This action did not bring happiness for the quality of people
On the topic of liberty, John Stuart Mill says society should not restrict freedoms unless their enactment causes direct harm to another person.
So since the collapse of Enron caused direct harm to another person a Utilitarian could argue that whistle blowing, and the actions of Sherron Watkins were wrong. A Utilitarian would concentrate on the maxim of 'the greatest good for the greatest number' and when Enron went bankrupt over 20,000 staff lost their jobs and it has also been cited as one of the causes of the global recession. The collapse of the company may well have affected more people than the companies fraudulent practices did, therefore pain was maximized and pleasure was minimized.
On the other hand, the individual person didn’t lose as much because they weren’t actually invested in the company. A pleasure is of higher quality if people would choose it over a different pleasure even if it was accompanied by discomfort, and if they would not trade it for a greater amount of the other pleasure
The stakeholder is both a consumer and a shareholder so they have experienced both, thus the people best qualified to judge a pleasure’s quality are people who have experienced both the higher and the lower
Since the greatest happiness principle considers the total amount of happiness, a noble character, even if it is less desirable for the individual, is still desirable by a utilitarian standard
