Slashdot Mirror
WikiLeaks Losing Support From Anonymous
Hugh Pickens writes "The Guardian reports that members of computer hacker collective Anonymous have distanced themselves from WikiLeaks, claiming the whistleblowers' site has become too focused on the personal tribulations of its founder, Julian Assange. A statement linked from the Anonymous Twitter account, AnonymousIRC, described WikiLeaks as 'the one man Julian Assange show,' and complained that the website implemented a paywall seeking donations from users who wanted access to millions of leaked documents. 'The idea behind WikiLeaks was to provide the public with information that would otherwise be kept secret by industries and governments. Information we strongly believe the public has a right to know,' said the statement on behalf of Anonymous. The dispute could starve WikiLeaks of potentially newsworthy leaks in the future, as some of Wikileaks' recent disclosures – including the Stratfor emails – are alleged to have come from Anonymous."
Yeah, Anonymous, that well known organisation made up of a heirachy of people who all speak with the same voice, united under a single person.
Oh, hang on, no, they're made up of a whole slew of individuals who do not speak for each other. What was I thinking of.
Apparently, the Guardian didn't manage to break out of this incorrect belief about the structure of Anon.
... countries without journalistic shield laws (Yes, United States, I am looking at you).
Journalistic shield laws are a terrible idea. Freedom of expression should be recognized for all citizens, not reserved for a privileged elite.
Not true. Lots of nerds have deluded themselves into thinking "English is a living language" means "my ignorance, typos, and mistakes are none of the above, they're just the instruments of change! The future is now!"
The enemies of Democracy are
Blah blah blah. You're rehearsing all these old arguments about journalistic responsibility. Here's the problem: the leaks are so big that it's impossible to know what's in them. No single organization has the resources to pick through them and find everything of interest. Once it has been ascertained that they contain some information which it is in the public interest to release, the choice is between releasing everything and releasing practically nothing. Only releasing relevant documents is simply not practical.
The analogy with personal communications is a false one. The diplomatic cables were produced by government officials while they were in work getting paid to write them. They are not personal communications.