See Internet Censorship for more information. WikiLeaks staff examine all documents and label any suspicions of inauthenticity based on a forensic analysis of the document, means, motive and opportunity, cost of forgery, what the authoring organization claims and so on.
We have become world leaders in this and have an enviable record: as far as can be determined, we have yet to make a mistake. This does not mean we will never make a mistake, but so far, our method is working and we have a reputation to protect. Given that many of the most prestigious newspapers, including the New York Times [Judith Miller, ], have published reports based on fabricated documents, WikiLeaks believes that best way to truly determine if a story is authentic, is not just our expertise, but to provide the full source document to the broader community - and particularly the community of interest around the document.
So for example, let's say a WikiLeaks' document reveals human rights abuses and it is purportedly from a regional Chinese government. Some of the best people to analyze the document's veracity are the local dissident community, human rights groups and regional experts such as academics.
They may be particularly interested in this sort of document. But of course WikiLeaks will be open for anyone to comment. Journalists and governments are often duped by forged documents. It is hard for most reporters to outsmart the skill of intelligence agency frauds.
WikiLeaks, by bringing the collective wisdoms and experiences of thousands to politically important documents will unmask frauds like never before. WikiLeaks is an excellent source for journalists, both of original documents and of analysis and comment. WikiLeaks will make it easier for quality journalists to do their job of getting important information out to the community.
Getting the original documents out there will also be very helpful to academics, particularly historians. For online submissions, all a whistleblower needs to do is upload the document and specify the language, country and industry of origin, likely audience, reasons for leaking and approaches to verification. All documents go into queue to obscure the date and time of their acquisition, and are then assessed by our editors to see if they fit our editorial criteria. Internally the document is distributed to backup servers immediately.
WikiLeaks staff, sometimes in collaboration with the submitter. Historically, most summaries were written by Julian Assange. Analysis articles written on WikiLeaks are written by WikiLeaks staff, or, more usually, written by other publications, but based on WikiLeaks source material. Quite the opposite actually. It is a global group of people with long standing dedication to the idea of improved transparency in institutions, especially government. We think better transparency is at the heart of less corruption and better democracies.
By definition spy agencies want to hoard information. We want to get it out to the public. It began with an online dialogue between activists in different parts of the globe. The overwhelming concern of these people was that a great deal of human suffering through lack of food, healthcare, education and other essentials stems from government resources being diverted through corruption of governance.
This is particularly true in non-democratic and repressive regimes. The founding people behind WikiLeaks thought long and hard about how this problem could be fixed, and particularly about how information technologies could amplify the fix on a world wide scale.
It's interesting to note that one online commentator accused us of being naive in our high level goals. This is effectively praise to us. It takes a little bit of naivety in order to jump in and do something that otherwise looks impossible. Many great advances in science, technology and culture have a touch of naivety at their inception.
We're reminded of Phil Zimmerman, the creator of PGP, the world's first free and freely available encryption software for the masses. At the start of the s when PGP was released, encryption was really only the realm of spy agencies. Governments classified it as a weapon. There was a huge outcry when Zimmerman dared to release this "dangerous" technology for the average person to use. Fast forward a decade and a half: virtually everyone on the net uses encryption all the time, for everything from secure ordering, online banking to sending private love letters.
The somewhat naive vision of a lone computer programmer in Boulder, Colorado, was at the heart of an extremely sensible and practical global revolution in privacy technologies.
WikiLeaks may be at the heart of another global revolution - in better accountability by governments and other institutions. We think this document leaking technology will effectively raise standards around the globe. We expect it to encourage citizens aware of consequentially unethical behavior to don the hat of brave whistleblower , even if they have never done so before.
How to contact WikiLeaks? What is Tor? Tips for Sources After Submitting. Contact us if you have specific problems If you have a very large submission, or a submission with a complex format, or are a high-risk source, please contact us. What computer to use If the computer you are uploading from could subsequently be audited in an investigation, consider using a computer that is not easily tied to you.
Do not talk about your submission to others If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. Act normal If you are a high-risk source, avoid saying anything or doing anything after submitting which might promote suspicion.
Remove traces of your submission If you are a high-risk source and the computer you prepared your submission on, or uploaded it from, could subsequently be audited in an investigation, we recommend that you format and dispose of the computer hard drive and any other storage media you used. If you face legal action If a legal action is brought against you as a result of your submission, there are organisations that may help you.
Submit documents to WikiLeaks. Shop Donate Submit. Leaks News About Partners. Jump to: navigation , search. Category : Pages needing translation. Views Project page discuss View source. Personal tools Log in. Main Page Country index Follow us. What links here Related changes Special pages Printable version Permanent link.
Contents 1 Introduction 1. How does WikiLeaks operate? If so, what are they? WikiLeaks and other media will make leaders uncomfortable, yes. But embarrassment and discomfort are small prices to pay for a healthier democracy. Wikileaks has the potential to make transparency and accountability more robust in the US.
That is good for democracy. Do you have information you want to share with HuffPost? News U. Politics Joe Biden Congress Extremism. Special Projects Highline. HuffPost Personal Video Horoscopes. Follow Us.
Terms Privacy Policy. Things that are highly relevant. So yes, WikiLeaks is dangerous to anyone in power who has something to hide. He thinks that certain information should not be disclosed. What is your position on this? EK: I am in favour of freedom of information as a cornerstone of modern democratic systems. However WikiLeaks' activities have had a damaging impact.
I don't believe that the intention was noble and respectful. On certain issues you need to create trust between partners, you need to believe in each other. Not because the public has no right to be informed but because things need to be kept discreet. When diplomats are negotiating arrangements it can destroy the whole process if documents are published.
It can destroy the good things which could come up as a result of the negotiations. Some people argue that more transparency strengthens democracy. Do you believe that WikiLeaks has contributed to democracy in the World? CE: Yes, very much so, since transparency is one of the fundamental points of a democracy.
What is the point of allowing people to vote, if they are not given any information about what the government or opposition is doing? The goal in a democracy must be to have informed citizens making informed choices. The larger goal of WikiLeaks is to make it obvious to all governments: Don't believe that you'll get away with hiding or lying about things. The indirect effect of WikiLeaks is that governments will start to become more transparent and more honest.
EK: Well, I would like to give you a straight answer so that you don't accuse me of diplomatic pirouettes, but sometimes there is no such answer. I can to a certain extent admit that the WikiLeaks' publications may have certain positive aspects.
In those countries where there is a dictatorial regime, the positive things are more evident and more intense. So I am not condemning everything that was published. But there should be a line between what can be published to expand the freedom of access to information for everybody and what should not be published in order not to damage discreet personal relationships.
0コメント