Wikileaks

2/12/2010

Comments: 7 readers have left a comment

The publishing of 250,000 classified documents last week by whistleblower website wikileaks is a classic example of the conflict between principal and pragmatism.

As long as there has been secrets, there have been leaks.

What makes wikileaks different is how the internet allows leakers to bypass the mainstream media.

In the past, the only way for confidential information to be disseminated to the public was through the media.

Media organisations would and do, apply a “public interest” test to determine whether to publish classified information.

Essentially if leaked information was not deemed in the “public interest”, it is not published.

Wikileaks does not seem to apply such a test and appears to believe that leaked information, regardless of what it is, is worth of publication simply because it is secret.

What is the benefit, for example, of releasing the social security numbers of US soldiers?

When asked by the New Yorker, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said the social security numbers may one day be of use to researchers investigating wrongdoings and therefore should be made public.

This reasoning can be used to justify the release of any information because there is a possibility that any information may one day be of use in uncovering wrongdoings.

Last year, wikileaks published the results of a 2004 US Army test of a device designed to prevent roadside bombs exploding.

I’m not sure what Mr Assange’s justification for publishing this was, but to me, the risk of serving soldiers being killed or wounded would outweigh some hypothetical possibility that the information may one day uncover some wrongdoing.

As a journalist and an idealist, I believe, almost as an article of faith, that the public has a right to information relating to acts done by governments in its name.

Sunlight, as they say, is the best disinfectant.

But to argue that government defence, intelligence and diplomatic agencies can operate effectively when every internal piece of communication is made public is preposterous.

To use a simple example, imagine the affect a 'leak' of the exact location and timing of the d-day landings in 1944 would have had on the outcome of WWII.

No two warring countries could ever make peace if every utterance of, and deal offered by, diplomats was made public.

That something is secret is not, in and of itself, justification for publication.

This is not to say that governments and other organisations have the right to be free of scrutiny, or that the public has no right to know what is being done in its name, but governments like people, sometimes need to keep secrets for the greater good.

This is something that Mr Assange does not seem to understand.



What do you think, was wikileaks wrong to publish the information, or am I simply upset that they are bypassing the mainstream media of which I am a part?

Bookmark and Share

Reader Comments

Ryan

02/12/2010 at 12:17

Its the internet.

When people learn to work with this great new flow of information instead of against it, or trying to control it, they can co-exist.

Surely when Metallica, and other musical artists, tried to bring down Napster and the sharing of digital media across the great internets did people in government (and the media) sit back and think; "Ha! Poor music people. Glad the internet isn't effecting my industry adversely."

a) You don't want your secrets exposed, keep them secret.
b) Try using sites like Wikileaks to help your industry instead of trying to suppress them. If Napster is any indication of how things roll another site will just pop up in its place - bigger and better.
c) The media controlling information in the best interest of the public? Orwell would be rolling in his grave.

Eliana

03/12/2010 at 03:28

Personally I think Assange should get Australian of the Year.

The information he gives the public allows us to better understand exactly what is going on behind the closed doors of Government and get a clear indication of just how "transparent" things really are.

A good Government is a transparent Government. A good corporation is a transparent corporation. In his interview with TED he makes the very valid point "Information that organizations are spending economic effort into concealing, that's a really good signal that when the information gets out, there's a hope of it doing some good. Because the organizations that know it best, that know it from the inside out, are spending work to conceal it." If there is no danger to the organization from the information being public, then they wouldn't pay to conceal it.

Zoe

07/12/2010 at 17:42

I agree with Ryan, in that it is useless trying to shut down these types of sites, and I even agree in principal with the idea of Wikileaks, however that doesn't mean Julian is entirely in the right. Collecting and storing personal information to use in a possible future crime seems some what similar to entrapment to me and it removes the presumption of innocence. And I don't see how soldiers personal information or their placement will better enable me to carry out my civic duty. As long as they (and the Government) are acting honourably and within the laws there is no reason for me to know specifics, at least not until after the fact.

Life above all else is important, everything else, particularly ideals is just filler.

Dane

08/12/2010 at 22:21

In short Assange is the founder of WikiLeaks(WL), this is a media organisation that believes in an transparent and accountable world. I have read some of the Cables released. I found it very insightful especially reading summaries of important meetings, one such meeting was that between US and Russian officials discussing the threats posed by Iran and North Korea with respect to their missile and nuclear capabilities. Reading notes of round table discussions gives a far greater understanding of how matters are dealt with and furthermore what the 'real' threats are if any. Interesting after the last few weeks. I have read and heard many statements citing 'irresponsible'. I must ask, have the wheels fallen off the world or are we better for it? No doubt this information will continue to flow and the interesting thing at the moment is the reactions and moves to suppress the information

Annette

09/12/2010 at 16:31

well of course you're upset, what Assange is doing shows how corrupt the media has become. i htink journalists are queueing up to attack him because the writing is on the wall.

peter

11/12/2010 at 16:19

typical response from the media, we know best don't ask any questions, lock up anyone who disagrees with us. pathetic

Post a comment

 

Tuesday 22 May 2012

  • Min 8°C
  • Max 22°C

Wednesday

  • 9 - 21°C

Thursday

  • 8 - 22°C

Latest Blog Articles


email subscribe linkHBF junior sports hero
Deliver our newspapers linkCommunityPix banner linkSolahart