Journalism’s Assange problem
Journalists, media organisations and activists attempting to make Julian Assange the poster boy for journalism and its struggles could end up causing themselves even more problems, argue Kathy Kiely and Laurel Leff in this crossposting from The Conversation. He is, they say, no journalist.
These days, anybody with an internet connection can be a publisher. That doesn’t make everybody a journalist.
This distinction has become more important than ever in light of two recent events.
One was the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The other was a proposal by lawmakers from Georgia, the Peach State, that looked more like an export from the Georgia that was part of the Soviet Union: a so-called “ethics in journalism” act that would have imposed onerous new requirements and potential civil penalties on reporters.
As soon as news broke of Assange’s potential extradition to the United States for trial on charges of conspiracy, his allies began campaigning to make him a Fourth Estate martyr.
There are people that are afraid of the attacks on alternative media. It makes you wonder how the likes of Amateur and Citizen Journalism fall into this debate? The ethics of the Paparazzi. The potentially undemocratic control of the media? The corporate media, bias in media. Oxford definition of a journalist; person writing for or editing newspaper etc. Why an Australian whose in Britain is being tried by American laws? Why they won’t release evidence to Julian Assange’s lawyer or the world, why there is so much secrecy over it? Supposedly because if he knew what punishment he would run. Wikileaks is a publication, in theory.
There is a difference social media comments and releasing classified information that could be used by enemies of the state.
assange has broken the law and could have endangered the country.
They used to be called traitors-He should be shot–
Bob
This is a lunatic comment. Are you seriously suggesting that anyone publishing government suppressed information, should be shot? There’s a public interest argument and you’re arguing against the First Amendment. Ample history to suggest you’re wrong. Thank god you have no power. Here’s some things that wikileaks helped us to learn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugHEXYMQ1uk&app=desktop
How do you define reporter? Are they the ones publishing truth or are reporters just the few accredited voices are allowed to speak today?
Wikileaks has a 100% accuracy record. They might not get invited to press briefings but do not retract of published materials. That means they publish the truth. Choose your profession wisely.
Assange is a narcissist of the highest order.
Nothing he’s ever done has been for the ‘greater good’.
It’s always been about him, him and only him.
Even the Ecuadorian Govt., having granted Assange asylum, realized what an untrustworthy, ungrateful piece of work he is when they discovered he’d been secretly criticizing their President from within the Ecuadorian Embassy.
He doesn’t deserve our sympathy.
Let him rot.