5 ms·

Is it false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks was a tool used to affect US election?

• marknutter 8y ago
  It's certainly false.
  • jayd16 8y ago
    How can you say this when the current understanding is that Guccifer 2.0 was a persona operated by the Russian military? Even if Assange was acting in good faith (a big assumption) , he was used to push Russian propaganda. There's no question he was a tool of the Russian government.
    • CryptoPunk 8y ago
      Any organization dedicated to publishing leaks can be used by any state to push its political propaganda. But that's the price of free speech. In a society that eshrines the right to free speech, unless you're sworn to secrecy, you're allowed to publish leaks, no matter what your motives, and no matter who those leaks help.
      • jayd16 8y ago
        You might argue it was for the greater good but Wikileaks was a tool nonetheless.
        • dwd 8y ago
          True, in the same way Facebook and Twitter are tools. The argument against them is the same, does the benefit outweight the damage that can also be done?
    • lawnchair_larry 8y ago
      That charge makes no sense. By that logic, were Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey also tools of the Russian government?
      • jayd16 8y ago
        I would argue that Wikileaks should be held more accountable for what it publishes under its own name than Zuckerberg for anything posted on Facebook. That said, I have no problem saying Facebook was a tool of Russian propaganda.
        • antidesitter 8y ago
          > I would argue that Wikileaks should be held more accountable Accountable for what? In what way?
    • marknutter 8y ago
      Because I don't buy that Guccifer 2.0 was a persona operated by the Russian military. Simple as that.
• throwaway6356 8y ago
  isn't the role of every media organization to affect the outcome of elections, by revealing true facts to the public? democracy dies in the dark you know.
  • phaus 8y ago
    There's a difference between objectively revealing all relevant, true facts at your disposal and selectively releasing true facts that support your agenda or actively harm your opponent, at very specific times when its most advantageous for you to do it. There's also a difference between having legitimate complaints about the United States government and actively working with Russian Intelligence to destabilize western civilization. Journalism is supposed to inform, not manipulate. You talk about democracy dying. If Wikileaks had their way I don't think you'd like the NWO that Putin and China would build for us.
    • elif 8y ago
      >If Wikileaks had their way I don't think you'd like the NWO that Putin and China would build for us. He told us factually about a progressive candidate being illegally silenced by the democratic establishment, and it has been transformed into a quasi-russo quasi-chino NWO conspiracy?
      • phaus 8y ago
        No one has argued that Wikileaks has never done anything right. You're disingenuously oversimplifying the situation to imply that my position is ridiculous. When your ridiculous position is simply that "Wikileaks did a thing that I liked so that means they never did anything wrong and anyone that thinks its possible is just paranoid". Instead of being dismissive and condescending why not try to have a conversation?
        • elif 8y ago
          You are arguing that it's part of an NWO conspiracy... I provided an objective view of the action you were discussing, because it seems you're drawing form inferences and assumptions, as there is clearly not sufficient evidence to support a NWO conspiracy belief. It was an attempt to allow you to connect the dots for me, by starting from the (in my opinion) reasonable act which is implied to be the smoking gun.