2 ms·

I'm a supporter of the idea of WikiLeaks, if not all of their decisions ... now here's what bugs me: why is it rare (or never) that we see mass dumps of Russian

I'm a supporter of the idea of WikiLeaks, if not all of their decisions ... now here's what bugs me: why is it rare (or never) that we see mass dumps of Russian, Chinese, or Pakistani intelligence information? What, there's no corruption, profiteering, or otherwise bad vibes over there? The US has a monopoly on all that? Why does it always have to hurt US intelligence activities (yes: some deserve to be hurt, but just blanket dumping also puts the country at risk).

woah 13y ago
Are you serious? http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:China http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:China
- BrandonMarc 13y ago
  Open mouth, insert foot I suppose. Though this leads me to a second question, equally interesting ... why haven't I heard of this? Aside from the obvious (I've never looked directly for it), there are two aspects at play - my own filtering, and the editorial decisions of the news organizations. For the former, I aim for diversity, but it's hard to know you're getting the "full story" as well as what's a "credible source" when all you have is what's already available to you. For the latter, none of us is immune to this influence, unless we operate our own news / fact-finding outlet, and then our internal biases still provide an umwelt [0] that's hard to escape. ---------------------------------------- [0] http://xkcd.com/1037/ http://xkcd.com/1037/
arca_vorago 13y ago
There are plenty of those things, but certain media outlets/"journalists" (Joshua Foust...) have taken this propaganda approach of thinly veiled accusations that Wikileaks only wants to hurt the US and may be a [insert enemy nation] intelligence operation. It's just a bunch of bullshit. I was reading wikileaks long before the Iraq War logs, and there was before that very little US related leaking. The interesting thing for you to do is analyze how it is you came to this myopic view of the situation. Who/what have you been reading? Having conversations with? It's a great example of how filter bubbles affect our view of the world.

woah 13y ago

Are you serious? http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:China http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Category:China

BrandonMarc 13y ago
Open mouth, insert foot I suppose. Though this leads me to a second question, equally interesting ... why haven't I heard of this? Aside from the obvious (I've never looked directly for it), there are two aspects at play - my own filtering, and the editorial decisions of the news organizations. For the former, I aim for diversity, but it's hard to know you're getting the "full story" as well as what's a "credible source" when all you have is what's already available to you. For the latter, none of us is immune to this influence, unless we operate our own news / fact-finding outlet, and then our internal biases still provide an umwelt [0] that's hard to escape. ---------------------------------------- [0] http://xkcd.com/1037/ http://xkcd.com/1037/

arca_vorago 13y ago

There are plenty of those things, but certain media outlets/"journalists" (Joshua Foust...) have taken this propaganda approach of thinly veiled accusations that Wikileaks only wants to hurt the US and may be a [insert enemy nation] intelligence operation. It's just a bunch of bullshit. I was reading wikileaks long before the Iraq War logs, and there was before that very little US related leaking. The interesting thing for you to do is analyze how it is you came to this myopic view of the situation. Who/what have you been reading? Having conversations with? It's a great example of how filter bubbles affect our view of the world.