3 ms·

Assange and wikileaks make it really hard to support their cause.

by wnevets 10y ago

optimuspaul 10y ago
Assange is so untrustworthy.
burkaman 10y ago
I don't really get their strategy. Wouldn't these leaks be much more damaging to Clinton if WikiLeaks at least appeared to be unbiased? It's not like they need to be vocal, there are armies of people poring over every single release. Why not just let the documents speak for themselves?
- skylan_q 10y ago
  Wikileaks can't appear to be unbiased to those who will perceive them as biased as a result of releasing info that may hurt Hillary Clinton. What would they have to do to appear unbiased but still be able to release information damaging to the DNC and Clintons?
  - fixermark 10y ago
    They could definitely appear less biased if they reigned in their Twitter account a bit. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Release documents, and only publicly comment on their own releases and their own business. Don't argue with people on Twitter, don't comment on Clinton scandals that have nothing to do with their leaks, don't speculate about the "ruling class" without evidence, don't offer a reward for information on Seth Rich with only "wink wink" as a reason, don't make vaguely anti-Semitic comments for no reason and then delete them, etc. If they only used Twitter to make announcements and highlight interesting documents, I think they would be orders of magnitude more trustworthy. Let the documents speak for themselves, and let other people write the commentary.
  - jryle80 10y ago
    The leak won't make those who support Clinton change their mind. Those hate her will feel vindicated. Those undecided will stay skeptical. In other words, it has done no harm. If they are truly unbiased, they should release all the information they've got at once; or hold onto it until after the election; or also release other information they've got about Trump and other countries. Let the readers decide. The fact that they release the emails in daily batches clearly shows they have an agenda and want to influence the outcome of the election. Which is fine, if that's what they aim for.
  - JumpCrisscross 10y ago
    The Panama Papers journalists managed a fair balance. They vetted and presented the papers while defending their sources' integrity and anonymity. Interpretation was left to third parties.
    - skylan_q 10y ago
      The Panama papers were released by the US gov't to target enemies. How many of you people are on the banking elite's payroll? :(
- snsr 10y ago
  Assange has stated publicly his desire to help Trump win the election.
  - virtuabhi 10y ago
    Where? Link?

Assange and wikileaks make it really hard to support their cause.

by wnevets 10y ago

Assange and wikileaks make it really hard to support their cause.

optimuspaul 10y ago

Assange is so untrustworthy.

burkaman 10y ago

I don't really get their strategy. Wouldn't these leaks be much more damaging to Clinton if WikiLeaks at least appeared to be unbiased? It's not like they need to be vocal, there are armies of people poring over every single release. Why not just let the documents speak for themselves?

skylan_q 10y ago
Wikileaks can't appear to be unbiased to those who will perceive them as biased as a result of releasing info that may hurt Hillary Clinton. What would they have to do to appear unbiased but still be able to release information damaging to the DNC and Clintons?
- fixermark 10y ago
  They could definitely appear less biased if they reigned in their Twitter account a bit. https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787079640661786624
- burkaman 10y ago
  Release documents, and only publicly comment on their own releases and their own business. Don't argue with people on Twitter, don't comment on Clinton scandals that have nothing to do with their leaks, don't speculate about the "ruling class" without evidence, don't offer a reward for information on Seth Rich with only "wink wink" as a reason, don't make vaguely anti-Semitic comments for no reason and then delete them, etc. If they only used Twitter to make announcements and highlight interesting documents, I think they would be orders of magnitude more trustworthy. Let the documents speak for themselves, and let other people write the commentary.
- jryle80 10y ago
  The leak won't make those who support Clinton change their mind. Those hate her will feel vindicated. Those undecided will stay skeptical. In other words, it has done no harm. If they are truly unbiased, they should release all the information they've got at once; or hold onto it until after the election; or also release other information they've got about Trump and other countries. Let the readers decide. The fact that they release the emails in daily batches clearly shows they have an agenda and want to influence the outcome of the election. Which is fine, if that's what they aim for.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  The Panama Papers journalists managed a fair balance. They vetted and presented the papers while defending their sources' integrity and anonymity. Interpretation was left to third parties.
  - skylan_q 10y ago
    The Panama papers were released by the US gov't to target enemies. How many of you people are on the banking elite's payroll? :(
snsr 10y ago
Assange has stated publicly his desire to help Trump win the election.
- virtuabhi 10y ago
  Where? Link?