stories filed under: "wikileaks"
How The Press Misleads About Wikileaks
from the journalism-at-work dept
As Julian Assange's lawyers fully expect him to get charged in the US under the Espionage Act, it's interesting (and a bit distressing) to see how some in the press -- who should be his biggest supporters -- are acting. Glenn Greenwald highlighted how a Time Magazine report on the potential US legal case against Assange misstated a variety of facts -- including the idea that Wikileaks itself had published "thousands" of classified State Department cables and that it had done so "indiscriminately." As Greenwald points out Wikileaks itself has only published a little over 1,000 of the cables, and nearly all of them are the ones that the press has already posted/vetted/reported on.This is a part of the story that isn't getting much coverage. While most of the news reports have said that Wikileaks published over 250,000 such cables, that's not exactly true. It has over 250,000 such cables and appears to have passed them on to its media partners, but it's slowly releasing specific cables -- with redactions -- and mostly after the press partners are releasing those same cables. In other words, it appears that Wikileaks is actually being judicious and discriminating in what it's releasing. Or, you could say (and probably should say) that Wikileaks is actually doing much of what a journalist would do in selecting which documents to pass along at this time.
But by trying to claim that Wikileaks is "just" a data dump, it's an effort to make Wikileaks look like it's not a journalistic or media entity -- thereby affording it fewer First Amendment rights. But, it appears that some in the press, such as Time, are being quite misleading in doing so. After Greenwald called them on it, Time issued a "correction," but it's a "correction that's not a correction" in that they basically say that Assange and some others disagree with some of Time's claims. But it makes no attempt to fix the factually incorrect statements.
Of course, this may come back to the view that many have: that certain elements in the press are upset about Wikileaks because it shows what a crappy job they've been doing on their own. If we had a functioning press that actually sought to hold the US government accountable, there would be much less of a need for Wikileaks. Instead, we have a press that focuses on keeping "access" to those in power, and that means not digging too deep at times.
Filed Under: espionage, journalism, julian assange, time magazine, wikileaks
Companies: wikileaks
Operation Payback May Now Start Focusing On Actually Digging Through Wikileaks Leaks For Details
from the much-more-effective dept
While I find Operation Payback fascinating, from a sociological/cultural perspective, I've said from the very beginning that I thought their DDoS strategy to be a bad idea. I was happy, last month, when the folks behind it effectively had "called off" their attacks on copyright-related sites, and a bit disappointed (though, again, fascinated) by the more recent attacks in support of Wikileaks. However, there are now reports that the group has (as it did with the copyright issue) decided to back off the DDoS attacks, but instead, work towards helping to sift through all of the Wikileaks leaks to find the hidden gems of information that need more attention and exposure. As the plan says, "they don't fear the LOIC (the tool used for the attacks), they fear exposure." Could it be that out of what some consider "vandalism," we may get journalism? Welcome to the new digital world...Filed Under: journalism, operation payback, wikileaks
Wikileaks Leak Suggests Hollywood Is Better At Preventing Terrorism Than The TSA
from the winning-the-hearts-and-minds dept
While it seems like US politicians keep insisting that Wikileaks' release of State Department cables has put people in harm's way -- despite a lack of evidence to support that -- some are pointing out that at least some of the cables actually show that some of what the US is doing in the Middle East has been quite effective. Prashanth points us to the news that one of the leaks showed that American TV and movies in Saudi Arabia are actually "are doing more to dissuade young Muslims from becoming jihadists than virtually anything else." As the cable noted: "Saudis are now very interested in the outside world and everybody wants to study in the US if they can. They are fascinated by US culture in a way they never were before."Of course, the same politicians blasting Wikileaks as a "terrorist" organization can't admit that some of the leaks are actually showing that some of what the US is doing is working quite well. As Prasanth notes in his own blog post, if US politicians were smart, they'd use cables like this to play up evidence that they're doing some things well:
I feel like this is along the lines of winning the people's "hearts and minds". The reason why this works is because as opposed to state-sponsored propaganda (which is pretty obvious when shown), this more subtly shows what's so great about the US.
Finally, I think this report is a great send-up of all the politicians who are equating Wikileaks with terrorism. Quite the contrary: while a lot of what it shows is what we've done wrong (and of course these politicians will hypocritically call for press freedom in other countries yet repress it here), it also shows a lot of what we've done right. Why not publicize that more?
Filed Under: entertainment, hearts and minds, hollywood, saudi arabia, terrorism, wikileaks
Companies: wikileaks
Military Threatens To Court Martial Anyone Using USB Drives Or Other Removable Media
from the overreacting... dept
Apparently, one strategy the military is taking in a weak attempt to prevent a future State Department cable leaks, like the one currently going on, is to ban all forms of removable media and to threaten to court martial anyone caught using USB keys or CD-Rs on machines connected to SIPRNET. Apparently this is kind of frustrating for many in the military:One military source, who works on these networks, says it will make the job harder; classified computers are often disconnected from the network, or are in low-bandwidth areas. A DVD or a thumb drive is often the easiest way to get information from one machine to the next. "They were asking us to build homes before," the source says. "Now they’re taking away our hammers."The thing is, just like TSA patdowns, this is targeting the last leak, rather than the next leak. If someone wants to leak the content, they'll figure out a way to do so, even if they can't stick a USB key into a computer.
Filed Under: court martial, military, removable media, wikileaks
New Competition For Wikileaks Shows Up -- Say Hello To OpenLeaks
from the are-we-going-to-jail-them-too? dept
Like many folks, I'm somewhat conflicted about Wikileaks as an organization. It's been clear for quite some time that it has some organizational issues, to put it mildly. However, as we've pointed out the concept behind Wikileaks is inevitable, and we fully expected that even if Wikileaks itself went away, others would quickly step up to take its place. Last month, we noted that some former Wikileakers (who were not at all happy with Assange's leadership) were planning a new competitor.Slashdot points us to the news that their offering, to be called OpenLeaks, is expected to launch next week. The new operation claims it will function slightly differently than Wikileaks, but with the same general intent: allowing whistleblowers to leak sensitive information. The main difference appears to be that OpenLeaks won't publish information directly, but will offer it up to others to publish. I'm not entirely sure how that will work, but either way it seems to be clear that even if the US government were successful in somehow making Wikileaks "go away," it won't stop the general trend towards systems and institutions designed to help whistleblowing.
Filed Under: competition, journalism, openleaks, whistleblowing, wikileaks
Companies: openleaks, wikileaks
Lieberman Praises Companies Helping Him Try To Censor Wikileaks
from the censorship-is-the-in-thing dept
This should hardly comes as a surprise, but Senator Joe Lieberman has apparently put out a statement, along with Senator Sue Collins, praising companies for following through on their political pressure to try to censor Wikileaks, calling them "good corporate citizens," and saying that people should support those companies for their willingness to bow down to government pressure. Yeah, okay. Even the press reporting on this seem to think Lieberman is simply making stuff up. Witness this paragraph from Wired:"The WikiLeaks data dump has jeopardized U.S. national interests and the lives of intelligence sources around the world," Lieberman said, though there is no proof or even detailed allegations that the release has endangered any intelligence source.Lieberman apparently wants the world to believe that censorship is okay because "this is no time for business as usual." It appears that Lieberman really wants to go down in history as the Senator who favors censorship of the press and US companies. Quite a legacy.
Filed Under: censorship, joe lieberman, sue collins, wikileaks
Companies: amazon, mastercard, paypal, visa
What Would Happen If Wikileaks Got Its Own Top Level Domain?
from the a-freedom-tld? dept
With all the talk about how the whole Wikileaks/domain name seizures issue is about a centralized vs. decentralized internet and even talk of a more decentralized DNS system, IP Watch raises an interesting question. With ICANN's plans to allow just about any TLD, what would happen if Wikileaks were to apply for its very own TLD?Given ICANN's official statement that it does not take down domain names and has no technical or legal authority to participate in such forms of censorship (and, in fact, we've noted in the past that ICANN has refused to meet with IP Czar Victoria Espinel about this, noting that it would not be appropriate), would it allow such a TLD to be created, and then take a hands off approach?
What if it wasn't even a .wikileaks (or just .leaks) TLD, but a more general .open DNS, managed by an organization that agreed not to censor anything, no matter what the cause?
Filed Under: dns system, icann, openness, tld, top level domain, wikileaks
Companies: icann, wikileaks
If Assange Were In China, US Politicians Would Be Cheering Him On
from the transparency-means-different-things-when-it's-about-you dept
We've pointed out the general hypocrisy of US politicians calling for an end to internet censorship, while threatening Wikileaks at the same time. If you want to see some real irony, check out the fact that Senator Joe Lieberman, who has been the loudest voice in pushing for censorship of Wikileaks and of others in the press, just so happens to be a member of the "Global Internet Freedom Caucus." Yeah, except here in the US.Along those lines, Martin Varsavsky points out the obvious: if Julian Assange were a Chinese citizen, publishing Chinese government documents, the US would likely be cheering him on:
Lately I have a strong feeling that the Chinese must be rejoicing at all the "retroactive law invention" that is going on in the West to put one man in jail. Because if Assange had been a Chinese citizen promoting transparency in China we would be lining up to give him the Nobel Prize. We can't demand transparency from others and censorship for ourselves.In fact, as Evgeny Morozov notes, Russia's Ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin is already using the US's reaction to Wikileaks to say what a joke "freedom of the press" is in America. That tweet is in Russian, but the Google translation is:
In my opinion, the fate of Assange says the lack of media freedom in the West, the presence of political persecution and human rights violations.What's really stunning, beyond just the sheer uselessness and impotence of the US government's response to Wikileaks, is the fact that it's inevitably destroying any moral high ground on claims of freedom and support of free speech we might have once had. In the end, I would expect that to have a much bigger impact than anything that's in the actual leaked cables.
Filed Under: china, free speech, governments, julian assange, russia, transparency, wikileaks
Companies: wikileaks
Amazon Won't Host Wikileaks... But Will Sell The Leaked Cables For Your Kindle?
from the choices dept
This is making the rounds on Twitter, but cc was the first to submit it here. When Amazon kicked Wikileaks off of their S3 hosting service, we noted how it had (just weeks earlier) tried to defend a pro-pedophilia book by stating:"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable."While Amazon did cave and pull that book eventually, some suggested that perhaps this just meant that Amazon would be fine with Wikileaks if it was being sold in book form. And, apparently, someone is testing that theory, and so far it's working. You can apparently buy the Wikileaks leaked State Department cables on Amazon for your kindle, if you're so inclined. Of course, since they're available (at an ever increasing number of mirror sites) for free, there's no reason to -- but as a way of showing Amazon's hypocrisy, well, that's just priceless.
Update: Amazon's "explanation" is that the book also contains commentary. Um. What? So if the Wikileaks website also contained commentary (which I believe it does), it would be okay?
Filed Under: censorship, ebooks, kindle, wikileaks
Companies: amazon
