3 ms·

Not really, on freedom of speech grounds. That said, I'm a bit torn on wikileaks as an organization. I think there needs to be an organization like wikileaks t

Not really, on freedom of speech grounds. That said, I'm a bit torn on wikileaks as an organization. I think there needs to be an organization like wikileaks that serves as an outlet for whistleblowers, but I also think that wikileaks is falling too far down the path of self-aggrandizement for me to take them seriously. For one, they've heavily promoted some releases that have turned out to contain very little truly new information. More importantly, their inclination to editorialize hurts their credibility in a massive way. The "Collateral Murder" video is case in point -- you not only have the title the video was released under, but the entire thing was annotated telling you exactly how you were supposed to interpret it. You're a helicopter pilot observing a combat zone and somebody traveling with a group of armed men pokes a cylindrical object around a corner in the direction of your forces - are you likely to think that object is A. a weapon or B. a pro-grade telephoto lens. According to the Colateral Murder video, it's ridiculous to think A. Things like that make me somewhat distrustful of wikileaks since it makes it clear they have an agenda beyond the simple dissemination of information, and forces me to wonder whether they'd actually publish information contrary to that agenda if they were to receive it.

blueben 16y ago
I'd love to hear somebody say they don't take Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison seriously because they're too "self aggrandizing". What happened to results mattering most? There are a lot of reasons to dismiss people and organizations, but how ego size is just about the most shallow reason I can think of.
- commandar 16y ago
  Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison aren't trying to fill the role of an information clearinghouse. The information they're disseminating should be what's important; instead I've increasingly gotten the impression that wikileaks being in the spotlight is being given more consideration.
  - blueben 16y ago
    Am I to take from this that journalism is a higher calling that requires a self-less attitude and a humble ego? Because I'm pretty sure that kind of journalism has never existed. Regardless of whether Wikileaks is self-aggrandizing or not (and the recurring theme here is that people "feel" it is, but can never substantiate), the information released and the results achieved speak for themselves.

blueben 16y ago

I'd love to hear somebody say they don't take Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison seriously because they're too "self aggrandizing". What happened to results mattering most? There are a lot of reasons to dismiss people and organizations, but how ego size is just about the most shallow reason I can think of.

commandar 16y ago
Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison aren't trying to fill the role of an information clearinghouse. The information they're disseminating should be what's important; instead I've increasingly gotten the impression that wikileaks being in the spotlight is being given more consideration.
- blueben 16y ago
  Am I to take from this that journalism is a higher calling that requires a self-less attitude and a humble ego? Because I'm pretty sure that kind of journalism has never existed. Regardless of whether Wikileaks is self-aggrandizing or not (and the recurring theme here is that people "feel" it is, but can never substantiate), the information released and the results achieved speak for themselves.