"only difference between Wikileaks and other news orgs is that Wikileaks is doing its job properly"

[The Straight Story]

The hypocrisy of the media attack on Wikileaks


Comment: The hypocrisy of the media attack on Wikileaks
Printer friendly version

Monday, 29, Nov 2010 11:50

The traditional media has become so toothless it is reduced to attacking Wikileaks for doing its job properly.

By Ian Dunt

With a regularity that's becoming almost traditional, the latest major release from Wikileaks has been accompanied by a chorus of disapproval from the establishment. Politicians, analysts and, most worryingly of all, journalists, are lining up to condemn the organisation's eccentric founder, Julian Assange.

The White House and the Foreign Office instantly sprang to action. The media's response was less predictable, and far more irritating. Writers point out that the West will be a more dangerous place if, for instance, Saudi leaders feel they cannot have confidential conversations with US officials. One might respond that the world becomes a far more dangerous place for a few unfortunate individuals when they do, but that's a small response to an attack that requires something bigger and more substantial.

Society is about roles, with groups pitted against each other in a bid to balance the outcome. The executive is given certain powers, for instance, while the legislature - constituted quite literally by the mates of the executive - is tasked with scrutinising its decisions. The same is true for international diplomacy. Diplomats strive for confidentiality. Journalists strive to uncover secrets. The fact that many columnists see fit to attack Wikileaks is evidence of how severely they have misinterpreted their mission statement.

The only difference between Wikileaks and other news organisations is that Wikileaks is doing its job properly. This is not a symptom of its greater intelligence, merely its ability to comprehend the ramifications of new technology. Wikileaks is like a symbol of globalisation. It has no HQ. It uses a Swedish company for net hosting, but puts servers all over the world.

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment/culture-media-and-sport/comment-the-hypocrisy-of-the-media-attack-on-wikileaks-$21385948.htm

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Wikileaks is not a news organization

[JackRiddler]

5. Yes it is, by precedent of US Supreme Court ruling as well as common sense and accepted practice.

Look up Banamex v. Narco News (2001).

Journalism is leaks. Every day, leaks are published, along with a lot of press releases and official statements. Many news organs feast on general solicitations for particular kinds of leaks. (An unpleasant example is all the crime pubs that publish police reports and photos.) It is impossible to shut down Wikileaks by any legal process that could not also be applied to shut down all other inconvenient press.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. I should have been more explict

Wikileaks is not a traditional news provider. It does not publish on a schedule, it does no analysis etc, it publishes raw data that is provided to it. It is clearly following its goals/charter. It is not the same charter as the mainstream media has had historically. WL does indeed have the same legal protections as a traditional media.

[FarCenter]

2. Information Wants To Be Free

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free

[Bonhomme Richard]

3. Do you think todays MSM would publish Ellsbergs papers?

I don't.

[JackRiddler]

6. Nope. At best, they'd call it "old news."

[Uncle Joe]

4. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, The Straight Story.