Whistle-blowing and Police Corruption Substantial attention, in recent years, has been centered on the professionalism of public administration institutions (Rosenbloom, 1984, p. 52). Increasingly, questions regarding the training, motives, and competence of public administrators are becoming imperative in the impact and constraints of these services (Rosenbloom, 1984, p. 52). The post-Watergate period initiated such concerns as it was becoming evident that in some cases career civil servants had redirected their attention from serving the public interest to seeking personal gain (Rosenbloom, 1984, p. 52). Clearly engaging in illegal and immoral activities, the FBI and the Civil Service Commission were once considered highly professional...The end:
.....o lead, my children to feed’” (Gobert et al., 2000, p. 33). References Fried, J.P. (2001, May). Following up. The New York Times, 31. Friedrich, C.J. (1977). Public policy and the nature of administrative responsibility, 333- 43. In The politics of the federal bureaucracy, 2d ed. Alan Altshuler and Norman Thomas (Eds.). New York: Harper and Row. Gobert, J. & Punch, M. (2000). Whistleblowers, the public interest, and the public interest Disclosure act 1998. The Modern Law Review, 63(1), 25-54. Johnson, R.A. (2005). Whistleblowing and the police. Rutgers University Journal of Law and Urban Policy, 1(3), 74-84. Rosenbloom, D.H. (1984). State & Local Government Review. Administrative Professionalism and Public Service Law, 16(2), 52-57.