Deep Throat: Good or Bad?

This is not a post about The Man Gene. So, those already thinking about the movie Deep Throat should get your minds out of the gutter.

Deep Throat was the name given to the principal informant for Bob Woodward and Carl Berstein as they wrote story after story in the Washington Post about Watergate in the 1970′s. The identity of Deep Throat was revealed a few years ago as Mark Felt, the number two person at the FBI during the Watergate scandal, when his children finally convinced him to come forward. Felt died in December.

Felt’s death rekindled the debate that began when he outed himself. Was he good or bad? Those labeling him bad point to his motive of disappointment at being passed over for the FBI’s number one job. Those labeling him good focus on the courage it took to risk his safety and job by documenting Richard Nixon’s wrongdoing.

Felt had mixed motives. Most whistleblowers do. They are offended by something that the company or an executive is doing wrong, but a deeper look usually discloses something else — something of a personal nature.

There are few employees who will take the chance of blowing the whistle on someone high up in any organization purely because it’s the right thing to do. It takes more, and that seems ok, if it results in righting a wrong.

Two more points. First, Felt had been with the FBI a long time. He was convinced he had earned the top job. In your world, ignore that person at your peril. Second, make your ethics policy more than mere words. Your employees need to believe that the policy means what it says. We’re looking at a year of disaster in our rear view mirror that proves the point.

1. 

   ACU Frank says:

   January 5, 2009 at 4:25 pm

   I’ve always wondered, though…

   Considering Felt’s professed reasons for feeding the info to Woodward & Bernstein, how might things have been different if he would have just collected the evidence himself and held a press conference? Would the information has been received more, or less, suspiciously? Just food for thought…
2. 

   John Phillips says:

   January 7, 2009 at 2:38 pm

   Frank,

   Thanks for comment.

   I don’t know, of course, but I would guess that it wouldn’t have gone well. He would have been branded a disgruntled employee for being passed over, and I’m sure he would have been subject to other attacks in an effort to discredit him.

   I think letting Woodward and Bernstein break the story over time was the better way to go. Also, I’m not sure Felt had everything, perhaps until the very end, to implicate Nixon.

   Good question, though.

   John