The Job Of The Media Is Not To Protect The Powerful From Embarrassment - Guardian on Embassy Cables

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-wikileaks

US embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment

It is for governments – not journalists – to guard public secrets, and there is no national jeopardy in WikiLeaks' revelations

Simon Jenkins
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 28 November 2010 18.30 GMT

Is it justified? Should a newspaper disclose virtually all a nation's secret diplomatic communication, illegally downloaded by one of its citizens? The reporting in the Guardian of the first of a selection of 250,000 US state department cables marks a recasting of modern diplomacy. Clearly, there is no longer such a thing as a safe electronic archive, whatever computing's snake-oil salesmen claim. No organisation can treat digitised communication as confidential. An electronic secret is a contradiction in terms.

Gary Younge, Seumas Milne, Craig Murray, Richard Norton-Taylor, Juan Cole, Abbas Edalat and Phil Wilay on the revelations about Iran and the Middle East
Anything said or done in the name of a democracy is, prima facie, of public interest. When that democracy purports to be "world policeman" – an assumption that runs ghostlike through these cables – that interest is global. Nonetheless, the Guardian had to consider two things in abetting disclosure, irrespective of what is anyway published by WikiLeaks. It could not be party to putting the lives of individuals or sources at risk, nor reveal material that might compromise ongoing military operations or the location of special forces.

In this light, two backup checks were applied. The US government was told in advance the areas or themes covered, and "representations" were invited in return. These were considered. Details of "redactions" were then shared with the other four media recipients of the material and sent to WikiLeaks itself, to establish, albeit voluntarily, some common standard.

The state department knew of the leak several months ago and had ample time to alert staff in sensitive locations. Its pre-emptive scaremongering over the weekend stupidly contrived to hint at material not in fact being published. Nor is the material classified top secret, being at a level that more than 3 million US government employees are cleared to see, and available on the defence department's internal Siprnet. Such dissemination of "secrets" might be thought reckless, suggesting a diplomatic outreach that makes the British empire seem minuscule.

The revelations do not have the startling, coldblooded immediacy of the WikiLeaks war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan, with their astonishing insight into the minds of fighting men seemingly detached from the ethics of war. The's disclosures are largely of analysis and high-grade gossip. Insofar as they are sensational, it is in showing the corruption and mendacity of those in power, and the mismatch between what they claim and what they do.

- snip -

The money‑wasting is staggering. Aid payments are never followed, never audited, never evaluated.

MORE

So using these leaks as proof of their willingness to expose anyone or anything in a really powerful way is ridiculous.

:dem: :kick:

seems as though they have forgotten what they are supposed to do or be.

And what is important here isn't so much how India reacts or how Pakistan reacts but how YOU respond to the information in these documents.

It's so amazing to me to see the little bit of power handed to people in this release being handed right back to Authority. We like trained seals any more.

Don't people realize that makes it different? :sarcasm:

From "Inherit The Wind".