Comments:Boston Globe criticised for outing FBI informant

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
"served a vital public interest"007:30, 18 October 2011
Whitey is No Threat: Releasing Informant's Name Won't Jeopardize National Security107:11, 18 October 2011

"served a vital public interest"

Served the public interest by adding to the Globe's bottom line. What a pair of scumbags reveling information like that and as for the Globe, guess what, here is one person that will never say a nice thing about it! For a news paper the people there don't seem to bright to me. I may not spell well or know all there is to know about English but I do know what the word "Confidential" means. I think this is another PAPER that needs to go away. (talk)07:30, 18 October 2011

Whitey is No Threat: Releasing Informant's Name Won't Jeopardize National Security

Whitey Bulger is not your average wiseguy mafioso. He lived by the code of a federal informant who could dime out his competition at the drop of a hat to get an edge and kill anyone else he wanted out of the way. For the last 16 or so years between indictment and capture Whitey lived in fear of being caught and dragged back to Boston to face his victims and those he betrayed to maintain his rat status. Nobody is coming to this guy's aid and looking to intimidate or injure the individual who gave him up to the feds. That woman is a saint to both the criminal element and the general public. As for whether revealing her name puts other potential informants in any position where they are afraid to come forward, I call bull. This is not a typical informant who would have to worry about being targeted for providing her tips to the authorities. If Whitey was the purported head of an Italian crime family notorious for murdering witnesses, then keeping her name out of the press would make sense. He's not. He's a bum. Most of those who once stood by him are now standing against him. Even his right hand man and surrogate son is ashamed of the old man. As for making the FBI look bad, they SHOULD LOOK BAD. They never should have signed on to get in bed with Whitey in the first place. Their top-echelon informant program backfired in a big way, and it's not the first time a high-level crook had official government backup during their worst crime sprees. This case called attention to the flaws of that program that needed to be exposed so they can be fixed. The Globe was right to publish the informant's name, and they aren't putting anyone in danger. Those who say different just don't know the facts of the story, facts the Globe was the first paper to fully discover and quantify. (talk)17:48, 17 October 2011

Releasing her name won't put her in danger? What crap... He's a dangerous criminal... doesn't matter if he was a petty drug dealer or a top mob boss. It wouldn't be hard for him to find someone willing to hurt her for a handful of money. The fact is that he's a violent man and who wouldn't harbour a grudge against the person who got you locked up for life? If anything does happen then the writers should be held fully accountable. (talk)07:09, 18 October 2011