Someone made an interesting observation.
Isn't Mr Asssange just doing what the newspapers are supposed to do? I mean he's uncovering lots of interesting facts and making governments more accountable. This I believe is called investigative journalism.
(The Archduke of South London I'm in your Girlfriend eating her organs, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 16:42, 2 replies)

Yeah but most newspapers and media outlets either can't afford investigative journalism
or have corporate interests that are specifically against it
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 16:53, closed)

I'd agree with the financial constrictions angle
seeing as most media outlets are just AP recycling machines nowadays, but I'm not sure that corporate interests are bothered about anything but the bottom line - sales/advertising.
( wotofco pissing in your swimming pool, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 17:10, closed)

it's that or journalists are simply lazy
I'm pretty certain that papers now employ one proper 'hack' (no doubt as per some obscure union regulation) and have outsourced the business of topping & tailing press releases.
( multijoy, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 23:20, closed)

Nah, it's finances
why pay for decent investigative journalists when you can get a work experience kid to rejig AP copy?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_earth_news gives a pretty depressing account of how newsgathering has changed over the past 20 years or so.
( wotofco pissing in your swimming pool, Fri 17 Dec 2010, 0:00, closed)

He hasn't uncovered anything
he's disseminated it, using (funnily enough) newspapers. As to whether the information he's released will make governments more accountable, time will tell. Assange isn't Deep Throat, and he certainly isn't Woodward/Bernstein.
( wotofco pissing in your swimming pool, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 17:01, closed)

As for the implicit charge that newspapers aren't engaged in holding governments to account
MP's expenses ring any bells?
( wotofco pissing in your swimming pool, Thu 16 Dec 2010, 17:18, closed)

And pulling that out was like pulling teeth if I recall.
Nevertheless it's not fair to discount the claim that many news outlets aren't really that bold in their journalism. Either that or they're necessitating their 24/7 existence with tat going about 19/7. I think it's perspective here that harms them most. They have a lot of time to report things and not a lot to do with it. I'm with you on one hand but there is a lot of shite out there too.
( Christian's Bolt and Ski, Fri 17 Dec 2010, 19:40, closed)

It's a new world.
It's a new paradigm and this is just the beginning. Does anyone remember 'the smoking gun' website? This is the start of a new media, where the raw data is handed directly to anyone who wants it.

A point someone made, wikileaks has released more 'secret' documents than all the world media has during the period wikileaks has existed. So, you can take that as they are releasing 'too much information' or that the world media is a very parlous state.
( Sextant goes to him is emotionally erect, on this day, Wed 22 Dec 2010, 16:16, closed)

A new world?
I'd agree that the internet makes it easier to access information. Unfortunately the vast majority of people have neither the time nor inclination to process this information, which is exactly where the boring "old" media step in...
( wotofco pissing in your swimming pool, Wed 22 Dec 2010, 19:33, closed)