3 ms·
Interesting points. I suppose it's a question of how far gone one perceives the system to be and whether one has any optimism that the system can heal itself wi
by grandalf 16y ago
Interesting points. I suppose it's a question of how far gone one perceives the system to be and whether one has any optimism that the system can heal itself without some sort of added stimulus.
What would the NY Times have done if Manning had sent the cables to it instead of to Wikileaks? Most likely nothing.
The adversarial relationship between the press and government is a core principle of our democracy, and I think it's because I view Wikileaks as being largely journalistic in nature that I feel that the leaks have strengthened our democracy, though at the cost of weakening our rule of law.
But in my opinion the government has already weakened our rule of law by propagandizing us and lying to us.
Democracy is a tenuous arrangement between the rulers and the governed. In my view it is a tradeoff between individual sovereignty and rights. When the government squashes those rights by breaking its contract with the people and propagandizing a war, the tenuous arrangement has been disturbed and a self-respecting public will claw back those rights through an exercise of sovereignty... and while this may be at the temporary expense of the rule of law, it is guided by a principle that we ought to consider at least as sacred.
So I hope our leaders are appropriately chastened and I hope that your wish of reforms and improvements via the democratic process occurs.
- DanielBMarkham 16y ago"What would the NY Times have done if Manning had sent the cables to it instead of to Wikileaks? Most likely nothing." Agreed. But twist it a bit. What if the NYT had received 100 docs on the subject of prisoner torture: detailed accounts, videos, reports of the problems it was causing. What would be their response then?
- grandalf 16y agoI'm not sure what you're getting at here. Surely if the Times received a completed story with detailed research and corroborating video evidence, it would write some sort of story, but I don't see how this differs from the leaked cable content. The true power of journalism comes from what doesn't get reported. The NYT wrote a story on Assange that referred to his "dwindling supporters" and made no mention of the odd technicalities in the rape case, and presented him as being an egomaniac. All of these may be true (or false) but the article cited no references for any of the negative claims. Also, the leaks are the story. Assange is not the story, as much as tabloids would like him to be.