How the Wikileaks founder alienated his allies(newstatesman.com)
newstatesman.com
How the Wikileaks founder alienated his allies
http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/02/assange-alone-jemima-khan-how-wikileaks-founder-alienated-his-allies
36 comments
If behaving like us includes abstaining from sexual assault, sure, I want him to behave like us.
For all the legitimate shots you could take at Assange, the rape charges are some of the weakest and least-founded in fact. When the prosecutor says "there's no reason to believe he's guilty of rape" and drops the charges, then 10 days later the charges are re-filed by a woman who's made it her mission to change Sweden's laws to classify many things that very clearly aren't rape as rape, that sets off my bullshit detector. I'm not one who buys into the US conspiracy angle, and I do think he should suck it up and go have his day in court, but I also don't think there's any evidence to suggest he did anything wrong.
I think Naomi Wolf has been one of the best articulated voices on the "rape" allegations.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/jaccuse-sweden-brit...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/jaccuse-sweden-brit...
Did you know Sweden has by far the highest rate of "sexual assault" in Europe?
The reason? Their definition is much different than in any other country. He is not guilty of sexual assault by any sane definition.
The reason? Their definition is much different than in any other country. He is not guilty of sexual assault by any sane definition.
One of the best ways to maintain the ability to shut down leaks is an effective campaign to isolate and persecute anyone who steps out of line. The media image of Assange has been built up by the same media who rang the drumbeats for the Iraq war and who will do the establishment's bidding. The same media who told us that Scott Ritter was not a reliable source on WMD and was probably a sex offender anyway (sound familiar?), when the former weapons inspector was dead on right.
The smear campaign against him has been eagerly joined by the same newspapers (notably the Guardian whose behavior has been disgraceful) that profited from publishing the leaks in the first place.
If Assange is put down, as the US government and certain allies wish, don't expect us to have someone else, whose personality you find more agreeable stepping into his place and doing the high-risk, low reward job of sticking their neck out on this stuff.
The smear campaign against him has been eagerly joined by the same newspapers (notably the Guardian whose behavior has been disgraceful) that profited from publishing the leaks in the first place.
If Assange is put down, as the US government and certain allies wish, don't expect us to have someone else, whose personality you find more agreeable stepping into his place and doing the high-risk, low reward job of sticking their neck out on this stuff.
By your own argument Assange has elevated himself above criticism by putting himself in the firing line. Any reported failing, minor or serious, can be attributed to media bias/conspiracy and safely ignored.
Isn't that exactly what the article was getting at? That the wikileaks movement has turned into a personality cult where it is forbidden to express any form of doubt about dear leader?
You call the job high risk, low reward. For someone that appears to exhibit strong narcissistic tendencies I would say the 'reward' has been anything but low.
Isn't that exactly what the article was getting at? That the wikileaks movement has turned into a personality cult where it is forbidden to express any form of doubt about dear leader?
You call the job high risk, low reward. For someone that appears to exhibit strong narcissistic tendencies I would say the 'reward' has been anything but low.
No that doesn't follow at all. However a skepticism of attacks on whistle blowers is necessary, given the risks they take.
The idea that it's a reward to be living under effective house arrest despite having no charges leveled against him because he faces the real threat of being handed over to the custody of a nation which has demonstrated its willingness to ignore laws and intern without trial for years on end its enemies, is facile.
The idea that it's a reward to be living under effective house arrest despite having no charges leveled against him because he faces the real threat of being handed over to the custody of a nation which has demonstrated its willingness to ignore laws and intern without trial for years on end its enemies, is facile.
I have no problem with some level of scepticism.
However having read a number of articles from both sides regarding his alleged offences, I see no evidence of conspiracy. The fact that he is a celebrity cannot deter the Swedish authorities from pursuing the allegations against him.
However having read a number of articles from both sides regarding his alleged offences, I see no evidence of conspiracy. The fact that he is a celebrity cannot deter the Swedish authorities from pursuing the allegations against him.
I think the article linked to below is about as good as there is about the Sweden nonsense. He has been charged with nothing for good reason and the case was dropped for good reason. The idea that he is under no risk of extradition to the US if he goes to Sweden is nonsense, their track record is clear. If it were about the case then remote questioning would have been fine and if there were charges to be filed they could have done. But it's clearly about getting him to the US and muddying his name with vague allegations that resonate with his core constituency on the left.
We can all find articles supporting one view or another. I'm not sure if this discussion is headed anywhere useful though. You may regard the proceedings against him as 'nonsense', and 'clearly' an attempt at mudslinging. But in reality neither of us can know either way, it's all supposition.
Which is the intention of mudslinging. It's not to settle anything. It's to make the target lose support without ever really being able to do anything about it. It's been very effective in this case.
You neglect how much of Assange's media image is his own creation. The very idea that his editorializing and spotlight-seeking are essential to the task of publishing leaked information is one that he created, not one that follows directly from the public interest. He chose the strategy of maximum hype (even if it bends the truth) and selective leaks to paying newspapers (even if it means keeping information from the public). If nobody steps in to his place in that regard, I think we'll all be better off.
The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile.
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. Once you show that you can silence even the most high profile of leakers and their mechanisms for getting information out there, don't expect more to step up and do it.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks. Once you show that you can silence even the most high profile of leakers and their mechanisms for getting information out there, don't expect more to step up and do it.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile.
The only reason you think he's at risk of being bundled into a jet is his high profile. If he'd used his technical abilities to create what many want wikileaks to be - a secure platform for whistleblowers to anonymously communicate with the press, then things would be decidedly different. He has chosen to focus everything around himself.
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks.
I'm not sure why you think this. Most of the drone stories I've read are about the killing of civilians which would be reported without wikileaks.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
I definitely agree.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
But it's the focus on his personality and him in general which many are objecting to.
The only reason you think he's at risk of being bundled into a jet is his high profile. If he'd used his technical abilities to create what many want wikileaks to be - a secure platform for whistleblowers to anonymously communicate with the press, then things would be decidedly different. He has chosen to focus everything around himself.
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks.
I'm not sure why you think this. Most of the drone stories I've read are about the killing of civilians which would be reported without wikileaks.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
I definitely agree.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality rather than the core issue of exposing things done behind closed doors in the name of people who may not approve of those things were they aware of them, is an unfortunate tangent to go down.
But it's the focus on his personality and him in general which many are objecting to.
We live in a modern media climate where to make any organization break above the noise and get attention - which it needs if it is to do its job - a narrative inevitably includes founders. Just like here in startup land.
Other organizations exist and none of them get attention.
RE: Drone strikes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-21333570
The reason it's in the news RIGHT NOW is due to the current story about leaked documents showing the US government secret legal case for targeting US citizens. So that's why I think that. Because it happens to be the case.
And my point has been that objecting to his personality is a trivial reason to undermine his work, and allowing the climate of hounding him into submission to successfully do so renders leaking a far more dangerous task and one that fewer people will engage in.
Other organizations exist and none of them get attention.
RE: Drone strikes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-21333570
The reason it's in the news RIGHT NOW is due to the current story about leaked documents showing the US government secret legal case for targeting US citizens. So that's why I think that. Because it happens to be the case.
And my point has been that objecting to his personality is a trivial reason to undermine his work, and allowing the climate of hounding him into submission to successfully do so renders leaking a far more dangerous task and one that fewer people will engage in.
The reason it's in the news RIGHT NOW is due to the current story about leaked documents showing the US government secret legal case for targeting US citizens.
You neglected to mention that the document in question was obtained and published by NBC, not Wikileaks.
You neglected to mention that the document in question was obtained and published by NBC, not Wikileaks.
The only thing that's protected Assange from being bundled into a jet and whisked to a foreign jurisdiction is his high profile.
Says who? How is that theory anything more than part of the image he's made for himself?
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks.
Even if I agreed with that (which I don't), you've neglected to explain how a Julian Assange figure is a requirement of leaking such information.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
What I said was that we'd be better off without a Julian Assange like attention-seeker. If you cannot mentally separate his actions from the information, you're only confirming my point that he has created a media image about himself that greatly inflates his personal relevance.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality...
Who cares about his personality? It's his actions I judge him on. I'm offended by his distortion of the content of the leaks ("Collateral Murder" is hardly the only example) and his choice to purposefully hold information back for a media-manipulating political purpose. If you want to blindly trust him (or anybody else) in spite of that, you're free too, but I don't think the world would be worse off without that.
Says who? How is that theory anything more than part of the image he's made for himself?
The only reason people are debating the drone strike situation at the moment is because of leaks.
Even if I agreed with that (which I don't), you've neglected to explain how a Julian Assange figure is a requirement of leaking such information.
I don't think we're better off with the world getting increasingly closed off and governments being able to better protect secrets.
What I said was that we'd be better off without a Julian Assange like attention-seeker. If you cannot mentally separate his actions from the information, you're only confirming my point that he has created a media image about himself that greatly inflates his personal relevance.
Focusing on being offended by someone's personality...
Who cares about his personality? It's his actions I judge him on. I'm offended by his distortion of the content of the leaks ("Collateral Murder" is hardly the only example) and his choice to purposefully hold information back for a media-manipulating political purpose. If you want to blindly trust him (or anybody else) in spite of that, you're free too, but I don't think the world would be worse off without that.
After reading "This Machine Kills Secrets" [1] I have to agree with the sentiment in this blog post (although maybe not the tone): https://eeqj.com/20110113/wikileaks/
Assange should have followed the philosophy of the cypherpunk mailing list he spent so much time on in the 1990s that was all about with protecting your identity, using cryptography, being anonymous and affecting change through technology.
Wikileaks used that methodology well for their whistleblowers but Assange did the opposite by being so public... and I'm not sure it was all for the best.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/This-Machine-Kills-Secrets-WikiLeakers...
Assange should have followed the philosophy of the cypherpunk mailing list he spent so much time on in the 1990s that was all about with protecting your identity, using cryptography, being anonymous and affecting change through technology.
Wikileaks used that methodology well for their whistleblowers but Assange did the opposite by being so public... and I'm not sure it was all for the best.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/This-Machine-Kills-Secrets-WikiLeakers...
The pirate bay founders are a good example of how things work.
There will always be leaders. Its a key part of how society work. TPB is no exception and the founders are very well known in the world. The interesting part through is that after all the problems, TPB turn into a complete anonymous organization where leader roles are now days gone from the public.
There will always be leaders. Its a key part of how society work. TPB is no exception and the founders are very well known in the world. The interesting part through is that after all the problems, TPB turn into a complete anonymous organization where leader roles are now days gone from the public.
Like Satoshi Nakamoto and Bitcoin?
Also the founder of Truecrypt apparently.
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1895vl/creator_o...
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1895vl/creator_o...
It is a shame, really, that Assange is such an attention whore. His being locked up in the Ecuadorian embassy is probably the best outcome that the US could have hoped for (aside from him being in a US jail). He has no one to blame but himself; power is the strongest aphrodisiac, and he let the power and attention get to him.
WikiLeaks should try to just distance themselves from him and try to continue the work of being a conduit for safely exposing corruption and lies.
WikiLeaks should try to just distance themselves from him and try to continue the work of being a conduit for safely exposing corruption and lies.
I lost respect for Wikileaks when they started editorializing their releases. Most notably the "Collateral Murder" video. I want to be able to form conclusions for myself without being told what I should think every step of the way. Assange admitted that they spun it in such a way to maximize the political impact.
Many interesting points, but I have no sympathy for Daniel Domscheit-Berg who's action destroyed document given to Wikileaks for publications. Who know what dangers and effort the source went through to get the documents, only to have everything destroyed by one individual who was trusted with the files.
I've reluctantly flagged a few Assange stories on HN over the past few months. I'm a libertarian and I absolutely believe that we have too many secrets in the west.
But at some point the story became about Assange and not about the issues. It was at this point that I realized that he was part of the problem and not part of the solution. You don't fix the security state with hero worship and self-promotion. You just create a different set of problems.
But at some point the story became about Assange and not about the issues. It was at this point that I realized that he was part of the problem and not part of the solution. You don't fix the security state with hero worship and self-promotion. You just create a different set of problems.
You don't fix the security state with hero worship and self-promotion.
True, but I think that is is often very strong/odd characters, who are willing to dedicate their life for "big" fights. Those causes need someone who is willing to go out, and promote the hell out of a leak. Otherwise it goes down as just another internet-only phenomenon.
If you are leaking information to a 3rd party, you want the information out there and create the biggest possible effect. Otherwise you could just post it on your blog. So far only Assange has shown repeatedly, that he can deliver this exposure - and to withstand the heat.
Case and point: Not a single relevant leak has reached my attention from all the split-up groups that aimed to do better than Wikileaks. The only acceptable alternative seems Cryptome who benefit for their long-time legacy.
True, but I think that is is often very strong/odd characters, who are willing to dedicate their life for "big" fights. Those causes need someone who is willing to go out, and promote the hell out of a leak. Otherwise it goes down as just another internet-only phenomenon.
If you are leaking information to a 3rd party, you want the information out there and create the biggest possible effect. Otherwise you could just post it on your blog. So far only Assange has shown repeatedly, that he can deliver this exposure - and to withstand the heat.
Case and point: Not a single relevant leak has reached my attention from all the split-up groups that aimed to do better than Wikileaks. The only acceptable alternative seems Cryptome who benefit for their long-time legacy.
"True, but I think that is is often very strong/odd characters, who are willing to dedicate their life for "big" fights"
At what point does one's narcissism become more than the cause?
"Case and point: Not a single relevant leak has reached my attention from all the split-up groups that aimed to do better than Wikileaks"
I don't think many of Assange's sincere critics wish for Wikileaks to collapse, they want him to step down from its operations.
At what point does one's narcissism become more than the cause?
"Case and point: Not a single relevant leak has reached my attention from all the split-up groups that aimed to do better than Wikileaks"
I don't think many of Assange's sincere critics wish for Wikileaks to collapse, they want him to step down from its operations.
...so is the alleged narcissism a worse wrong doing than what's being exposed?
The only thing protecting Assange from having been bundled into a jet and whisked off to Guantanamo by now is his rather high personal profile. It's not like his enemies don't have a track record here...
The only thing protecting Assange from having been bundled into a jet and whisked off to Guantanamo by now is his rather high personal profile. It's not like his enemies don't have a track record here...
"...so is the alleged narcissism a worse wrong doing than what's being exposed?"
No, and that's not what was stated. What he was alleged to have done would be a wrong, as are many things Wikileaks covers. Does Wikileaks require Assange to do exactly what they're doing? They don't need such a figurehead.
"The only thing protecting Assange from having been bundled into a jet and whisked off to Guantanamo by now is his rather high personal profile. It's not like his enemies don't have a track record here..."
The second contradicts the first, there is nothing about his high profile that protects him from being whisked off. Those forces aren't particularly concerned about the media operating independently from the governmental interests.
No, and that's not what was stated. What he was alleged to have done would be a wrong, as are many things Wikileaks covers. Does Wikileaks require Assange to do exactly what they're doing? They don't need such a figurehead.
"The only thing protecting Assange from having been bundled into a jet and whisked off to Guantanamo by now is his rather high personal profile. It's not like his enemies don't have a track record here..."
The second contradicts the first, there is nothing about his high profile that protects him from being whisked off. Those forces aren't particularly concerned about the media operating independently from the governmental interests.
Assange became a cause célèbre in the UK long enough to make it difficult to get him extradited quickly. Doesn't mean he can hold those pressures off forever.
The same media which profited from his leaks is the media whose portrait of him you're choosing to accept unless you know him personally. The arguments on here are pretty much exclusively about this alleged personality.
The same media which profited from his leaks is the media whose portrait of him you're choosing to accept unless you know him personally. The arguments on here are pretty much exclusively about this alleged personality.
"The same media which profited from his leaks is the media whose portrait of him you're choosing to accept unless you know him personally"
I really have no interest in "media" portrayal, and I certainly don't want to enable their continued "successes", as dim as they are, but I do take sexual assault charges and evasion seriously. The profile makes it easier for him to avoid them and find supporters to fund/house him, but I don't see how it would stop a government from whisking him off if they were able to.
I really have no interest in "media" portrayal, and I certainly don't want to enable their continued "successes", as dim as they are, but I do take sexual assault charges and evasion seriously. The profile makes it easier for him to avoid them and find supporters to fund/house him, but I don't see how it would stop a government from whisking him off if they were able to.
A good example is anonymous. Are their leaks working as effective for change as Wikileaks was?
The times when Anonymous and Wikileaks work together seem to produce some of the best results for both. See: Stratfor, Scientology.
That article doesn't seem contain much meat besides Assange not liking the film the author of the article made, and a list of people who fell out with him. Bad article...
WikiLeaks ... guilty ... obfuscation ... misinformation ... blinkered ...cultish
Considering that story lede immediately tried to sway my opinion with a swath of negative adjectives, "Jemima Can" do without me reading her screed.
Considering that story lede immediately tried to sway my opinion with a swath of negative adjectives, "Jemima Can" do without me reading her screed.
It takes a certain type of personality (and a certain type of mania/insanity) to run against the odds/world like he did.. We should accept that if it comes with some rough edges, thats kinda the price for it.
Even if there are arguments over wether or not he is "a great man", it is clear that he has achieved great things, and sometimes the people who do also have great flaws..