Legal blackmail as a means of uncovering wrongdoing needs to be compared.against the alternatives...which are chiefly legallt protected whistleblowing, and legally protected journalism.
To cut a long story short , journalists have a direct financial incentive to publish, whistle blowers are neutral , and rational blackmailers are incentivised not to disclose information, but rather to keep their victims paying on the threat of disclosure.
Legal blackmail as a means of uncovering wrongdoing needs to be compared.against the alternatives...which are chiefly legallt protected whistleblowing, and legally protected journalism. To cut a long story short , journalists have a direct financial incentive to publish, whistle blowers are neutral , and rational blackmailers are incentivised not to disclose information, but rather to keep their victims paying on the threat of disclosure.
For clarity, the case for blackmail is not that it’s a means for uncovering. It’s a means for reducing the undesirable behavior without uncovering.
Much the same objections apply: it isn’t the only way, and it isn’t particularly effective.