Julian's situation seems very weird to me, given the stories about how secretive he was, how he kept in hiding, etc. At the same time, he was very clearly and publicly the face of wikileaks. Why did he not simply remain anonymous? All that Wikileaks has done could be done without having a public figurehead, right? Being public seems to have been the tactical error. (or was he trying to be anonymous, but got outed at…
According to the people at the New York Times he worked with, he became transformed by his celebrity. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.htm... goes into their history. I'm tempted to quote a few paragraphs but it wouldn't be fair since there is a very large picture being painted.
Guess what Bill Keller also wrote?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/08/opinion/the-i-can-t-believ...