WikiLeaks

The publication of information by the WikiLeaks organisation leaves me of two minds. On the one hand I completely understand the value of Freedom of the Press and the role investigative journalism plays in our modern society. On the other hand I question their self-proclaimed role to publish apparently whatever comes into their hands.

The next batch of documents to be released allegedly comes from messages written by officials in the US State Department. The server from which the leaks apparently come is the US Government's Secret Internet Protocol Router Network(SIPRNet), used to distribute not particularly sensitive information. It was created after 9/11 in order to facilitate the distribution of information amongst the various government departments in the hope that more information was better information.

It is surprising to me that anyone would have put anything even remotely likely to come back and bite someone in the arse, but then it is even more surprising to me that the same US Army soldier, Pfc. Bradley Manning is supposedly responsible for this leak, as he seems to be the guy responsible for two other recent leaks.

I don't know where he currently is, and why he is allowed access to the Internet, but then again it might just be another example of that most famous of oxymorons, Military Intelligence.

But back to the information and the question of publication. I don't understand how the right to privacy and the freedom of the press interact with one another.

If I write a memo intended to provide color on a person or situation to other members of my "community"-in this case the US State Department-I would assume that they are not for general consumption. Apparently I would be wrong in that assumption, and so I would stop putting anything on such a network.

Perhaps personal opinions don't belong there anyway-although even "facts" become personal as they inevitably contain a modicum of subjectivity, and so nothing could be put on what is essentially a public network-if leaks are allowed.

In this most recent download there are purportedly some potentially embarrassing comments on some foreign leaders, maybe some behind the scenes contacts, and maybe that the US does not always negotiate in good faith.

It might come as a surprise to people that diplomatic staff is human and will have personal opinions or will sometimes not be transparent in their interactions. It's called geopolitics and as such there are certainly aspects that require the complete context to be understood, and there will be cases that are opaque.

It might also come as a surprise to people how mundane and petty diplomacy can be.

In any event, I am worried that the line between public interest and prurient interest is becoming muddled, and that wikileaks should reflect on what is investigative journalism, and what is sensationalism.