Singh 1

Navdeep Singh
Diane Tucker
Comm 171 841
9 August 2016
Say no to free speech exploitation!
Wikileaks is no ordinary website, It is a domain that divulges sensitive
information and facts to the general public. Wikileaks as we all know captured the world
by storm in the year 2006 when its founder Julian Assange made public an article named
a secret decision, this crucial document marked the start of thousands of more leaked
archives every one of them creating waves in every nook and corner of the world. Having
said all of this the question still remains to be seen whether the aspect of free will and
speech is a suitable option or not. To dig into more detail, the criticism and backlash from
the respective governments like USA, India, China, France, Iran and even Julian
Assanges home country Australia is a profound fact to ponder upon considering the fact
that not all reports are plausible. To be precise questions have been raised on how
Wikileaks is manipulates content, initiates trust issues and compromises national security.
First and foremost, in todays world of deception and anonymity, it is a highly
arduous task to buy the fact that anything posted in the name of WikiLeaks is indeed true
and accurate. In the words of Charlie Beckett:
Wikileaks publishes no financial accounts or annual reports. It does not
answer questions about income, employees or structure. It does not have
any accountability mechanism or governance structure. It does not give a
right to reply . . . . Wikileaks might argue that it is necessarily secretive.

Singh 2
Most obviously, it must protect its sources . But in the culture of
hypocrisy. It criticizes governments and mainstream media for their lack
of openness. It claims to be a transparent organization but it is not fully
transparent itself (222-239)(Beckett)
Clearly Wikileaks has a long way to go to ensure full trust and dependability, as
for now many crucial documents are being showcased in an unknown and unsourced
fashion. Considering the fact that Wikileaks is an open based website and primarily relies
on the general public for most of its donations and for the leaks as well. Realistically any
person in this day and age could come up to Wikileaks and spill the beans of a specific
influential organization leaving everyone but the whistleblower to suffer the
consequences of a breach of security. This breach is no modest issue, In one of more
extreme cases, as per an CBS article in the US government particularly the Democrats
and Republicans were calling the assassination of Julian Assange, to be more specific a
former senior advisor to Prime Minister Stephen Harper famously said "I think [Julian ]
Assange should be assassinated, actually," Flanagan said with a laugh, and when [he
was ]asked to expand upon his answer, [he] added that he "wouldn't be unhappy" if
[Julian] Assange "disappeared."
Moreover, it is of no secret that governments all around the world release
statements and dialogues about world issues and events. The million-dollar question now
would be as to how would a normal person have any confidence in administrations after
being enormously provoked by Wikileaks in particular. This telling fact would sting even
more in the event of the government actually speaking the truth. Student writers Jennifer
B, Michael C, Melissa M, Steven R have very well stated about the killings of civilians

Singh 3
by the US army, given the fact that that gruesome executions happen once in a blue
moon, the heart of the matter is that owing to the reason that an established organization
like Wikileaks is saying this, it will most definitely be blown out of proportion to levels
one can never imagine.
Furthermore, national security is the name of the game and we very well know
that the first thing that comes to a nations mind is security and in no circumstances should
that be violated. The US government for instance has very well ben inflicted from
Assanges allegations and could put not only the security of a country but its citizens too
at risk. In the words of M. Nick,
Despite the seemingly good intentions of Assanges work, his work has
had serious repercussions. Some of the information that his organization
has published includes confidential military documents that reveal great
deals of US strategy and policy. As Wikileaks makes this information
publically-accessible, Assanges work has potentially compromised US
national security, essentially placing in danger not only the lives of
soldiers who rely on the secrecy of these documents, but also the lives of
citizens at home who are now more vulnerable to attack.
The observation is dead right, taking in to account that it could also hamper future intercountry dialogues and interactions to the extent that leaders and prime ministers would
hold back honest and ingenuous statements fearing any more leakages therefore
preventing prospective advances between countries.
To sum up Wikileaks being very popular and influential in recent times has
always had a backlash from leading countries and world nations. This is because strong

Singh 4
arguments of Wikileaks distorting facts, affecting integrity and exposing national security
is a real fact happening in front of our eyes. Freedom of speech is not something that
should be taken for granted and misused for anyone in power and Wikileaks being a
leading organization has a responsibility to be more transparent and genuine in its
statements, moreover Wikileaks should be more controlled and if possible regulated to
have a real and dependable impact in every sphere of life.

Singh 5
Works Cited

Alexander, Harriet. Why is Julian Assange still inside the embassy of Ecuador?. The
Telegraph(2/16)
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/11681502/Why-is-JulianAssange-still-inside-the-embassy-of-Ecuador.html>

Beckett, Charles and Ball, James. Wikileaks News in the Networked Era Polity Press
2012: (222 - 239)
B, Jennifer, C, Michael, M, Melissa, R, Steven. Censorship:Should Wikileaks Be
Regulated Or Let Free Speech n.d Web 11 Dec 2010.
< http://techcomm.wikidot.com/censorship-should-wikileaks-be-regulated-or-letfree-speech>
Flanagan regrets WikiLeaks assassination remark, CBC News, 1 Dec 2010 Web 1 Dec
2010 < http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/flanagan-regrets-wikileaks-assassinationremark-1.877548>
M, Nick. Julian Assange: Champion of Freedom of Expression or Criminal? Yale Law
and Technology n.d Web October 19 2011
< http://www.yalelawtech.org/free-speech-online/julian-assange-champion-offreedom-of-expression-or-criminal/>
Noble, J. WikiLeaks, Canadian media and democracy. The Walrus (21 Sept 2011)