This employee posted the sales numbers BEFORE Sprint even released their exaggerated sales figures. Though this employee's 'leak' may have been what caused Sprint the recant their original information, you could hardly call the person a whistle-blower.

[ Also, "Sprint fires employee who publicly exposed exaggerated Android EVO sales numbers" is a highly 'exaggerated' version of "Sprint cans employee for leaking EVO 4G sales numbers." The MobileCrunch title doesn't infer that the employee had some intent to expose Sprint. ]

You can argue intent all you want (and btw no one has described the employee as a whistle-blower)

However, as a matter of fact, Sprint's exaggeration (claiming that sales were around 3 times as much as they really were) was exposed by what that employee did.

>> btw no one has described the employee as a whistle-blower

"publicly exposed exaggerated Android EVO sales numbers" reads like he is a whistle blower. and it doesn't express what really happend.

I totally agree to your second point.