Can Wikileaks survive as a movement if the website and Assange fall?

The founder and face of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, is facing extradition and possible charges in Sweden for sexual misconduct. The website and organization are caught in a financial stranglehold as many of the means through which it receives donations and funding are cut off. If the man is jailed and the organization crumbles, can Wikileaks survive as a movement?
That’s the question that the NY Times attempts to answer. While many of their points are valid, is it realistic to believe that this Pandora’s Box can truly be closed now that the demand for this sort of transparency and accountability are at a high?
There have been many examples made of whistleblowers over the past couple of years. As governments and corporations face embarrassment and potential disasters in their relationships with other entities, it’s natural that the reactions to date have been harsh. President Obama made note of his desires to have the most transparent presidency in history, yet in his first 17 months in office his administration was involved in more prosecutions of leakers than any of his predecessors.
As the Times puts it, he has “not only affirmed the Bush administration’s approach, but has done so with renewed focus.”
The major flaw the Times makes in its assessment is that the venues created to supplement or replace Wikileaks at the NY Times, Wall Street Journal, and other mainstream media organizations have been scarcely used and therefore a failing Wikileaks could mean the end for the movement. They miss the real muscle – organizations without boundaries.
Disclosure: Some of the links in this article are affiliate links and we may earn a small commission if you make a purchase, which helps us to keep delivering quality content to you. Here is our disclosure policy.
LEAVE A REPLY
Similar Stories
Full of dreams and larger than life disasters, it seemed for a while that the world of tech startups is...
The law is often depicted as an extremely slow industry, slow because of its heavy contracts and legalese, the very...
X (formerly Twitter) has ignited controversy by blocking links to Signal.me, a domain linked to the widely used encrypted messaging...
The problem with Wikileaks financing is the result of poor management, and nothing more.
Transparency is for what each organization and agency to define. It is their responsibility and in their best interest to foster trust in them. However, they must balance the rights of all parties involved.
If Assange wants to criticize government and other organizations for their level of transparency, that is in his right. If Wikileaks want to be the go to organization for receiving leaked documents then so be it.
Whistle blowing will continue. So, will the leaking of information. Governments will continue to revise freedom of information laws, and corporate disclosure laws. However, transparency, leaking documents, and whistle blowing are three distinct things. For we are all worse for if we forget that.
I don’t think Wikileaks can survive from troubles.
Let’s think about what the enemy is at present. It is really a handful.