Wikileaks is drawing scorn from governments around the globe for its release of thousands of diplomatic cables, and its founder, Julian Assange, is a man on the run - literally - from an arrest warrant on sex charges issued by Interpol.
But should Wikileaks be shut down, and should news organizations like The New York Times stop reporting details of the leaked documents?
No, says journalism ethics expert Stephen Ward, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison j-school and author of the book "Global Journalism Ethics."
"I'm all in favor of bringing this information into the public light," Ward says in a phone interview. "I just hope we can do it in a responsible way."
He adds: "It is ethically permissible to publish this material and to even break the law in so doing so - but we never do that recklessly."
If nothing else, Ward says the leaked documents are adding substantially to the public's knowledge of international diplomacy involving countries ranging from Iran to North Korea, just as an earlier document release added to the public's knowledge of the war in Afghanistan.
"We're learning a lot about how the U.S. is struggling with its diplomacy around the world," Ward says. "The public is now much more aware of this. It gets the story beyond just those normally interested in foreign affairs."
Ward says he thinks the Times did a good job of checking and vetting the leaked cables. "They did the best you can do with this data in terms of minimizing harm.
"My concern is there is a difference between The New York Times and Wikileaks; my concern is about whether Wikileaks is paying enough attention to the possible consequences of publishing this data," he says. "I don't know if they have the same commitment to minimizing harm."
Wards adds: "To my knowledge, no one has of yet been harmed by any of this. But the enthusiasm many have for what Wikileaks is doing will go down the tubes the moment they publish something that gets someone killed."
Read "How do Journalists Decide Whether to Public Classified Material?"
Photo of Ward courtesy the University of Wisconsin
Comments
Ward seems to hold Wikileaks to a higher standard when he says: “My concern is there is a difference between The New York Times and Wikileaks; my concern is about whether Wikileaks is paying enough attention to the possible consequences of publishing this data. I don’t know if they have the same commitment to minimizing harm….”To my knowledge, no one has of yet been harmed by any of this. But the enthusiasm many have for what Wikileaks is doing will go down the tubes the moment they publish something that gets someone killed.”
What type of care did the New York Times take when its reporters and editors in the run up to the war in Iraq reduced themselves to Stenographers as they published the falsehoods of Ahmed Chalabi, via Judith Miller (Chalabi was a convicted Felon with a dubious past – she could have checked her own paper’s archives) The Defense Department, and other administration officials, while silencing or minimizing critical anti-war voices. The end result, at least hundreds of thousands dead, and many more injured, tortured…oh yeah, and a few million Iraqis internally displaced…
You do not like peace? How would you like to see the terrorist back in the United Stated, bombing and killing OUR innocents in OUR streets. Also, you are retarded lol.
With hate towards you, Communist
-Liberty
Tony, does Glen Beck follow your blog?
I’ll start off by saying that I am liberal, I drive an old VW bus, work in the computer industry, 420+, and I think that Wikileaks SHOULD be shutdown.
I was curious about what it contained, and pulled up one single classified report from some Iraq files. In the journal entry which described surveillance of a suspicious vehicle the license plate number is noted as are many other details. Now lets just say for a moment that this IS a bad guy. If they were to find that their car had been sighted wouldn’t that be prohibitive to an ability to effectively stay ahead of them. I can’t beieve someone would dump this kind of info. If it were controversial or had some bearing on the people in question committing a crime then I am all for it. But if it is even possibly going to aid in the deaths of soldiers then this is not journalism at all, it’s aiding and abetting.
Tim, whether you are a hippie or liberal doesn’t really matter. If you have the link to the document I would like to see it. I do know that Wikileaks, just being a 4-year-old institution, has been evolving with its standards regarding how they release information. I know that they have taken advice from some sympathetic critics and are more careful in protecting people’s identities when the question of safety is raised. But again, if you believe in international law and are familiar with it then you shoudl recognize that the War and Occupation in Iraq is a violation of the UN Charter Treaty as well as teh Geneva conventions – not to mention the various war crimes that have been committed since the invasion. As an American citizen you should probably focus your attention on this, work to see that Washington follows teh rule of law, and that those responsible are brought to justice before the international criminal court. Again, this illegal war has rsulted in teh murder of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s, scores more injured and tortured and the destruction of the country’s infratstructure. Oh yea, and then there’s the fact that we propped up and armed the Hussein regime in the late 70’s and through the 80’s. What a lot fo teh wikileaks cables also do is reveal the hypocricy and dupliciotus nature of US foreign policy, and lends documnetation to criticisms put out by the Left for years. “Sunshine is the best disinfectant.”