After examining more than 2 million whistleblower reports from more than 1,000 publicly traded U.S. companies, our new study found that secondhand whistleblower reports are almost 50% more likely to be substantiated — in other words, they’re 50% more credible — than firsthand reports.

After examining more than 2 million whistleblower reports from more than 1,000 publicly traded U.S. companies, our new study found that secondhand whistleblower reports are almost 50% more likely to be substantiated — in other words, they’re 50% more credible — than firsthand reports.

One reason is that firsthand reports are more likely to be frivolous and are occasionally personally motivated. Secondhand reporters who decide to come forward usually do so after doing a sort of first round of vetting of the situation themselves. In other words, a secondhand reporter is most likely going to say something only if they’re sure about what they’re reporting. https://www.cfo.com/news/dont-discount-secondhand-whistleblower-reports/656927/

This is just a response to the argument that David Grusch’s claims are second hand, and therefore should be dismissed as flimsy rumors. Grusch’s task was to investigate UFOs, so he gathered a large number of mostly first hand witnesses, evaluated the information, and then reported that, which technically makes it second hand to the general public, but from this information, it looks like this is not flimsy at all. If anything, it’s more likely to be accurate.

Even if one or two of the accounts are inaccurate, Grusch has the benefit of looking at the problem from a bird’s eye view, rather than personally being witness to every aspect of what he reported. A person with direct involvement is only useful to you when you have a bunch of direct witnesses so you have a lot of data points, which is mainly what Grusch had. A single whistleblower is not enough information because 1) there is always the possibility that that singular person has ulterior motives or was somehow mislead, and 2) a single person has less information compared to a large number of witnesses with direct involvement.

Of course everyone wants each of the direct witnesses to come forward publicly, and a number of them reportedly will, but this narrative that the information is likely false because through Grusch, it becomes second hand, doesn’t seem to hold much water. The importance these forums have placed on first over second hand whistleblowers to me at least seems heavily exaggerated, especially because of the large amount of corroboration for many of the claims that have already been public.

For a large number of first and second hand ufo whistleblowers who went public prior to Grusch, you can find many of them here: https://np.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/u9v40f/abc_news_the_us_government_is_completely/

I think we can find a lot of useful information by looking at different areas in this subject in a kind of meta-analysis way.