Klemann 1

Dustin Klemann

Presentation Paper

Clem Work

12 October 2010

Wikijournalism

In December 2006, a branch of the (in)famous Wikipedia was launched with the tagline,

“We open governments.” Wikileaks, born from the mind of Julian Assange, an Internet activist,

provided a place for anonymous document submissions. Although Assange is the sites current

Editor-in-Chief, the site claims it was pioneered “by Chinese dissidents, journalists,

mathematicians and start-up company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and

South Africa.”1 In the journalism school here at the University of Montana, we are taught in

Intro to Mass Media that journalism is this animal with a future constantly evolving for better or

worse. Wikileaks.org is evolving to becoming another viable source for new information,

changing another aspect of journalism and how people adapt to receiving information. New,

controversial documents are being submitted regularly and can even influence how other new

outlets report news if the website can make necessary changes to make itself better known and

more reliable.

With websites such as CNN.com, NPR.org and even the Missoulian.com, we find

ourselves with information overload. I have noticed that television cannot seem to get enough

text scrolling across the screen at once. A scrolling bar of stock updates going left, the one

above scrolling text right and statistics on the top left, we have adapted how to understand all the

information being thrown at us on a daily basis. But with this information, there is someone

standing behind the article on the declining house market. We see writers and journalists
1
http://web.archive.org/web/20080314204422/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About
 Klemann 2

claiming their possibly controversial work, answering for any issues that skeptics may have with

the written article. Wikileaks has broken this barrier of responsibility. The site provides refuge

for journalists and whistle-blowers; informants who expose alleged wrongdoing within an

organization in hope of stopping it. This anonymity provides individuals with sensitive

information a place to let the public know without repercussions.2

As of January 2007, Wikileaks boasted over 1.2 million documents that were leaked and

being prepared for publishing.3 These documents Wikileaks claimed to own was processed

through the hosting network PRQ (PeRiQuito), a Swedish Internet service provider. Because

Wikileaks’ use of the web hosting company, it was allowed hosting privileges as long as the site

continues to adhere to Swedish laws.4 These laws forbid any Swedish administrative authority to

inquire any sources about information. To add to the anonymity provided, Wikileaks “maintains

its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade encryption to

protect sources and other confidential information.”5 These protections urge continued

submission of sensitive information by anyone.

On November 7, 2007, arguably the biggest leak of the site to date is released.

Guantanamo Bay standard operating procedures document is released on Wikileaks detailing

detainee restrictions and other designations the U.S. military denied in the past.6 This major

release grabs media attention of Wikileaks and almost a year later, during the height of election

season; Sarah Palin’s Yahoo e-mail account contents are released. The action of illegally

obtaining these facts raised questions of the journalism integrity of Wikileaks. While the facts

2
http://web.archive.org/web/20071127164824/http://www.scenta.co.uk/scenta/news.cfm?
cit_id=1432293&FAArea1=widgets.content_view_1
3
http://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#Wikileaks_has_1
.2_million_documents.3F
4
http://www.certaindoubt.net/sweden-wikileaks-safe-haven/
5
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/21/wikileaks_bulletproof_hosting/
6
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo
 Klemann 3

provided are true, where is the line drawn on how to obtain the information? Even though the

violation occurred on Wikileaks, the site stayed open. Other reports were released over the

remaining months of 2008 and through 2009 until April 2010. On April 5, 2010, Wikileaks

released footage of U.S. military attacking and killing 12 civilians in 2007. The camera on the

U.S. Blackhawk shows twelve individuals with some carrying camera equipment. The video

continues with soldiers being ordered to open fire and commenting on the attacks.7 Critics have

considered an assessment of the incident poor. Needless to say, Wikileaks received worldwide

attention with significant hits on their website according Google Insights. 8

With incidents being uncovered by Wikileaks that would otherwise go unseen, we are

left wondering how this impacts the world of journalism. Can a site that relies on information

from anonymous sources be trusted? If the answer is yes, then how does a site continue to stay

online when such controversial documents are being released possibly affecting lives? This past

summer, Wikileaks released 92,000 documents, to several news outlets regarding the war in

Afghanistan. This details the time from 2004 to 2009 including 150 incidents of coalition forces

killing or injuring civilians9 and earned the moniker “Afghan War Diary.” These documents led

to the Obama administration asking countries to consider placing criminal charges on Assange as

it could be considered he aided “an enemy of the Australian Defence Force,” according to the

ADA. Allegedly, the war documents has “endangered the lives of Afghan informants.” Critics

around the nation are outraged by Wikileaks, condemning their actions as a mission against the

United States military.10 Assange’s reply to the backlash is that the site did reach out to the

7
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html?_r=1
8
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/current-google-insights-trends-wikileaks-posts-clasified-military-
video-masters-1942629.html
9
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-guardian-editorial?intcmp=239
10
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703940904575395500694117006.html?
mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle
 Klemann 4

White House, requesting that the government identified names that may be in danger. No

response was given.

Wikileaks is still smaller than CNN, Fox News, USA Today and many other media

outlets, but it is under a much larger microscope; every move, every document being closely

monitored. Under the United States’ Constitution, Wikileaks is completely protected, but how

correct is the website and Assange morally? The benefits of a transparent government help

Americans understand what is going on; whether it is war or the economy. The benefits far

outweigh the negatives of Wikileaks’ power. We continue to see 24/7 news organizations report

for three straight days how long Lindsay Lohan will be in jail, but now we have a new source of

information. Julian Assange agrees the site has changed the world when he appeared at TED this

past July.11 Regardless of the website’s current power in the world of journalism and

information, the site is years away from true journalistic power. Money is an issue as it is

troubling to continue the site without funds. A site can only stay alive so long on donations and

bake sales. How do you advertise on a site that is such controversial issues? Another problem

the site has is the amount of documents volunteers and small staff has to sift through to find

importance.

The least of Wikileaks’ issues is the amount of news. Definitely no shortage in news

when over 1.2 million documents can be a long read for any news enthusiast. A major issue of

Wikileaks is the lack of judgment on authenticity of submitted documents. Unverified sources

are the difference between a correct story and made-up fluff. Wikileaks relies on the world

community to find authenticity by scrutinizing the document. So far, the only documents “of

political, diplomatic, historical or ethical interest.” If these issues are fixed, documents are

expanded and the website is streamlined for a more commercial appeal – where more people
11
http://www.geekosystem.com/wikileaks-julian-assange-ted/
 Klemann 5

begin to know what exactly Wikileaks is - we could see a rise of a new type of journalism. If the

site can even survive the scrutiny world governments are giving it, Wikileaks will be an

influential and important part of the journalism world.