WikiLeaks: where do you stand?

The Independent carries an interesting piece this morning entitled 'WikiLeaks vs The Machine'. In the article, Martin Hickman outlines several examples of the types of classified information which has found its way into the public domain before highlighting the cyber-attacks which have taken place against the perceived foes of the website. It's worth a read.

Even as someone who believes freedom of information is a crucial element of a modern democracy, I must confess to being on the fence about the whole issue.

On one level, I have no problem with low-level diplomatic observations about how rude a member of the royal family may or may not be or if Angela Merkel is judged to be difficult to deal with. None of these observations have come as a surprise to anyone. On the other hand, however, I am rather disturbed that information about which sites the US military believe to be most susceptible to terrorist attacks have found their way into the public domain.

What do you think?

By Daniel Hamilton.

Comments

[startledcod]

I share your quandary on this but have tried to draw a distinction between three distinct types of information release.

The first is a 'traditional' whistle blower, someone principled who believes that (generally) his employer is concealing something which they should not and at some personal risk leaks the information. Even when the whistleblower's motives are ones with which I might profoundly disagree I accept and approve of the right of principled leaking.

Secondly we have the Wikileaks type leak. This has sometimes been described as whistleblowing, it isn't, its information dumping and I am at a loss to see what real benefit has come from it except to highlight the Americans staggering lack of control of information; really, its scary. I don't approve of information dumping just because one can. I don't think Julian Assange's creepy demeanour is critical in my disapproving of all the recent activity but it can't help.

The third is Freedom of Information and the ability of anyone to demand information from the State with which I wholeheartedly agree.

The problem for Governments generally is that their default setting is towards secrecy and an, at times, a paranoid desire to keep everything away from the public. If the default were to change to transparency the urge to leak would surely diminish. I believe much of the support for the Wikileaks situation is based upon cocking a snook/sticking the finger up at those in authority who won't let us know what's going on.

The decision to publish Government expenditure is a crucial and irreversible step in the right direction.

[Lee-d]

I was behind WikiLeaks when they were exposing potential war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, but I think these diplomatic cables are a completely different matter. As stated in the article, there is a vastly varying level of sensitivity to these documents and I think some discretion should have been used when deciding which ones to publish. I don't think anything good can possibly come from releasing some of the more highly charged political communications, especially where places like China and the Middle East are concerned. I think this has been done for publicity first and the public second. To put it bluntly, Mr. Assange has risked the start of a major breakdown in political relations, with potentially deadly consequences, for the sake of being a smart-arse.

[Robert]

Really good article by Clay Shirky on what is at stake:
http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/12/wikileaks-and-the-long-haul/

I just think it important to remember that Assange != Wikileaks and a conviction on these rape charges should not discredit the project or underlying philosophy.

[Dave Atherton]

I too have been searching my conscience on what is right and what is wrong here, I suppose we in our private life and work have a right to privacy. There is no doubt Wikileaks straddles the acceptable and unaccepetble releases.

It is the American reaction I find most pertubing. There cannot not be too many people who believe that Assange's rape charges seem all to convenient and I worry that Obama may use the leaks as an excuse to put his size 10s into internet control.

American bullying and extradition of Gary McKinnon I think is quite wrong. Obviously an eccentric possibly from his Aspergers Syndrome, trying to hack into a system to find out about UFO's is hardly the world's most heinous crime. I appreciate he did leave insulting messages but this just comes across as vindictiveness.

Two wrongs do not make a right, when an elected government does it, the immorality seems far worse.

[SadButMadLad]

The sites the US military think are important are of not interest to the average terrorist. Countries that are opposed the US might be interested, but they are likely to have the information already.

All a terrorist has to do is plant bombs in random locations and they'll get the authorities running around like blue arsed flies. Sometimes they don't even need to succeed - like the shoe bomber, the laser toner cartridge bomb, and the underpant bomber.

[Wellesley]

I don't have a crisis of conscience. Publish and be damned.

[Purlieu]

No it goes to the Independent, I just tried it. Perhaps you need to tun a virus check or something.

Re: Wikileaks - the utopian part of me says that governments should not need to have these "secrets" in the first place, the libertarian part says that information should be freely available (after all we pay their wages) and the caring part says that diplomatic cables are sent on the premise that they are confidential and so their contents reflect that - remember they are sent from a dedicated terminal in the embassy - these embassies do a lot of good work protecting travellers' interests abroad, that should not be jeopordised.

[p foomer]

The link I posted in the previous post got translated to an image, look at the source code, down the bottom..

http://b.scorecardresearch.com/b?c1=2&c2=6035669&c3=&c4=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk%2Fhome%2F2010%2F12%2Fwikileaks-where-do-you-stand.html&c5=&c6=&c15=&cv=1.3&cj=1

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

It's fantastic that somebody challenges the "super-powers" this should be a wake up call to realise that they work for the people and not the "Davos" elitists. The only reason why any part of the world is dangerous is because our governments have made it that way! These documents clearly show that the leading governments, notably the US only ever act if it benefits some wealthy capitalist, this system can't last forever!

[Alex Deane]

P Foomer - sounds to me like you have some malware or spyware on your machine, tracking your browsing habits. It's nothing to do with us (obviously) and is nothing, as far as I can tell, to do with the Independent either.

I'd clean your machine.

[p foomer]

Hi

its a mac, no virus's or trojans, and its in the source code of the web pages.

I have blocked it in my router, and every time any machine visits the site, up pops another entry (and they are all macs).

[Richard Craven]

Wikileaks is a very dangerous organization. It has greatly exacerbated the difficulties of undertaking diplomacy. It needs to be suppressed for everyone's sake.

[Cheap Coach Bags]

Beautiful scenery will relax you.