A novel the CIA spent a fortune to suppress
I've been thinking a lot about these kind of scenarios lately:<p>Autocratic regime holds power over a territory with a long history of violent instability. The regime is guilty of corruption, nepotism, human rights violations, suppressing dissidents, etc. This is I think a requirement for it to hold power given the conditions. If the regime collapses even greater violence and general horrible stuff happens. There are plenty of examples in recent history. The Arab Spring comes to mind.<p>You have some leverage on the situation. You have reliable information about the bad stuff the regime is doing and you are a member of the press, a public figure, whatever. What do you do? What is the right thing to do?<p>And one step further and closer to the scenario in the article: suppressing the release of that information to protect the fragile stability and prevent a possible greater evil. Is that necessarily a bad thing?