Wikileaks__Good_or_Bad

WikiLeaks; a website, a non-profit organisation, a source of information, a frontier media outlet. It is like nothing the world has ever seen. Since its release in December 2006, Wikileaks has been the backdrop of universal condemnation, posing the question, is Wikileaks a good thing' The answer is yes. Although coverage of the website has been dominated by criticism and scrutiny, it has not yet managed to overshadow what a strong and prominent force Wikileaks is in providing information for the public to use to create a more broadly informed opinion. Wikileaks has so far managed to establish itself as an influential organisation, publishing documents including war logs, private and controversial conversations between politicians and images that are in some cases highly classified, while keeping the whistle-blowers anonymous and away from public glare. These give the public and other media makers access to the information they deserve but that they would not usually see or be privy to. Much of the information released has caused embarrassment for governments across the world, forcing them to be more democratic towards their people and more accountable and careful in dealings with other countries. This embarrassing information has caused politicians in particular to dislike Wikileaks and its Australian founder Julian Assange. Former US President Bill Clinton recently said “the founder of Wikileaks is a criminal and will not escape US law,” while others suggested that Assange and his sources should be executed and Wikileaks declared a terrorist organisation. A little too far to call for the execution of someone don’t you think' All of those threats and many more have abounded because people in positions of power were embarrassed about being exposed for the actions they and their country are taking behind closed doors- and sometimes contrary to what they had led their people to believe. Wikileaks as a media outlet must be supported. The main reason why it has invited so much criticism is because it is not sugar coating information like other forms of media but, exposing the reals truths of governments, banks and other organisations. The information that was supposedly classified, caused reason for the governments to retaliate but after doing a little research it was found that the information wasn’t so top secret after all. Actually 2-3 million US citizens had access to this sensitive database, so really all Wikileaks was doing was confirming the information that so many people already knew. This organisation, which has been branded as illegal is yet to do anything that is in fact illegal or wrong. Releasing secrets constitutes the job of the media and is nothing new, and most importantly there is no law stating it is illegal to release secrets. By making public these truths it should be in the interest of the governments as it will make it easier for future mistakes not to be repeated. One mistake of the US government was condemning Wikileaks while they were in fact using the website to release their own documents. Documents about corruption within the United Nations (UN). If it was not enough to condemn the website they were taking advantage of, they proceeded to react furiously when things were released about their own government. This sounds like a serious case of double standards to me. They cannot possibly think they have the right to use this website against an organisation and not have it used against them. Governments are appointed to represent the countries people on a wider scale. They are not elected to keep things from their people, no matter how big or small it may be. Corruption hides in secrecy and by keeping secrets from everyone the governments are acting unjustly and not in the interest of its people. If their actions were regularly made public it would actually allow the government to be held accountable for their doings, and would ensure they are more cautious about the things they say behind closed doors. If governments can tap our phones, read our emails and track every website we visit, it is only fair that we get to know what governments are using that information for and what else they are doing in our name, after all power is supposed to be in the hands of the people, right' What Wikileaks is doing is the same as what the governments are doing to us. Governments that have little to hide from their citizens will have little to fear from the likes of Wikileaks, but those who do are strongly advised to realise that yes, maybe they can a run corrupt government with illegal operations happening, but they cannot hide forever. The founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange has been polluting debate about the website. With the direct association between the two, people are immediately thinking of Assange when they hear Wikileaks. Assange with his alleged sex charges has been impacting negatively on the credibility of the website. He has also been using Wikileaks as a platform for activism, rather than for pure transparency, by using his role as editor to enforce his distrust of governments. This is shown by the use of emotive titles in the edited videos released. By doing this Assange is risking damaging the platform he has created as a direct source of information. With all this in mind, yes Assange has an interesting character, but he is not the only one involved with the website- there are hundreds. As part of the debate surrounding Wikileaks, it was inevitable that there were going to be people against the website and its practices. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but uninformed generalisations should not be made about the website. Due to manipulation and a spin of stories regarding Wikileaks, many people were lead to believe that the release of some classified information was putting people’s lives in danger. These arguments were not at all factual, with officials from the pentagon concluding that there was no evidence in Wikileaks four years that a single person’s life was lost. Not even one. These claims often initiated by the governments themselves have been made on the basis, as an attempt to intimidate Assange and dissuade him away from making further humiliating releases. At the same time the governments were also seeking to bring down the credibility of the website as a continuing media force. But the website is not killing people at all, it is the secrets that are. What if Wikileaks had been around in August 2001, when Former US president George Bush was handed a secret memo stating the Osama Bin Larden was determined to attack, by hijacking aeroplanes. This was given to him one month before September 11. What if someone from the government realised the president wasn’t going to do anything about the information and decided to leak it. Well, possibly the 1366 lives lost that day would have been saved and September 11 would have no significance, as it does so much today. This loss can only add weight to the already heavy conscience that the American government must have. Some may ask, well what is next for this whistle-blowing website, pioneering in the digital world' The answer- nobody knows. The future of Wikileaks is what each person makes it to be, it is in the hands of ordinary people. But what we know is that it is a strong force with major links to media contacts and it is expected that it will continue to gain momentum. What may influence the websites near future is the matter of Julian Assange, and whether he is or is not charged. If charged and unable to continue running the website, there will surely be someone else to fit into his shoes. Someone willing to take over, after seeing the power they have in releasing information that so many people are interested in. Wikileaks has opened the door on a new era of investigative journalism and it is up to us all to go through that door and show support for this continuing power that is Wikileaks.