An unidentified criminal charge against Julian Assange (WikiLeaks leader),
with a rumor of erasing press freedoms and effort in putting out his business.
Some stated that WikiLeaks played a crucial role in being a watchdog in the
journalism industry, and Yochai Benkler, professor testified at Ms. Manning’s
court martial stated that there was even evidence that Julian Assange
partnered with Russian intelligence agency to overthrow democracy, and the
evidence about the murder of Seth Rich, a democratic national committee
member, who provided all the information and was the source to WikiLeaks.
With the court deciding what crimes Julian Assange should be charged with,
it could mean holding legal proceedings against him due to the violation of
espionage act, and violating national security information. Julian Assange
had also stated that he did not know where the source came from for the
democratic emails for Ms. Manning’s court martial in 2013. However,
12 Russians were accused of “out the hack and release operation”, the timing
of the operation and release to increase the effects on the 2016 presidential election.
What crime should Julian Assange be charged for?
What actions will be taken place in the prosecution?
How does this affect press freedoms?
Sources:
6 comments:
(The previous comment was deleted because I forgot to put a link)
Assange's Wikileaks pushes the boundaries of the First Amendment, the freedom of the press, gaining popularity due to its "radical transparency." But then, the government obviously doesn't want you spilling their top secret stuff, and thus they make it illegal for these things to be shared out. However, this seems to violate the First Amendment. In this case, while some argue that Assange should be charged for espionage, others might say that he's just exercising his First Amendment.
Personally, I think that Assange's case is on the more extreme side, given that the content his website publishes (like Hillary Clinton's top-secret emails) is often controversial, so I don't think it will impact the mainstream media too much. Think of it as setting a high upper limit to what can or can't be published.
Matt Taibbi: Why You Should Care About the Julian Assange Case
As much as I support whistle blowing of all types, don't believe that we should have any special compassion for Assange in his prosecution, as his crimes were merely leaking all of the information itself. There was no journalism involved in the way he leaked, which is a dangerous way to go about releasing government secrets(including military, I believe).
The way Edward Snowden did his leaks, through responsible journalists, was much more credible and should receive more protection as journalism and whistle blowing than Assange should.
This issue is tricky because even though the First Amendment in theory guarantees freedom of speech for Assange, he is still subject to the Espionage Act if he did in fact distribute secret national security information to unauthorized sources. Transparency in government is important and it is good to have watchdogs like WikiLeaks to keep the government in check, but similar to what William said, to consider Assange's information leaks "journalism" is very shaky. I wouldn't be surprised if the government convicted Assange, for at this point he could be considered a threat to the security of the nation.
I think it's important for journalists to be able to expose government corruption and violations of international law; however, when it comes to top-secret operations or military technology that we would like to keep secret from hostile nations, the line becomes less clear. On one hand, if a military operation such as our involvement in Vietnam, was found to have been doomed to fail and the administration knowingly misled the American public about a war's duration, costs, and likelihood of victory, leaks such as the Pentagon papers is fine because many citizens were or who have family who were fighting in the war. Publishing those papers would be in the citizen's interest, and it's clearly exposing an administration that's more interested in saving face than the lives being lost in Vietnam. On the other hand, if we are exposing full length, technical documents about how the CIA hacks or spies, that should not be accepted. The public has no need to understand the technical processes -- only that the government is committing certain actions. Assange should've used discretion, publishing small excerpts that serve inform the public of government atrocities instead of just dumping the entire document online.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html?action=click&module=inline&pgtype=Homepage
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/europe/wikileaks-cia-hacking.html?module=inline
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/22/opinion/vietnam-was-unwinnable.html?mtrref=www.google.com&assetType=opinion
While journalists should keep us updated on what's going on in the government, I don't think to expose top secret government information counts as actual journalism. At that point it's more like Assange is trying to sabotage the American government. Due to the vagueness of the first amendment, it does protect him through the freedom of the press. However, he still violates the espionage act. I think that what his actions pose a threat to the American government for information they want to keep confidential. Releasing top-secret information not only poses a threat to the government but all of America as well.
Post a Comment