Friday, May 6, 2011

WikiLeaks

If you are a news-junkie, you have most likely heard of WikiLeaks. You've probably heard of it anyways..

WikiLeaks is an international non-profit organization that broadcast sensitive, sometimes classified, information from governments and high-profile organizations to the public. It was launched on October 4th, 2006, by the enigmatic journalist, computer programmer and Internet activist Julian Assange. Their goal is to give important news and information to the public, and they want transparency in governments and organizations, because they believe this leads to less corruption, a better democracy, a better society for all people.

WikiLeaks is a project of "the Sunshine Press" , and the founders of WikiLeaks consists of a mix of Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the U.S., Europe, Australia, South Africa, and Taiwan. According to an article on TIME.com, WikiLeaks claims they use the same software platform as Wikipedia, and whistle-blowers can anonymously post documents there. Protecting the whistle-blowers is one of their top priorities. They want anyone, instead of a couple of academic specialists, to be able to post documents, so that everything can be analyzed, interpreted, and explained to the public, without being shushed by authorities. The WikiLeaks staff goes through every document that is posted, and check the credibility of the document before broadcasting it, like any other news agency that get tips from anonymous sources.

- WikiLeaks is important to maintain a free press
I think a free press is extremely important. It is paramount in a democratic nation for making the normal person know what his or her's government or organization is doing. Without a free press, the government would be an entity that the public would not have control over, and it would most likely lead to more corruption. For example, WikiLeaks exposed a multi-million dollar corruption involving Kenyan embassies that swung the vote in the 2007 Kenyan elections by 10% because of the more open view on the Kenyan government, and led to changes in its constitution. Without these sorts of leaks, and this kind of free press, the public in countries like Kenya is walking blindfolded in their government’s deceit.

Without WikiLeaks, many stories like this would never see the light of day, because journalists in regular newspapers often trust the official sources. But like John Pilger said in an article on the WikiLeaks case, WikiLeaks would revolutionize today’s journalism because it forces journalists to rely less on official sources and authorities, as WikiLeaks can prove that they don’t always tell the truth.

I believe that secrecy is on one hand a human right, and to have privacy for one’s own personal matters is essential in most countries. But when it comes to things that involve other peoples’ interest, such as taxpaying, investing, war, etc, I think it is extremely important that we insist transparency to these kinds of establishments.

In 2010, WikiLeaks broadcasted a video called “Collateral Murder” on the internet, showing an Apache helicopter murdering a dozen people, including killing two Reuters journalists, and harming two children in 2007.

The "Collateral Murder" video on YouTube.
This might be disturbing for some viewers.

This made headlines worldwide, and nations around the world wanted answers from the American military. The American military then began an “internet war” against WikiLeaks, and later a man named Adrian Lamo betrayed Bradley Manning and told the U.S. military that Manning was responsible for the leaks. Private Manning has never been charged for this, but he has spent his days in prison ever since, including an empty 6-by-12 foot cell, where he spent 23 hours a day, from July 2010 to April 2011. WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange has hired many lawyers who have fought against the unreasonable and inhumane treatment of Manning ever since he heard the news of his imprisonment.

The U.S. has told the media that the reason why Manning has been sent to prison, is that by leaking the material of the Apache killing, he is helping “the enemy” and has betrayed his country. Although I do believe that leaks shouldn't be broadcast if it can lead to innocent people getting hurt or killed, in this situation it didn't harm any innocents, and I believe that after ten years of being at war with Iraq, people deserve to know what exactly they’re doing there. Not only was the U.S. killing innocent civilians, but they also did it in a way that made ordinary people think they were heartlessly killing people in a video game; 

‘Crazyhorse One-Eight’, the soldier operating the helicopter's machine-gun during the “Collateral Murder” video: 
“Come on, let's shoot!” 
“Come on!”
“Oh yeah, look at those dead bastards.”

I firmly believe that the public should know about this kind of breach of the rules of war, especially when the military is not prosecuting the people who do these kinds of things themselves. WikiLeaks is important to keep transparency in governments and high-profiled organizations!

8 comments:

  1. I always heard of Wiki leaks but never quite knew what it was all about. I'm glad I came across this blog.

    It's great to have a public source not manipulated by the government. Sorry to say but governments inevitably want to control the public when it should be the other way around. I would like to directly blame certain governments but it's identical in every government. Corruption is something we all don't want to see in the future. Lucky for us the people outnumber the government vastly if people remain united to keep us free.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting topic. People don't give in much thought of how the media is being presented to them. I don't either but after reading this I can say that it is essential that we get our news from people based sources than from sources that are government owned. It protrays the need for people to have the right to recieve accurate news as opposed to what the higher profiled authorities want the public to know.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have heard about Wiki leaks and read some news when Julian Assange had arrested before. This is queit hard topic..because truth has dark and bright side.. of course people has right to know but sometime it can be worse than knowing I think :) Anyway I was enjoying to read your essay. great job:)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Same goes for me, Ive heard of WikiLeaks but never really knew what it was about. There diffently needs to be some transparency. There is some much corruption going on in governments and officials it is crazy. The general public have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. The US government in particular has so many secrets and conspiracies . But where are these sources and the information where have they sourced it from? WikiLeaks would need to verify that their sources are correct and not be a conspiracy.As Min said some times it can be worse to know than not know. But if it is beneficial to the public then people should have the right to know.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I found this really interesting, also reading the other comments Ive noticed that I am definitely not the only one that doesn't know much about it. I think wikileaks is such a good idea, if they keep it all together and make sure all the info is correct and not let it be taken over by the government in anyway. I think the world should know whats really going on, its not fair that the government gets to decide what we know and dont know about important topics.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is a post made by "aclemas", and this was deleted by Blogger in their effort to make this site "go back to normal". So I'm just posting aclemas' post from my email.

    aclemas wrote:
    There's been so much talk about Wikileaks lately that you're right, it has been hard to escape hearing about it. Hearing about it and knowing exactly what is Wikileaks is another thing. I agree with Gareth when he said that he 'never quite knew what it was all about'. I tried to Google the topic once and left the computer confused. Thanks to your Blog, I could probably join a conversation about the topic and bluff my way through it now.

    Your sixth paragraph hit home for me. As long as National Security wasn't being compromised, I say go ahead with the leaks too. Transparency is vital.

    But is it not concerning to anyone else that any freak show could post there conspiracy theory on Wikileaks? I may not have understood correctly, but you say the site is run similar Wikipedia. We already know that Wikipedia isn't a credible source so how do we know Wikileaks is?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Suzana's comment was also deleted, so I'm posting her comment from my email also.

    Suzana wrote:
    Interesting topic. People don't give in much thought of how the media is being presented to them. I don't either but after reading this I can say that it is essential that we get our news from people based sources than from sources that are government owned. It protrays the need for people to have the right to recieve accurate news as opposed to what the higher profiled authorities want the public to know.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks for the responses everyone!
    Aclemas, yes, WikiLeaks use the same software platform as Wikipedia, but the difference is that when people submit documents to WikiLeaks, their journalists and staff work hard to find out if the source has submitted authentic documents. So nothing is broadcast before it has been analyzed by WikiLeaks themselves. So credibility wise, WikiLeaks is as credible as any other news agency that receives documents from other sources, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete