A driving force behind the contrasting societal views of whistleblowers may be the media. Media vehicles have the power to today to take tidbits of information from the exact same case and portray the whistleblower as either identity. In an article published in Forbes magazine entitled Blowing Whistles, Blowing Smoke, the author points out that with respect to the 1997 case of an IRS whistleblower, Jennifer Long, the New York Times, 20/20, and almost all other American media vehicles, portrayed Ms. Long as "...a noble IRS agent who had received top performance reviews until she blew the whistle (Seligman)." The article goes on to say that in fact her work had been criticized for several years prior, giving Ms. Long reason to fear that she may lose her job, meaning that her act of whistle blowing was out of spite and self-service (Seligman). So, who is more credible, 20/20 or Forbes Magazine? Who is guilty of being self-serving, the IRS or Jennifer Long? The answers to both these questions are matters of opinion, and can very rarely be answered beyond the shadow of a doubt. Perhaps the reason for the anomaly is that in many whistle blowing cases, the whistleblower themselves, is not entirely sure of the their true motivation behind the action (Meithe, 14). They may express that they blew the whistle because it was the right thing to do, but other statements they make may be indicative that part of the reason was that they wanted to give the boss what they had coming to them (Ibid). One must be aware of this ambiguity when assessing whether or not the employee is worthy of legal protection from employer retaliation as a result of their whistle blowing. Any legislation that may be implemented should not include references to the motivation behind the blowing of the whistle. The provisions should deal strictly with the act or omission on behalf of the employer and the actions carried out by the employee in their dealing with the situation.

There are three sides to every story. In the case of a whistle blowing employee, there is the story of the courageous, altruistic citizen standing up for the greater good of society, there is the story of the narcissistic 'fink' or 'rat' that is looking out for their own personal gain and seeking the suffering of their employer, and then there is the truth which hovers around the fine line between the other two sides of the story. Some regard whistle blowing as a heroic act; especially since in almost all cases of whistle blowing, the whistleblower faces some degree of retaliation by the affected employer (White, 532). Because of the stress and hardship a whistleblower often endures, to many it seems as though they may be sacrificing their own well-being (and financial security in cases where they are fired) for the sake of others around them, therefore they may be coined as a knight in shining armor. On the other hand, to many others, especially those who are adversely affected by the aftermath of the situation going public, the whistleblower seems to be acting in a vindictive manner or possibly out of spite. These opposing views about the motive behind whistle blowing are strong and are often argued about by scientists who ponder whether "...the self-serving office snitch or the self-sacrificing public savior best characterize[s] the whistleblower (Meithe, 14)."

In almost all cases, the whistleblower faces some degree of retaliation by the affected employer (White, 532). This retaliation can emerge in a variety of forms inside or outside of the workplace, from alienating tactics like the 'could shoulder', to official disciplines like firing, to more serious retaliations like physical attacks and defamation (Miethe, 74). In the previously mentioned case of Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, the measures that occurred in reprisal to his taking action were severe. Not only did he lose his former $300K/year job as the director of research, but his severance pay and health benefits were

Some common words found in the essay are:
IRS Jennifer, Industry Canada, Conduct Ibid, Whistle Blowing, Department Justice, Ibid Physical, Dr Wigand, Service Whistle, Michael Moore, Act Ontario, whistle blowing, public service, industry canada, health safety, dr wigand, competition bureau industry, blew whistle, competition bureau, bureau industry, safety act, occupational health, occupational health safety, bureau industry canada, health safety act, whistle blowing act,
Approximate Word count = 3358
Approximate Pages = 13 (250 words per page double spaced)