Tag Archives: Wikileaks

NYT: What would Daniel Ellsberg have done with Pentagon Papers if Wikileaks had existed?

Now that it is relatively simple for anyone in possession of leaked documents to publish them directly to the internet, is there any reason to pass them on to a national newspaper?

With the viral advantages of internet publishing and social networking, can dedicated sites such as Wikileaks – which made a huge impact two weeks ago with the release of a classified military video showing the killing of civilians in Baghdad by a United States Apache Gunship – replace mainstream news organisations as the place to take leaked information?

Noam Cohen of the New York Times casts an eye back at the case of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, and asks how it might unravel differently today.

[I]f someone today had the Pentagon Papers, or the modern equivalent, would he still go to the press, as Daniel Ellsberg did nearly 40 years ago and wait for the documents to be analysed and published? Or would that person simply post them online immediately?

Full story at this link…

Leaked US military video boosts donations to Wikileaks

Whistleblowing website Wikileaks has received more than £150,000 in donations since Monday, when it published a leaked US military video of the killing of 12 civilians – including two Reuters staff – in Iraq in 2007. According to the Wikileaks site, the project requires $600,000 a year to run.

The video has been hailed as a turning point for the controversial site (see this Wired article from 2009), which uses a network of volunteers to release information and promises full confidentiality for its sources.

As the Editors Weblog summarises:

Many news outlets might find themselves in a love-hate relationship with the news outlet. Wikileaks is situated at an important spot within the news industry as the only place willing to publish stories others can’t or wont. The website can function as a voice capable of breaking high profile scandals news outlets don’t want to break.

While Wikileaks acts as an important watchdog against corruption, the sometimes-paranoid tone of the site might undermine the website’s value while making it a target for criticism. To an extent, Wikileaks has every right to indulge in their paranoia. Several democratic governments around the world, all of whom have laws protecting free speech, have passed or discussed creating new laws which block the public’s access to the website. Just last night, the UK passed the digital economy bill, which contains a clause that could be used to justify blocking Wikileaks. The site is also blacklisted in Denmark and Australia.

Democracy Now is claiming videos it has obtained feature eyewitness accounts of the 2007 attack from the day after event; while international media organisations have called for a fresh investigation of the incident by the US military.

CNN: Wikileaks editor on why it posted video of Reuters journalists’ deaths

Julian Assange explains the process involved in receiving and breaking the encryption on the US military video published by the site earlier this week, which shows the slaying of 12 people including two Reuters journalists in an Apache helicopter attack in Iraq in 2007.

Any assertion that Wikileaks selectively edited the video is “an outrageous straw man”, says Assange.

“We have a mission to promote political reforms by releasing suppressed information,” he explains, when asked about Wikileak’s mission.

This is a special circumstance for us, because this is not what we normally report. This is an attack on our own, this is an attack on journalists in a difficult situation trying to report the truth and we have a responsibility to our sources who give us this sort of material to get it out there. In fact, our promise to them is that if they give us this type of material that is of significance and has been suppressed we will release it and try to get the maximum political impact for it.

Video available at this link…

Wikileaks releases video showing Apache shooting of Reuters news staff

Wikileaks today released a video depicting the slaying of more than 12 people – including two Reuters news staff – by two Apache helicopters using 30mm cannon fire.

The attack took place on the morning of 12 July 2007 in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad. Two children were also wounded.

Among the dead, were two Reuters news employees, Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen. Chmagh was a 40-year-old Reuters driver and assistant; Noor-Eldeen was a 22-year-old war photographer.

An investigation by the US military concluded that the soldiers acted in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own rules of engagement.

Reuters has been unsuccessfully trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act since the time of the attack.

More information can be found on the Collateral Murder website.

Warning: the following video contains highly disturbing imagery.

Could Iceland’s journalism haven create a ‘ripple effect’?

Al Jazeera English’s Listening Post has an excellent film about the new Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI) proposal, which, if successful, could make Iceland an investigative journalism haven.

  • Read more about IMMI here: http://immi.is/?l=en: “The goal of the IMMI proposal is to task the government with finding ways to strengthen freedom of expression around world and in Iceland, as well as providing strong protections for sources and whistleblowers. To this end the legal environment should be explored in such a way that the goals can be defined, and changes to law or new law proposals can be prepared. The legal environments of other countries should be considered, with the purpose of assembling the best laws to make Iceland a leader of freedoms of expression and information.”
  • Wikileaks.org, which helped draft the law, also has more information here (its site currently has restricted content, as it prepares for relaunch and seeks more funds).

In the Listening Post film, which also features Index on Censorship news editor Padraig Reidy, Wikileaks’ editor Julian Assange explains IMMI’s limits as well as its potential: “It’s important to remember that the IMMI appears to be a good bullet, but it’s not a magic bullet, so there will be many cases where there is brutal suppression of the press that IMMI doesn’t have substantial effect on.”

IMMI’s proponents hope new legislation will help change tough libel laws around the world, with a “ripple effect” in the EU and beyond.

BBC News: Wikileaks and Icelandic MPs propose ‘haven’ for investigative journalism

Whistleblowing website Wikileaks and some Icelandic MPs have launched the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI) – a proposal calling on the country’s government to adopt laws to better protect journalists and their sources, which has the potential to create a haven for investigative journalists in the country.

The proposal will be filed with the Icelandic parliament on 16 February.

Such changes could encourage more journalists and media businesses to move to Iceland, Wikileaks editor Julian Assange, tells BBC News. The IMMI also wants to challenge so-called “libel tourism” and change libel laws that threaten publishers, internet hosts and sites like Wikileaks that act as a “conduit” between source and journalist. Wikileaks has recently been involved in a fundraising drive to support the site, which has previously had to be taken down because of lack of funding.

Full story at this link…

Wikileaks temporarily closes due to lack of funds

WikiLeaks.org, the whistleblowing and transparency website, has temporarily shut its site, citing lack of funds. It promises to be “back soon”.

WikiLeaks, part of the Sunshine Press, is calling for donations to support the publication of “hundreds of thousands” of pages from “corrupt banks, the US detainee system, the Iraq war, China, the UN and many others”.

“We have raised just over $130,000 for this year but can not meaningfully continue operations until costs are covered. These amount to just under $200,000 PA. If staff are paid, our yearly budget is $600,000.”

Full post at this link…

‘Super injunctions’ parliamentary debate: kicks off 2.30 pm

The effects of English libel law on the reporting of parliamentary proceedings will be debated in the House of Commons today at 14.30 pm.

You can watch it here at this link…

Liberal Democrat MP Dr Evan Harris secured the debate, following the legal row between the Guardian and Trafigura’s lawyers, Carter-Ruck.

Although a ‘super-injunction’ that stopped the Guardian reporting – or mentioning – the suppressed Minton Report was eventually lifted, it had prevented the Guardian reporting an MP’s question tabled for Parliament.

Carter-Ruck twice issued letters to the House, in regards to the case: firstly in response to media reports on how the firm was trying to ‘gag’ Parliament; secondly, indicating that the case could be ‘sub judice‘. On Friday Carter-Ruck abandoned its injunction and on Saturday the Guardian reported the draft report that Trafigura had battled so hard to keep secret. On Sunday Guardian.co.uk reported that the MPs’ debate would go ahead.

Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger has dissected the injunction here for us on Guardian.co.uk although the document had already been made available by the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) prior to the injunction being lifted.

The Times had also been issued with the same injunction, Wikileaks reported.

See:

Computer World: WikiLeaks plans to make leaking easier with new upload system

Wikileaks.org, the document leaking website, is working on a way to enable newspapers, human rights organisations, criminal investigators and others to embed an ‘upload a disclosure to me via WikiLeaks’ form onto their websites, Computer World reports (IDG News Service article).

“The upload system will give potential whistleblowers around the world the ability to leak sensitive documents to an organisation or journalist they trust over a secure connection, while giving the receiver legal protection they might not otherwise enjoy.”

Full post at this link…

Related on Journalism.co.uk: Difficult to get Western media attention on Kenyan killings and disappearances, says WikiLeaks editor

ReadWriteWeb: Google may hand over Caribbean journalists’ IP addresses

ReadWriteWeb follows up Wikileaks’ report that Google could comply with an order to supply the IP addresses used to access a news site’s GMail account, as part of a libel claim in the Santa Clara, California Superior Court, regarding government corruption in the Turks & Caicos Islands.

The TCI Journal is a news and commentary site based in the Islands, run by ‘journalists, lawyers, professionals, students and patriots.’ RWW reports:

“A property developer discussed at length in the Journal’s documentation of corruption and in the official UK government inquiry report is now suing the journal for libel.”

According to Wikileaks and RWW, Google intends to hand over the requested records in just over two weeks, unless the Journal files a counter-motion with the court itself.

Google has supplied RWW with a statement that said the company was ‘still evaluating all [its] legal options regarding this particular request’.

Full post at this link…