5 ms·

One of the best ways to maintain the ability to shut down leaks is an effective campaign to isolate and persecute anyone who steps out of line. The media image

One of the best ways to maintain the ability to shut down leaks is an effective campaign to isolate and persecute anyone who steps out of line. The media image of Assange has been built up by the same media who rang the drumbeats for the Iraq war and who will do the establishment's bidding. The same media who told us that Scott Ritter was not a reliable source on WMD and was probably a sex offender anyway (sound familiar?), when the former weapons inspector was dead on right. The smear campaign against him has been eagerly joined by the same newspapers (notably the Guardian whose behavior has been disgraceful) that profited from publishing the leaks in the first place. If Assange is put down, as the US government and certain allies wish, don't expect us to have someone else, whose personality you find more agreeable stepping into his place and doing the high-risk, low reward job of sticking their neck out on this stuff.

MrScruff 14y ago
By your own argument Assange has elevated himself above criticism by putting himself in the firing line. Any reported failing, minor or serious, can be attributed to media bias/conspiracy and safely ignored. Isn't that exactly what the article was getting at? That the wikileaks movement has turned into a personality cult where it is forbidden to express any form of doubt about dear leader? You call the job high risk, low reward. For someone that appears to exhibit strong narcissistic tendencies I would say the 'reward' has been anything but low.
- richardjordan 14y ago
  No that doesn't follow at all. However a skepticism of attacks on whistle blowers is necessary, given the risks they take. The idea that it's a reward to be living under effective house arrest despite having no charges leveled against him because he faces the real threat of being handed over to the custody of a nation which has demonstrated its willingness to ignore laws and intern without trial for years on end its enemies, is facile.
  - MrScruff 14y ago
    I have no problem with some level of scepticism. However having read a number of articles from both sides regarding his alleged offences, I see no evidence of conspiracy. The fact that he is a celebrity cannot deter the Swedish authorities from pursuing the allegations against him.
    - richardjordan 14y ago
      I think the article linked to below is about as good as there is about the Sweden nonsense. He has been charged with nothing for good reason and the case was dropped for good reason. The idea that he is under no risk of extradition to the US if he goes to Sweden is nonsense, their track record is clear. If it were about the case then remote questioning would have been fine and if there were charges to be filed they could have done. But it's clearly about getting him to the US and muddying his name with vague allegations that resonate with his core constituency on the left.
      - MrScruff 14y ago
        We can all find articles supporting one view or another. I'm not sure if this discussion is headed anywhere useful though. You may regard the proceedings against him as 'nonsense', and 'clearly' an attempt at mudslinging. But in reality neither of us can know either way, it's all supposition.
        richardjordan 14y ago
        Which is the intention of mudslinging. It's not to settle anything. It's to make the target lose support without ever really being able to do anything about it. It's been very effective in this case.
GHFigs 14y ago
You neglect how much of Assange's media image is his own creation. The very idea that his editorializing and spotlight-seeking are essential to the task of publishing leaked information is one that he created, not one that follows directly from the public interest. He chose the strategy of maximum hype (even if it bends the truth) and selective leaks to paying newspapers (even if it means keeping information from the public). If nobody steps in to his place in that regard, I think we'll all be better off.
- richardjordan 14y ago
  The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile. The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. Once you show that you can silence even the most high profile of leakers and their mechanisms for getting information out there, don't expect more to step up and do it. I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets. Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
  - MrScruff 14y ago
    The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile. The only reason you think he's at risk of being bundled into a jet is his high profile. If he'd used his technical abilities to create what many want wikileaks to be - a secure platform for whistleblowers to anonymously communicate with the press, then things would be decidedly different. He has chosen to focus everything around himself. The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. I'm not sure why you think this. Most of the drone stories I've read are about the killing of civilians which would be reported without wikileaks. I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets. I definitely agree. Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down. But it's the focus on his personality and him in general which many are objecting to.

MrScruff 14y ago

By your own argument Assange has elevated himself above criticism by putting himself in the firing line. Any reported failing, minor or serious, can be attributed to media bias/conspiracy and safely ignored. Isn't that exactly what the article was getting at? That the wikileaks movement has turned into a personality cult where it is forbidden to express any form of doubt about dear leader? You call the job high risk, low reward. For someone that appears to exhibit strong narcissistic tendencies I would say the 'reward' has been anything but low.

richardjordan 14y ago
No that doesn't follow at all. However a skepticism of attacks on whistle blowers is necessary, given the risks they take. The idea that it's a reward to be living under effective house arrest despite having no charges leveled against him because he faces the real threat of being handed over to the custody of a nation which has demonstrated its willingness to ignore laws and intern without trial for years on end its enemies, is facile.
- MrScruff 14y ago
  I have no problem with some level of scepticism. However having read a number of articles from both sides regarding his alleged offences, I see no evidence of conspiracy. The fact that he is a celebrity cannot deter the Swedish authorities from pursuing the allegations against him.
  - richardjordan 14y ago
    I think the article linked to below is about as good as there is about the Sweden nonsense. He has been charged with nothing for good reason and the case was dropped for good reason. The idea that he is under no risk of extradition to the US if he goes to Sweden is nonsense, their track record is clear. If it were about the case then remote questioning would have been fine and if there were charges to be filed they could have done. But it's clearly about getting him to the US and muddying his name with vague allegations that resonate with his core constituency on the left.
    - MrScruff 14y ago
      We can all find articles supporting one view or another. I'm not sure if this discussion is headed anywhere useful though. You may regard the proceedings against him as 'nonsense', and 'clearly' an attempt at mudslinging. But in reality neither of us can know either way, it's all supposition.
      - richardjordan 14y ago
        Which is the intention of mudslinging. It's not to settle anything. It's to make the target lose support without ever really being able to do anything about it. It's been very effective in this case.

GHFigs 14y ago

You neglect how much of Assange's media image is his own creation. The very idea that his editorializing and spotlight-seeking are essential to the task of publishing leaked information is one that he created, not one that follows directly from the public interest. He chose the strategy of maximum hype (even if it bends the truth) and selective leaks to paying newspapers (even if it means keeping information from the public). If nobody steps in to his place in that regard, I think we'll all be better off.

richardjordan 14y ago
The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile. The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. Once you show that you can silence even the most high profile of leakers and their mechanisms for getting information out there, don't expect more to step up and do it. I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets. Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
- MrScruff 14y ago
  The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile. The only reason you think he's at risk of being bundled into a jet is his high profile. If he'd used his technical abilities to create what many want wikileaks to be - a secure platform for whistleblowers to anonymously communicate with the press, then things would be decidedly different. He has chosen to focus everything around himself. The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. I'm not sure why you think this. Most of the drone stories I've read are about the killing of civilians which would be reported without wikileaks. I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets. I definitely agree. Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down. But it's the focus on his personality and him in general which many are objecting to.