I strongly encourage it. There are several notable cases where loss of life could have been avoided if companies were willing to admit fault and take the financial burden. The '91 Patriot missile incident resulted in the death of 22 US soldiers because of a programming time rounding error that was found but not acted on quickly enough when the missile failed to intercept an incoming SCUD. Or the Challenger explosion, in which an engineer pointed out that their company's o rings where not tested in freezing conditions, the conditions present the night before launch. NASA was notified, but gave authority to the producing company whether or not to cancel the mission. Fearing financial costs, they did not. The individual who ultimately made the call is quoted saying "Guess we dodged that bullet" seconds before the Challenger exploded. Whistleblowing is often viewed as "tattling" by individuals, but many companies welcome it. For example, the firm I work for receives most of its money with government contracts; rules and guidelines pertaining to how information is handled, received, and worked on is very stringent in this business and failure to comply can not only cost you your current contracts but your ability to compete and work on any or all future contracts. We are educated and instructed to feel open about asking questions regarding what we may believe to be infractions of these procedues because a little internal and quiet auditing is much preferred to overall loss of our primary source of income.

this

When/if the information negatively impacts the lives of other people (Wikileaks) then it is unacceptable, yet if the whistleblowing is corporation based and about poor/negligent business practices then it is by all means acceptable.

Depends on what it is.