I might be missing something, but I don't quite get why Internet activists keep defending Wikileaks as part of their perceived community. How many people are aware of the facts that:
- There is no Wiki in Wikileaks? - There is, currently, no Wikileaks Internet service for leaking documents at all? - That the above wasn't a result of external pressures but internal trouble and schisms in the Wikileaks project? - Wikileaks' collaboration with news media such as The Guardian and Der Spiegel was based on payments to Wikileaks, with Wikileaks working as an 'information broker with a funny name' (Dmytri Kleiner)? - Assange signed a one million dollar book contract? - In May 2010, Assange announced a $100,000 defense fund for Bradley Manning but not a single cent was ever paid? (according to Daniel Domscheit-Berg) Why does noone discuss whether it wouldn't be safer for whistleblowers to directly contact a news medium like The Guardian instead of using an intermediary? (Credits to Dmytri again.) Florian -- blog: http://en.pleintekst.nl homepage: http://cramer.pleintekst.nl:70 gopher://cramer.pleintekst.nl # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
