Need help with discussion question

[EonsNearby]

The question is the following:

 

Why is crime reporting so low in "major industries?

 

I am supposed to have a 1 page, double spaced response. However, I have only been able to come up with a little more than half a page, which is the following:

 

One possible reason crime reporting is so low is to give the impression that the company is secure. This is a common strategy that is used to keep people from panicking and getting distracted from their assigned duties. This can also provide mild deterrence, because some hackers may not want to attack a company that has not had a successful at against it. They may just want to target companies and institutions that have suffered attacks before. Another possible reason crime reporting is so low in major industries is to protect the industries pride and dignity. For better or worse, those two can cause a company to fail. For example, if a major industry suffered from an attack and word got out about it, people would believe that the industry is not very secure. This could lead to people not wanting to work there or people not wanting to financially support it (like investing in the industry’s stock or purchasing products made by the industry). Also, other, competing companies that have not suffered an attack may exploit this weakness to insinuate their superiority over the attacked company.

 

Can someone offer up some suggestions that could get me the desired length.

[caKus]

Perhaps may you investigate the other side of the question : "What profit may be hoped by a major industry in reporting a crime ?" "In what cases is a crime reported ?"

 

Find cases in which the crime is reported. For instance when a repayment of a loss is requested from an insurance company.

Find samples, in the media, of legal actions against employees, competitors, hackers : they are a bunch of them.

 

"Who is the responsible for the crime ? " : the industry itself (as a moral person), its executives, its workers, competitors, external individuals? The reaction of the company may vary drastically according to the answer to this question. Generally, companies love to make a good trial to a competitor or to external individuals when they are a true nuisance. They are usually more reluctant to sue their own executives.

[EonsNearby]

 

Perhaps may you investigate the other side of the question : "What profit may be hoped by a major industry in reporting a crime ?" "In what cases is a crime reported ?"

He doesn't want that. He just wants why some crimes go unreported in major industries.

[ewmon]

First, I suggest more explicit descriptions —

 

 

One possible reason crime reporting is so low is to give everyone the impression that the company is secure. This is a common strategy that is used to keep people employees from panicking, gossiping and getting distracted from their assigned duties — which can reduce the workforce, productivity and morale.

This can also provide mild deterrence, because some hackers — especially copycat hackers — may not want to attack a company that has not had a successful attack against it. Perhaps mostly elite hackers would attack a "virgin" company for the challenge or the novelty of doing so; They the copycat hackers may just want to target companies and institutions that have suffered attacks before because they know it can be done and/or they want to prove themselves equal to the elite hackers.

You seem to be confusing "industries" for "companies" below. If I want to buy a car, I must go to the auto industry, but I might buy a Chevy, a Ford or a Honda. Ford would care about its own pride and dignity, but not about the pride and dignity of the auto industry.

 

Another possible reason crime reporting is so low in major industries is to protect the industries pride and dignity. For better or worse (huh?), those two can cause a company to fail. For example, if a major industry suffered from an attack and word got out about it, people would believe that the industry is not very secure. This could lead to people not wanting to work there* or people not wanting to financially support it (like investing in the industry’s stock or purchasing products made by the industry). Also, other, competing companies that have not suffered an attack may exploit this weakness to insinuate their superiority over the attacked company.

* Shouldn't you be covering this in the first paragraph?

Argh, you need to outline this to get your ducks in line —

Company seems secure:

* Employees (current and prospective operations)

* Customers (revenue)

* Stockholders (market value)

* Government (regulations, investigations)

* Other companies (competitiors, buyouts/mergers)

* Hackers (minimize attacks)

[EonsNearby]

This isn't a formal paper or anything, it is just an answer to a discussion question. As such, there are not multiple paragraphs. Heck, I don't even think it is supposed to be in paragraph format since I never indent.

[caKus]

A company is supposed to act rationaly. So before deciding to report / not report a crime, the people in charge must study where is the interest of the firm. It is why I suggested that you search for reasons why a firm should report. If you cannot find any valuable one, you have the answer to the initial question.

[LaurieAG]

Many companies have their staff sign Confidentiality Undertakings if they work in sensitive areas due to Information Privacy and Information Security legislation.

 

If government regulations do not require reporting of breaches and there is no whistleblower protection then you will not hear about it.