Wikileaks

by Matthew Pellicer on November 20, 2013 - 10:37am

We live in a world where information is at our fingertips. We barely have time to contemplate a
question that the answer is already on Google. In a world like we have, people want to know everything
about everything. People want to be able to know everything the government is hiding from us and this
is where, in 2006, Wikileaks took over. “Its releases include nearly 80,000 documents about the Afghan
war, some 400,000 Iraq war documents, and diplomatic cables from 274 U.S. embassies around the
world,” (Hood 635). This is a lot of information for one source to put out there for the public and it, “has
been claimed to be the biggest leaker of secret information in history,” (Hood 635). This means that
anyone has access to all of these documents at any given moment. They just type let’s say the name of
someone they suspect to be an undercover government agent and poof their cover is blown and they
get shot the next day. Many corporations and governments are trying to find a legal way of suppressing
this leaked information because since the information is online, there is no proof of its origin.
 
The second article I read was about the purpose behind Wikileaks. It was about mostly the intent of its
creator and the difference with the information he presented compared to traditional media. As
traditional media usually selects information based on personal biases or appeal to the public or a
certain group, Wikileaks is about just releasing the information. It just gives out the truth without any
opinion attached or a biased explanation. It is about facts and nothing more.
 
These two articles were very interesting to read as they presented different aspects around Wikileaks.
The first, spoke about more the background and what is being done to try and stop Wikileaks and the
second one was about how the author presents his information. Wikileaks today is seen as one of the
main sources of transparency and is there to answer questions where the government decides to
suppress information. It is a very idealistic view to have but as Hood states releasing information about
wars and risking peoples’ lives isn’t always a good approach to convincing the government to be more
open.

About the author