4 ms·
For some reason my mind immediately went to the fact that Wikileaks has to honor protecting its sources. I know it should be real obvious that the task of prot
by scoggs 9y ago
For some reason my mind immediately went to the fact that Wikileaks has to honor protecting its sources.
I know it should be real obvious that the task of protecting sources itself is most paramount in their operation, but for some reason I get the feeling that "full disclosure" includes "how do you get the info / who do you get the info from / tell us juicy secrets / tell us the truth about your legal cases". I don't know why, it's not that I do or don't fully trust Wikileaks, I think they can do both good and bad for the world -- not very different from any government, but I don't expect Wikileaks to get a fair shake from many people.
Everyone is looking to get the best information these days to get ahead. Information and data is the name of the game so the possibilities are really endless when it comes to the lengths people would go to get that information.
- mirimir 9y agoSure. But prudent leakers handle that themselves. So there really isn't anything to protect. Leaking is different from journalism. In journalism, identities of sources matter. In leaking, only the leaks matter. And, by the way, I don't believe that Snowden needed to dox himself. He left the decision to Poitras and Greenwald, and I think that they unnecessarily trashed his life.
- qb45 9y agoI thought it was because both Snowden and Greenwald believed that the US would identify him sooner or later and if his identity wasn't public the CIA would quietly arrest him illegally abroad, like they did to others before, and nobody would even know. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-day-we-revealed-snowdens-identity-2014-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-day-we-revealed-snowdens-...