Does WikiLeaks Give Journalism a Bad Name?

Posted by Lindsay Scarpello

Courtesy of

The practice of journalism is all about keeping the public informed while maintaining ethical and social responsibility. But since the dawn of the internet, the world of journalism has morphed into a 24/7 news wire, allowing for less accuracy and the release of some questionable content. WikiLeaks–“an international new media non-profit organization that publishes submissions of otherwise unavailable documents from anonymous news sources and leaks.”– is rapidly becoming an example of a media outlet that some might call “questionable”.

Today, WikiLeaks revealed “questionable” content when they released a list of sites worldwide the United States government deemed high-risk for terrorist attacks. The Associated Press reported that government officials consider this leak “damaging” because it may provide a hit list to potential adversaries. This isn’t the first “questionable” information WikiLeaks has released, but another  in a long string of secret U.S. documents.

Some argue that the information WikiLeaks has released isn’t questionable because it serves as information the public should know. Regardless, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is currently facing termination of the site due to the Swiss shutting down his bank account in an attempt to halt the site from publishing any more secret documents.

What do you guys think? Is WikiLeaks releasing information it shouldn’t? Is WikiLeaks lending a bad name to the practice and profession of journalism?


3 responses to “Does WikiLeaks Give Journalism a Bad Name?

  1. I am torn about the issue of WikiLeaks. I understand the point Assange is trying to get across. The public has a right to know information, especially if it involves the government. Information that we can do little about as well as being harmful to our government’s security may not be necessary to divulge. I think that it should be careful what it leaks, it may have deadly and powerful repercussions.

  2. I may be in the minority, but I think that WikiLeaks shows the general direction journalism is headed in. It seems distasteful and an invasion of potentially dangerous materials, but when we live in such an information based world with supposed “free reign” on that information, we deserve to know. Some may think it gives us a bad name as people who scrape the bottom of the barrel for info, but Assange and WikiLeaks do it for no money. Now I’m just waiting to see what insurance.aes256 holds.

  3. Wikileaks does not give journalism a bad name. I think people have the right and access to all information and all it does is present the information in a same venue. I understand it might be an invasion of privacy and a threat to national defense, but if the principle of journalism is to seek the truth, then Wikileaks does just that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s