Wikileaks Response

Up until recently I had never heard obout this site called Wikileaks. After discussing it in class, I discovered that it is an international online website on which, sources can anonymously post top secret information. This information can range from classified government military files to secret business strategies. To many this site is cause for controversy, should secret information be made public? Who should decide? Founder of Wikileaks, Jullian Assange, defends his website on a range of different points. In an interview with TED, Assange stated something to the effect that he believes the sites purpose is to reveal things that are considered immorral or wrong and should be brought to the publics knowledge. The info that is leaked on his site is not to cause trouble but to do good.

Some of the strengths to Wikileaks are many. The information revealed within the site, according to Assange, is to always produce a positive result and not a negative one. By having all this open documentation, the site is revealing the true nature of the government and business. Through such openess the public is able to hold institutions such as businesses and government more accountable.

I think there are a few flaws to Assange's defenses. For one he doesn't consider the source and therefore all the information cannot always be completely accurate. Second, what is published on Wikileaks can very easily sway the public's opinion, start a revolt or even a war. Although I haven't heard of any wars happening as a result of Wikileaks, the idea is not that far fetched. Lastly is it morally right to reveal something that was meant to be kept secret? The end doesn't always justify the mean in the case of Wikileaks. 

I have a very hard time deciding whether or not I agree with Assange's beliefs. What if he decides to publish something that does more harm than good? I struggle deciding which is worse, having someone withhold information that may or may not protect me or having someone decide whether or not this information should be made available, whether it causes harm to individuals or not? I tend to stray towards the belief that if information is made secret, theres probably a good reason for it. In the instance of information such as a scandalous e-mail exchanged between a public official and some mistress, then this doesn't nessecarilly bring any damage to me but it may ruin the life of that official. Whether he deserves it or not i don't think it is our business to mess with other peoples lives or thier own business. In Assanges case however, this is precisly his business.