Huh?
But if Wikileaks really is acting pro bono publico, why force its employees to sign a gagging order with a £12m price tag? I mean, wouldn't it make more sense for those with access to a given piece of information to be informed of the strategy for its release, so that the moral high ground could be occupied by Wikileaks whatever happened? (That is: wouldn't an explanation to employees of what's what and what's at stake be much more in keeping than issuing them with legal threats?)
And if Wikileaks is acting wholly for moral rather than commercial reasons (not that I see how the two necessarily conflict), then why stress the commercial value of the information and the financial loss to Wikileaks as rationales for the gagging order?
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Wed 11 May 2011, 19:48,
Reply)