CNBC senior economics correspondent Steve Liesman writes Friday about the remaining unanswered questions surrounding the Bloomberg snooping scandal.
Here are some of them:
If editors knew about the issue in 2011, why was the practice only banned in 2013 after Goldman Sachs complained?
The appearance, according to Roush, is that clients are calling the shots on journalistic ethics at Bloomberg. “That causes me to worry what’s going to happen the next time a large client of Bloomberg comes to the company and says ‘We don’t like what you’re doing,’ ” Roush said.
What changes have really been made?
Doctoroff said the company has created a new position of client data compliance officer, “who is responsible for centralizing our data security efforts.” He also said the company now prohibits access to the private information for “reporters.” But the company has said nothing about editors and news executives, such as Winkler, who could potentially tell reporters what they have gleaned from the information.
Where’s Bloomberg’s coverage of the breach?
Roush points out that the New York Times was able to put the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal behind it a decade ago because it wrote the definitive story on the incident. Roush and others say Bloomberg’s coverage has been non-existent. There appears to be a company policy that it does not write about itself. That policy conflicts with its otherwise blanket coverage of central banks, many of which have made public statements about the breach. The company has declined requests from CNBC to interview its executives.
Read more here.
