1–8 of 8 posts
The danger here is relying too much on just one organization, which may decide to filter, distort or refrain from publishing altogether.
Personally, I think people should be uploading to systems/programs like FreeNet and have that pass around up there. Then start using media (mediums?) on the web as a way to move it around faster. For instance, (and of course the irony of it) bit torrenting could be used as a medium.
I think we do need Wikileaks, but the objective and impartial 2006 version.
Today, there is not even a wiki at wikileaks.org. If an archive of the wiki exists, its not easy to find on their website. There used to be multiple ways of sending information, including online upload, email and multiple postal address around the world, now there is only one postal address in Australia. I get the impression that they are only interested in major scoops these days.
Wikileaks is now a "brand name", if you will, and leaking through them makes sure that, unless you yourself decide to confess like Manning supposedly did, you both remain secure and yet are noticed.
Whistleblowers can publish this material themselves. However, once you publish the material, you also need to make sure that mainstream news sources pick up on it and report it, otherwise you are just some guy with a blogpost somewhere. Wikileaks is now a "brand name", if you will, and leaking through them makes sure that, unless you yourself decide to confess like Manning supposedly did, you both remain secure and y…