While the founder of Wikileaks Julian Assange considers
himself to be an internet activist, many have compared he and his organisation
to the likes of the terrorist organisation of Al Queda.
Since Wikleaks was first launched in 2006, Assange has managed to ruffle the feathers of the US government with the release of US documents. Some of the information Wikleaks has released include information regarding the US army protocol in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, documents from the Church of Scientology and content from Sarah Palin’s personal yahoo account just to name a few. With considerable damage done to the reputation of the US government with the release of classified footage of US military killing civilians and news workers in Iraq for example, the US government consider Wikileaks to be a “foreign terrorist organization”; even taking Assange before a US court in an effort to shut Wikileaks down. From Assange’s point of view “This transparency creates a better society for all people”. Written in one of Wikileaks’ mission statements its said that they believe that “freedom of speech and freedom of information are paths toward improving the world we live in”. Also worth noting is that Wikileaks do not believe in altering any of the information that they hack into, they simply gather information that they so important to them with no other objective than to make the practices of governments and other organisations they have investigates transparent to the public. As a not for profit organisation in this approach they can be seen as a sort of modern day Robin Hood to many in ‘outing’ the current dishonest and misleading nature of societies hierarchies. However, this also means that they have no regard to the privacy of information and in accessing classified government documentation, they are in fact engaging in illegal activity. It is for this reason that not only government and the institutions they have exposed have reacted negatively to Wikileaks as an organisation but also the global e-commerce business PayPal have distanced themself from the rogue organisation. In 2010 PayPal froze the Wikileaks account in a breach of their acceptable use policy which states that their payment service “cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity.”
Although, he shows no regard for information privacy Assange’s objective of sharing information with an online community for the supposed betterment of society does fit in with Jenkin’s views of a participatory culture. One in which the people are empowered by information sharing in an online environment. Assange is certainly an activist and a very dangerous one at that. With so much controversy regarding Wikileaks, their legacy may continue on for as long as they can legally do so. Governments and institutions are likely to be far more careful with classified information they are withholding, especially with social media making it so easy for damaging information to spread like wildfire across the globe, leaving reputations in tatters.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2010/04/05/wikileaks-releases-video-of-us-choppers-slaying-reporters-civilians/
http://www.ifla.org/publications/what-is-the-effect-of-wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/07/26/just-who-is-julian-assange-the-man-behind-wikileaks/
http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/feb11/kinsman.pdf
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/paypal-wikileaks/
Since Wikleaks was first launched in 2006, Assange has managed to ruffle the feathers of the US government with the release of US documents. Some of the information Wikleaks has released include information regarding the US army protocol in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, documents from the Church of Scientology and content from Sarah Palin’s personal yahoo account just to name a few. With considerable damage done to the reputation of the US government with the release of classified footage of US military killing civilians and news workers in Iraq for example, the US government consider Wikileaks to be a “foreign terrorist organization”; even taking Assange before a US court in an effort to shut Wikileaks down. From Assange’s point of view “This transparency creates a better society for all people”. Written in one of Wikileaks’ mission statements its said that they believe that “freedom of speech and freedom of information are paths toward improving the world we live in”. Also worth noting is that Wikileaks do not believe in altering any of the information that they hack into, they simply gather information that they so important to them with no other objective than to make the practices of governments and other organisations they have investigates transparent to the public. As a not for profit organisation in this approach they can be seen as a sort of modern day Robin Hood to many in ‘outing’ the current dishonest and misleading nature of societies hierarchies. However, this also means that they have no regard to the privacy of information and in accessing classified government documentation, they are in fact engaging in illegal activity. It is for this reason that not only government and the institutions they have exposed have reacted negatively to Wikileaks as an organisation but also the global e-commerce business PayPal have distanced themself from the rogue organisation. In 2010 PayPal froze the Wikileaks account in a breach of their acceptable use policy which states that their payment service “cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity.”
Although, he shows no regard for information privacy Assange’s objective of sharing information with an online community for the supposed betterment of society does fit in with Jenkin’s views of a participatory culture. One in which the people are empowered by information sharing in an online environment. Assange is certainly an activist and a very dangerous one at that. With so much controversy regarding Wikileaks, their legacy may continue on for as long as they can legally do so. Governments and institutions are likely to be far more careful with classified information they are withholding, especially with social media making it so easy for damaging information to spread like wildfire across the globe, leaving reputations in tatters.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2010/04/05/wikileaks-releases-video-of-us-choppers-slaying-reporters-civilians/
http://www.ifla.org/publications/what-is-the-effect-of-wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information
http://www.aolnews.com/2010/07/26/just-who-is-julian-assange-the-man-behind-wikileaks/
http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/feb11/kinsman.pdf
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/paypal-wikileaks/
Good Post Luke! It is interesting that you wrote that Governements will just find different ways of hiding information from their constituents... That strange quirk of human nature - the need for power - would do nothing else I guess!
ReplyDeleteEnjoyable read, Good to see another perspective of Assange. I viewed him as a hero, and I feel the fact that he is 'not-for-profit' only gains him more trust. Although I can see where your coming from, the 'powers' are in 'power' for a reason, and more often than not we awarded them with these positions. So I like that you have supported their cause. Although after watch the 'collateral murder' video I could not help but feel a little distaste toward government bodies. Look forward to more
ReplyDeleteIf you would like to have a read of another perspective my blog is COOP! Gen Y- give it a try
Good to have some feedback from both of you, thanks!
ReplyDeleteI suppose I just think Wikileaks aren't too fussed about the mess they may be leaving behind after they prove their point.
Of course governments are misleading and Assange has certainly left a message but at what cost? That's my take on the matter.
I'll have a read through your blogs, cheers.