Argumentative_Essay_Wikileaks_-_a_Danger_or_Vital_Source_of_Information

WikiLeaks – A Danger or Vital provider of Information To be able to answer the question related to WikiLeaks whether it is A Danger or Vital provider of information, the concepts behind freedom of information, media, and journalism and information awareness have to be clearly understood by all. Due to the fact that each one of these terms relate to each other and play a very important role in our culture. The Australian Government ComLaw states Freedom of Information as “An Act to give to members of the public rights of access to official documents of the Government of the Commonwealth and of its agencies.” (Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing, 2012). On this context the word “media” refers to the way information is made available to the public. (Media, 2012). Moreover it is said that “journalism” is a way of telling a story or better yet letting people know how things really occurred in a written form. (Niles, 2007). Therefore people that practice this style of writing work on areas related to the media and at times giving more significance to unimportant things such as (i.e., Lady Gaga dyes her hair) and by doing that important information is at times lost on all the clutter. “Media is the nervous system of a democracy. If it’s not functioning well, the democracy can’t function.” (Cohen, n.d.). Now days the access to information it is at your fingertips, is no longer the action of buying and reading a printed copy of a newspaper, magazine or even a book on a library with the introduction of the internet this act has been reducing the traditional ways of getting the information required. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) web site the percentage of visits made to read news online is around 5 per cent (OECD, 2009). With the internet traditional media has started to also provide web sites to reach more audience, this concept has opened the door to new ways of getting information across and web sites like TradeLeaks, 100 Reporters (Directory, 2013) and the one mentioned by this essay WikiLeaks. This essay will argue whether WikiLeaks is a Danger or Vital provider of information, is the essay’s aim to demonstrate two aspects of the topic in question: The first section of the essay will try to demonstrate why it is thought that WikiLeaks is a vital provider of information; and the second section will show the other point of view of the argument refereeing to WikiLeaks as a dangerous provider of information. WikiLeaks a vital provider of information The fast-paced and ever growing technological changes such “digital media” is allowing to close the gap for accessing first-hand information. Relating to the concepts previously mentioned, it is said that WikiLeaks main goal and activity is to provide important information to the public truthfully and directly from its source. (WikiLeaks, 2007). “In the history of WikiLeaks, nobody has claimed that the material being put out is not authentic.” (Assange, n.d.). In a summary the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) aims to drive Governments towards a transparency relating to their operations and giving access to such information to the public. Private companies and even Governments think that they can adjust the FOIA to their needs and only provide what they consider to be relevant to their citizens. WikiLeaks is non-profit organisation, WikiLeaks provide a way of transparency like no other provides and reveals important information which is vital for the public to know allowing them to analyse it and to have a more clear understanding on what is happening with the Government they have elected and if this Government is doing right by them, not giving much room for corruption amongst Governments, Private companies and even other Countries. Because of this Governments are trying to establish different ways of stoping WikiLeaks by imposing controls, restrictions and governance standards as discussed at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Dec. 14th 2012, therefore attacking its founder Julian Assange and all others that will share information with the organisation. These collaborators and WikiLeaks are called whistle-blowers just because they dare to do what others won’t do, these type of censorships shouldn’t be allow at all, because if this is permitted the public in general will keep getting limited and tainted bias information in favour or against of a particular point of view. Professional ethics dictated that “whistle-blowing” is the duty of every individual to help the detection and minimise corruption, fraud or any type of unethical practices done by an individual, companies and even the Government. (Kohn, 2011). Without whistle-blower’s contribution it is almost impossible to discover those who are not been transparent on their dealings with others. As stated by the Global Campaign for Free Expression Art. 19, “It is established that the right of the public to information held by the government bodies is essential in ensuring democracy.” (Expression, 2010). WikiLeaks also provides a nameless and safe method to provide information to those journalists relating to news that will normally not see the light of day on the traditional media or that controlled by an specific Government, making WikiLeaks an ideal place to share such vital information, what is ironic is that in the United States Supreme Court it was said that “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government” (States, n.d.). WikiLeaks a dangerous provider of information It has been argued that WikiLeaks is a vital provider of information without taking into account all the important factors, impacts and risks of the publication of confidential and private information presented on the WikiLeaks web site. Talking about ethics, it is important to be as transparent as possible while dealing with other companies, countries and governments, but is also important to keep the wellbeing of those who at some level are affected by the allegations presented on the WikiLeaks web site, so therefore they should think of the consequences that their actions will bring to the public, government and the country on this instance the publications made by WikiLeaks are most damaging to the United States of America focusing on apparent government unethical practices. There are many reasons why WikiLeaks is a dangerous provider of information, one being more important of all is that this type of web sites become a threat to national security and the foreign policies of a country, secrecy is a way of life specially when dealing with other countries without it no one could win a war (May, 2010). As mentioned before transparency is important and some of the articles published by WikiLeaks show that like the shooting of the journalist and civilians from Iraq back in 2007 (WikiLeaks, 2010) demonstrating that they are reporting what they are supposed to report, but another thing is revealing top secret information such as Army bomb devices or official cables from the United State Department, disclosing this vital information to nations around the world, information such as human right abuse in countries like Kenya and Nigeria, restriction in Russia and China publications like this could create wars within the countries mentioned and also could cause less cooperation and sharing of information with the United States of America, damaging any treaty United State has with other countries due to the fact that they won’t be trusted as fear of their secrets been uncovered as the American have. “The people don’t want war, … All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifist for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger …” (Goering, n.d.). Hoshyar Zebari, foreign minister of Iraq said that the information leaked was “unhelpful and untimely” also said “the revelations could damage Mr. Maliki’s efforts to bring together a government in Iraq.” (Landler & Goodman, 2010) There has to be a control on what information is publish to protect the public and foreign policies of each country. So who is to stop WikiLeaks and all the other web sites that are emerging with this ideology, who gives them the power to decide what’s good or bad, what is stopping them from taking their focus against other companies, banks, institutions, who will control them to make sure that they are not working in conjunction with terrorists. United States is in their right to defend themselves against anything that threats their national security and agencies such as the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) have the right to enforce laws against individuals and organisations such WikiLeaks. Their actions and publications give a lot to think, such as what are the real motives behind publishing the diplomatic conversations between leader of other countries and the United States of America. That’s a violation to the privacy of each individual whether is a government official or an individual, as we all know “privacy” permits those who require it to have some level of control over their opinions and information (Government, 1988). What is sad is that by publishing these diplomatic conversations WikiLeaks is weakening the importance of “whistle-blowing” and threatening the views in relation to the freedom of information act, falling towards defamation of the diplomacy between country officials. To give a simpler approach to the argument of WikiLeaks being a dangerous provider of information, let’s take Microsoft as an example, at the moment they are most certainly making a new version of their operating systems after the release of Windows 8, so with that said it is imperative for them to keep whatever technological changes or features they might have to maintain the advantage over their competitors, if this information is leaked they could not only lose that advantage but it can also ruined the project development. So now imagine the impact that the publications of WikiLeaks and any other leak web site are having for the United States government and countries around the world. At the moment even though all the focus falls into the war between the United States and the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange, people are forgetting all the implications this is bringing to the table, eventually individuals and companies will have to find alternative ways of protecting their information and secrets and isolated even more the private from the public and it is increasingly more and more harder to achieve. After covering both sides of the argument, this essay inclines to support WikiLeaks as a vital provider of information, even though now days we can’t actually say for sure that there is freedom of speech, writing it is always good to have organisations such as WikiLeaks and others that have merged on this terms to show governments that they cannot continue brainwashing the mind of their citizens and playing with people’s rights to express themselves. A lot of things has been said against WikiLeaks, such as that it is a threat to national security, a danger to humanity and individuals, but the truth is that nothings has been proven. WikiLeaks and other sites are providing a great service under the new era of digital media and they should continue to so and encourage traditional media to evolve and break from the chains and fear they presently have and jump into the new trend, governments should also implement this line of reasoning and create, implement whistle-blowing laws that will apply not only to their national security but also the private industry and the public. As a conclusion, in this essay was argued whether WikiLeaks is a danger or vital provider of information, to be able to demonstrate a valid argument the essay had to be divided into two sections: The first section argued the importance of WikiLeaks as a vital provider of information along with relevant terms such as media, whistle-blowing, journalism and the freedom of information act, the second section argued the reasons in some extend how WikiLeaks is affecting in way or another the human rights for privacy, the national security and foreign policies between United States of America with other countries presenting WikiLeaks as a dangerous provider of information. References Assange, J., n.d. The Truth, s.l.: s.n. Cohen, J., n.d. Media, s.l.: s.n. Directory, L., 2013. LeakDirectory. [Online] Available at: http://leakdirectory.org/index.php/Leak_Site_Directory [Accessed 28 August 2013]. Expression, G. C. f. F., 2010. Article 19. [Online] Available at: http://www.article19.org/data/files/pdfs/press/wikileaks-and-internet-disclosures.pdf [Accessed 04 September 2013]. Goering, H., n.d. Storm Clouds, s.l.: s.n. Government, A., 1988. Privacy Act 1988. [Online] Available at: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00482 [Accessed 04 September 2013]. Kohn, S. M., 2011. The Whistleblower's Handbook: A Step-By-Step Guide to Doing What's Right and Protecting Yourself. 3rd ed. Connecticut: Globe Pequot Press. Landler, M. & Goodman, J. D., 2010. The New York Ties. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/world/30reax.html'_r=1 [Accessed 03 September 2013]. May, B. B., 2010. Cavemannews. [Online] Available at: http://www.cavemannews.com/WikiLeaksTheGoodTheBadTheUgly.htm [Accessed 03 September 2013]. Media, U., 2012. Understand Media. [Online] Available at: http://www.understandmedia.com/ml-basics/8-what-is-the-media [Accessed 28 August 2013]. Niles, R., 2007. RobertNiles.com. [Online] Available at: http://www.robertniles.com/journalism/Introduction-to-Journalism.pdf [Accessed 28 August 2013]. OECD, 2009. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. [Online] Available at: http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/oecdexaminesthefutureofnewsandtheinternet.htm [Accessed 27 August 2013]. Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing, A.-G. D. C., 2012. comlaw. [Online] Available at: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00231 [Accessed 27 August 2013]. States, S. C. o. t. U., n.d. Cornell University Law School. [Online] Available at: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0403_0713_ZC.html [Accessed 29 August 2013]. WikiLeaks, 2007. WikiLeaks. [Online] Available at: http://wikileaks.org/About.html [Accessed 29 August 2013]. WikiLeaks, 2010. Collateralmurder. [Online] Available at: http://www.collateralmurder.com/ [Accessed 03 September 2013].