> Not only that, but by the same token this is in no way "attempted" blackmail.
This is a direct attempt to shut her up -- this an attempt to silence their critics via blackmail -- and they hoped it wouldn't get mainstream press coverage. They hoped she would find out just via whispers from those who were there.
It's not blackmail by either the legal or common-usage definition of blackmail. Even if Uber followed through with such a sleazy plan, it would not be blackmail. For blackmail, a demand must be made, accompanied by a menace. Floating an idea that you plan on digging up dirt? That might have been an incipient but ill-advised plan, it might be idle dreaming, or it might be it might be machiavellian FUD.
> For blackmail, a demand must be made, accompanied by a menace.
It may not meet the legal definition -- but there is a clear demand and menace:
The demand is that journalists do not write negative stories on Uber.
The menace is that Uber will retaliate against any journalists by digging up dirty on them personally and thus hurting either their reputation, careers, or relationships.
Except the "demand" is not a demand directed at anyone, but just the world in general -- since it's after the fact. They would dig up dirt on those who have already written negative articles. No demands are made of them. And no demands are made of any nameable individuals. If you ask "who are they blackmailing", the answer is "a hypothetical."
Not all blackmail is done by cartoon villains. This was clearly a threat, made by someone who has made more than a casual thought about it: “Stop reporting about us or we attack you personally”
This is a direct attempt to shut her up -- this an attempt to silence their critics via blackmail -- and they hoped it wouldn't get mainstream press coverage. They hoped she would find out just via whispers from those who were there.