Wikileaks Text

"This is not journalisim," she says. "Did they write stories, talk to sources, analyze the information, go to the government for a response or put it in context? Did they do something to inform the public about what these documents show? No."

Assange doesn't dispute that notion. He concedes that no more than about 2,000 pages of documents released this week were reviewed substantially by his own staff or those of the three news organizations that got an advance peek at the material. That, he says, is up to journalists, historians or anyone with an interest in sifting through the documents.

USA Today- July 27, 2010 Peter Eisler & Gregory Korte.

The legitimacy of Wikileaks is a concern which has direct bearing on the way the world will handle this type of information exchange. As a young adult in the United States, whether or not Wikileaks is posting valid information directly affects my view on the political processes of my country. After much digging, however, the legitimacy of Wikileaks still seems suspect. Some trusted news organizations such as the New York Times claim that the material is valid, having been vetted by their own journalists, while others like USA Today condemn the website as poorly thought out, as seen in the quote above. This question of veracity could possibly change the way I as a young voter act in politics.

The New York Times and The Guardian (London) both state that the Afghan War Logs and diplomatic cable releases seem to be genuine information. Both organizations were given access to the Wikileaks documents prior to release so that they could investigate the information and determine what was newsworthy. These are reputable news organizations, and their credibility can be trusted. But the fact that other reputable sources like USA Today are calling foul muddies the situation a bit. Who can I believe? Of course some governments are flat out denying the truth of some documents, but this is to be expected. The problem lies with finding neutral, credible sources that give the facts on whether or not Wikileaks is legitimate. So far my searches have proved disappointing and inconclusive, but I will still search.

However, after some reflection I have started to realize that in a way it doesn’t matter if the information is true or not, because it will cause a stir no matter what. People who do not take the time to review the information will take it at face value, which could cause drastic effects on the politics in the US and abroad. Governments must react to this information regardless of truth value because of potential threats to their countries.

So perhaps the real lesson to be learned from Wikileaks is that people must learn to audit the information that they receive in every case so that clear thinking can be achieved and decisions can be based on solid support. If Wikileaks turns out to be illegitimate it still teaches this lesson. If it turns out that it is legitimate, it could be the start of massive reform in government structure and practice. In a way, Wikileaks will be significant no matter what it posts.

Tron/Wikileaks

The Tron movie shows a parallel with Wikileaks in that Flynn plays the role of Wikileaks for the corporation Encom. Flynn seeks to expose the true dealings of Mr. Dillinger, the Senior Executive of Encom who gained his position by stealing Flynn's video game ideas. Flynn uses his prowess in technology to find a secret data memory that proves he is the original writer of the Encom video games, much like Wikileaks finds secret documents revealing supposed truth behind sensitive situations.


My only question about Wikileaks right now is: "Does Wikileaks post legitimate documents and information?" This must be the starting point for any investigation into Wikileaks because if the answer is no, then the subject can be dropped. My main interest concerning the validity of the information posted by Wikileaks has been unsatisfied by my current research. Many articles from reporters in multiple countries talk about how the credibility of the information could easily be suspect. After all, the internet is known for less than accurate information. With this problem in mind, I don't see how any meaningful analysis of the effects of Wikileaks on politics can be achieved without first verifying the information which is causing the stir.

One thing that we do not require information verification for is an analysis of what Wikileaks shows about digital media. What we see in Wikileaks is the next step in the information age. First was the mass access to user created projects and information. The next step is using this mass access function to examine how we structure society and the government. Whether or not Wikileaks turns out to be legitimate, it does represent a new way of using digital media. We have entered a time where information about how the people we elect actually conduct themselves could be at our very fingertips. The only barrier is knowing whether or not anything is true.

Gathering

My current strategy for searching for and gathering information on the web is very simple and also limited; I just use Google. While it has served me well in the past, and I have had little complaint about the relevancy of the search results, after reading the search strategies pages I have realized how small a box I have been working within. To know about this so-called 'invisible web' of databases and other search engines makes me want to assimilate those strategies into my search procedures.

Of particular interest to me are the databases with access to scholarly journals and articles. As a resource for education and exploration I believe they would be very useful. In addition to this, the idea of taking time to think about what I'm searching for is another essential search strategy I must add to my arsenal. With a clear picture in my mind, navigating through the world of databases will be much more efficient and productive.

Another interesting concept that stuck with me was the idea of learning as you search. People always say the journey is the important part, and this applies at least somewhat to searching for information on the web.

Initially I found it difficult to figure out what was meant by framing and reframing. However, after some thought and observation I have come to the conclusion that this class is about thinking of the resources, technology, and concepts we have in as many different ways as possible. This class is framed in such a way that we will develope skills in manipulating media, but not in a traditional 'computer skills class' sense. We will be learning to use media as a tool to tap into the bigger culture of the world which is brought together by many different mediums.

Thus far the reframing ideas I have seen in this class have been interesting and diverse. From Bogdonovich to the Persuaders, each instance has given as slightly new perspective on something seemingly mundane. Looking at a good movie as an indelible piece of time, seeing education as an emergent phenomenon that comes with interest instead of force, discovering a tapestry of human experience in the form of a website, considering the focus of today's industry and environmental concerns as a shift from the broad to the focused takes place, and taking a closer look at the world of advertising and sales, all of these are reframings of concepts which I had previously thought had limited facets.

A moment of reframing came when I first came to this school. Before I had thought of music as a career, but after entering the music world here I have come to see music as an experience instead. It has changed from a job to a communication tool.

The diagram of the material we have seen so far is my way of visually defining what each piece was about. Each shape represents a key aspect of each presentation. The reason I connected the shapes in an all inclusive web and not in a loop is that I am in the process of reframing the way I view the impact of each on the other.