally uncomfortable with questioning authority.
But it doesn’t mean she’s right, it just means she feels strongly about it.
Considering that the last 2 years is full of whistle blowers that acted credibly and saw nothing happen, I doubt she cared about the larger optics. The data manger was probably more concerned with an immediate, clear response to users of the data.
It's different to be a whistle blower when you aren't sitting on a big savings account, other people's problems stop being a high priority.
“As a word of caution, I would not expect the new team to continue the same level of accessibility and transparency that I made central to the process during the first two months. After all, my commitment to both is largely (arguably entirely) the reason I am no longer managing it,” she wrote.
What about the statement bothers you?
Life is short, and I don't get paid enough to deal with people like that.
And for what it’s worth, both of those accusations seem to have already played out as she expected. You can read more in comments in this thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23239014
[1] https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2020/05/18/censorshi...
Further context: https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/04/29/florida-medi...
A spokesperson for the health department’s Hillsborough County office said a lag in reporting accounts for some of the difference. The health department is also excluding some snowbirds and other seasonal residents, along with visitors who died in Florida, from its count. The medical examiners are including anyone who died in Florida.
Plus as someone else said, there have been plenty of whistleblowers this election cycle, all of whom were immediately claimed as being disgruntled workers, partisans etc no matter how professionally they tried to handle it. At a certain point we really need to start putting the burden of proof on the state and governmental agencies rather than playing defense for them.
They'll just manufacture proof.
It's neither obvious nor candid if it is in fact misrepresentative.
To me it looks terrible. She was fired for doing something wrong and she's claiming that 'only she has the ability to do it well, the newcomers cannot' which is definitely problematic.
Given the details of what she was asked to do and did not do so ... I don't see the state acting in any way towards 'censoring' information, just a disagreement as to what and how information should be presented.
Trump is claiming that Flynn was 'unmasked' and that this was some kind of crime, when in fact Obama letting Trump know that Flynn is under investigation was exactly what we want him to do.
The state seems reasoned in their justification, I don't see how someone would be 'whisteblowing' here.
FYI the state also made the claim that this issue was persistent, it wasn't just this one thing, and that she made changes to the site without consulting with her team, or the epidemiologists supporting the initiative, which is not good.
It's hard to make a full conclusion but I don't think it looks very good for a whistleblowing case.
> The Tampa Bay Times automatically checks for changes in the data and archives new updates. Shortly before 10:12 a.m on May 4., data still included the EventDate field, showing records with listed dates that people reported symptoms as early as January 1. By 3:02 p.m., the column was gone.
For much of the next day, May 5, the column was either missing or empty, with every row listing “None.” Finally, it returned shortly before 8:02 p.m.
Times reporters asked Health Department spokesman Alberto Moscoso that day why the data disappeared. Two days later, he said, “This field continues to be represented on the Department’s COVID-19 Dashboard.”
Moscoso did not reply to requests for comment Tuesday.
According to internal emails reviewed by the Times, Department of Health I.T. Director Craig Curry emailed Rebekah Jones just before 5 p.m. on May 5. He cited Dr. Carina Blackmore, director for the Division of Disease Control and Health Protection.
“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,” Curry wrote.
The tables in the PDF documents did not include the column of data showing when symptoms were first reported, only the “Case Date” — the date the state recorded and confirmed the case.
“This is the wrong call,” Jones replied minutes later.
A few minutes later, she emailed Curry again. “Case line data is down.”
Then, just after 6 p.m., the I.T. director emailed both Jones and Dr. Blackmore. “Re-enable for now please.”
Jones replied, “10-4.”
Neither Dr. Blackmore nor Curry replied to requests for comment.
If there's something truly horrible going on, go find the best reporter you can and tell them your tale. If you want to make a difference, forsake fame, forsake glory, forsake vengeance, forsake righteousness. Become quiet death to the evil worth fighting.
I think you might have gotten a little carried away with your rhetoric there, that would mean keeping your job. ;) But this serves an important point, which is that vitriolic rhetoric can creep in even when the writer is a Hackernews commenter steeped in a culture of dry language and with no strong emotions or anything at stake. Filtering out information that comes along with vitriol is like filtering out any paragraph that uses the word "and" an even number of times.