WikiLeaks, Revolution, and the Lost Cojones of American Journalism
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Feb 2011 23:11 UTC
In the News "So why do all these American reporters, who know quite well that they get praise and money for doing what Assange has done, stand in a silence that can only be called cowardly, while a fellow publisher faces threats of extradition, banning, prosecution for spying - which can incur the death penalty - and calls for his assassination? [...] U.S. journalism's business model is collapsing; the people who should be out in front defending Assange are facing cut salaries or unemployment because of the medium that Assange represents. These journalists are not willing to concede that Assange is, of course, a publisher, rather than some sort of hybrid terrorist blogger, because of their self-interested prejudices against a medium in which they are not the gatekeepers." Great article - focussing on the US, but just as applicable in the rest of the world (except the great nation of Iceland, obviously). The internet could very well become the single most important 'invention' in human history. We must stand guard against our governments getting their filthy, inefficient, censoring, controlling, and damaging hands on it.
E-mail Print r 8   87 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/itb
Permalink for comment 461281
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Think again about Assange
by lemur2 on Tue 8th Feb 2011 03:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Think again about Assange"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

"However, one must aknowledge that governments might react the oposite way to what was hoped. They might 'lock down internally and to balkanize'. Assange is perhaps saying that if that happens, then at least the governments won't be as efficient at doing these objectionable things as they once were.
Along the same lines, if a government wants to keep something a secret, it must act as if the thing is a secret. It can't be a secret shared with millions of civil servants. It can't be a secret on paper only in order to suppress open court cases. It must actually be a secret, and treated like a secret. So far what we've seen from Wikileaks are primarily things that are officially secret, but are actually widely known. "

So far IMO what we have seen from Wikileaks are things that are officially secret but which sholud not be a secret and/or should never have been done in the first place.

I believe that Richard Nixon once said something like: "If it is the President who does something, then it is not a crime".

Sorry Richard, but no. Just no.

Reply Parent Score: 3