“Yeah, can it possibly be true; it’s a worry isn’t it? That the rest of the world’s media is doing such a bad job that a little group of activists is able to release more of [classified] information than the rest of the world has combined” – Julian Assange

“Light them all up. Come on, fire!” – U.S. Soldier before opening fire on Reuters journalist Namir Noor-Eldeen 

Wikileaks, one of the most controversial websites of the 21^st century, describes itself as a non-profit media organization which was created by the Australian hacker and activist Julian Assange, who also serves as the face of the organization in public. Assange has also risen to worldwide fame and he generates massive media attention for his project, also because he currently awaits a decision of British courts, as he is charged with sexual molestation and rape charges in Sweden and want to extradite him. Assange also recently announced that he plans to run for a seat in the Australian Senate.

Wikileaks task, as they see it, is to distribute private, classified information of government or corporate misbehaviour to the public. And they have been very successful in doing so. In 2010 they released classified information about the Iraq War they obtained through PFC Bradley Manning, who was stationed near Baghdad in 2009/10 and is now in military jail, which apparently “isn’t really a fun place to be”. He confessed his “treason” to hacker Adrian Lamo, who in return revealed this fact to the U.S. authorities. As Wikileaks has no control over the behaviour of a source, it would be unfair to blame them for his arrest, although one of the major issues Wikileaks faces is the safety of their sources. Another person who came to fame by assisting Wikileaks would be Swiss banker Rudolf Elmer. Wikileaks faces hard times as many major credit card companies and banks refuse to collaborate, because of international, mostly U.S. pressure.

By October 2010 Wikileaks had released 400,000 classified documents, which included the footage of the Reuters journalists being shot and revelead that over 15,000 civilian casualties have not been reported by the U.S. Forces. Furthermore it showed the ignorance the Coalition forces had towards the investigation of war crimes commited by both foreign and local military and police forces.

Most of the involved countries disapproved of the release; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that it “puts the lives of United States and its partners’ service members and civilians at risk”.

Wikileaks does not, or if so only barely, act as a journalistic organization, as they usually publish their data to several global media partners. The respective journalists then examine the data they received and produce stories and headlines. In the case of the Iraq War files Wikileaks partners were The New York Times , The Guardian and Der Spiegel.

This behaviour was repeated when Wikileaks released the U.S. Diplomatic Cables, so called Cablegate, in 2010/11, with additional media partners from France and Spain.

The most recent, publicly noticed release were the “Global Intelligence Files” which included private emails from American intelligence company Stratfor.

If you want to know more about Wikileaks, the documentary Wikirebels is highly recommended.

Misachi Ogawa

Anyone can be a mole by sending private and often classified information to the Wikileaks website. It is non-profit organization who’s sole purpose is to educate people on topics that lack transparency.

Anonymous sources can send Wikileaks information which is then “fact checked” by Wiki Journalists and published on their website. Usually, the sources are people inside of an organization or  situation where they have access to information that is unreported in order to protect someone’s image. For example, Bradley Manning was a troop stationed in Iraq during the 2004-2009 war and was sent to Military Jail for leaking information that jeopardized and outed the US Military’s actions (or lack thereof). In October of 2009, Manning was sent to Iraq by the United States. A month later he contacted Wikileaks and releases found footage of a Baghdad air strike which was later published on Wikileaks in April. Once the US Army had heard about the leaked information, they sent him to the Marine Corps. Brigade in July 2010. He was held in maximum custody. Prior to the detainment, Manning was not well liked by the Army since he acted out towards his commanding officers. He had gender issues and didn’t support the war. The addition of exposing confidential information to Wikileaks was the straw that broke the Army’s back. The “Bradley Manning Support Network” set up a website to raise funds and awareness of Bradley’s conviction. On the website, there is an “I am Bradley Manning” photo campaign where people take a picture of themselves with a sign that says “I am Bradley Manning”. Some people are just supporters while others are people who submitted information to Wikileaks or a similar source. Both feel that Manning has not committed a crime. I think a better and more fair question isn’t whether or not Manning is “innocent”. Rather, what does the US Military have to hide that is so contraversial?

 In an article by The Telegraph, Senator Joe Lieberman said releasing information to Wikileaks is “an attack on the national security of the United States” because certain information is meant only to be seen by a privilaged group. Unless the information is harmful for the public eye, what does the American Government have to hide? Perhaps sweeping issues under the rug in order to “protect” America isn’t doing the country any good. Allowing citizens to live in a bubble created and controlled by corporations and their power to censor media as well as the government, will only cultivate an illusion of a perfect world. By doing this it gives people a sense of false security and masks the underlying issues that are going on. Ignorance is not the way to solve problems. Maybe Wikileaks will be a window to shed some light on dusty issues that have been put on a shelf.

-Megan Chuang

WikiLeaks is a non-profit media outlet which was established in 2007 by Australian Internet Activist Julian Assange and The Sunshine Press organization. The goal of WikiLeaks is to mass publicize private, secret and classified information which is being withheld from the public at large. Although the organization has faced severe counterattacks in the form of law suits and threats, within one year it had already made public over 1.2 million private documents and this number has grown substantially since then.  But how does an organization like this work? It’s quite simple. WikiLeaks combines investigative journalism and top of the line security in an effort to bring information to the public. First, a source will voluntarily submit the leaked material in person, by mail or the most recommended option, through a secure, anonymous drop box. Next, WikiLeaks journalists analyze the information, verify it and a new story is formed. Finally, both the WikiLeaks news story and the original leaked material are published side by side on the website to prove to the reader what WikiLeaks is reporting on is authentic and viable. And so far, through this process WikiLeaks has been able to successful in verifying every document that it has sent out into the public.

When I think of WikiLeaks another organization called OpenLeaks comes to mind, which was established in 2010.  OpenLeaks has similar goals in mind as WikiLeaks and was inspired by much of its success. Their aim was to make the spreading of leaked material more widespread in a way that does not endanger the lives of those who wish to reveal information. However, they differ to WikiLeaks in that they do not receive or transmit any documents; instead they provide a platform for other networks of people to send out information that is vital to society.

In July 2010, 92,000 documents covering the war in Afghanistan to prominent newspapers such as The New York Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel. Then in October, in the largest leak of confidential information ever known, approximately 400,000 documents regarding the U.S treatment of Iraqi authorities surfaced. The leaked materials became known as the Iraq War Logs and told an astonishing story of war through the eyes of American soldiers. Among many other findings, the Iraq War Logs exposed that 15, 000 civilian deaths had not be reported by the US government and that US soldiers killed almost 700 civilians for coming too close to checkpoints. Not only that but they show how US authorities failed to investigate allegations regarding the rape, torture and abuse by the Iraqi police.

Much debate has been surrounding the question of whether WikiLeaks can be considered a journalistic organization. This presentation has taught me that WikiLeaks is in fact a form of investigative journalism and a good one at that. The very purpose of journalism is dig up dirt on issues that will interest the public regardless of any efforts to conceal the information. The fact that WikiLeaks has paired with major newspapers like The New York Times and their intense fact checking makes the War Logs legitimate. While some argue that WikiLeaks is a national security threat and others insist Assange is committing espionage, I believe that WikiLeaks is simply doing what needs to be done in revealing the bold truth behind war and that is worth the risks they take.

I enjoyed watching WikiRebels: The Documentary which takes a fascinating look at  how Wikileaks is having a profound effect on transparency and the way governments need to change how they release information. It includes interviews with Founder, Julian Assange and Co-Founder, Kristinn Hrafnsson as well as a number of analysts.

WikiLeaks is launched in 2006 by Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, and The Sunshine Press Organization. This non-profit organization publish private anonymous sources and allege government or corporate misconduct through leaked documents. WikiLeaks put much effort to protect their sources and to encrypt their documents, however, the encryption use of WikiLeaks face ‘Legal Challenge’. The encryption becomes an issue because some suspect the encrypted file to contain further sensitive materials.

400,000 documents were released in October 2010 through WikiLeaks, revealing torture and civilians death during the Iraq War. These sources are kept in the Iraq War Logs where stories, pictures and videos of civilians suffering are documented. The Iraq War Logs are also partnered with many news institutions such as Al Jazeera, The New York Times and The Guardian. The spilling of these secret documents marked the largest military leak in U.S. history and raised public awareness of the negative impacts of U.S. occupation in Iraq.

WikiLeaks is successful at raising public’s awareness, however, U.S. authorities turned a blind eye to the reports of torture, abuse and murder. There were 15,000 unknown civilian deaths reported, however U.S. did not investigate into this problem. They claim that no official record of civilian casualties exist. While U.S. authorities avoid to respond to the civilian casualties, worldwide discussions and debates formed immediately after the release of Iraq War documents.

Many criticisms were faced by WikiLeaks eventhough this whistleblowing website offers a voice for the voiceless. Hilary Clinton condemned the leaks to “put the lives of U.S. and its partner’s service members and civilians at risk.” Furthermore, U.S. political circles are outraged when the Iraq War documents were released, they demand WikiLeaks to be taken offline.

WikiLeaks engages ordinary citizens to submit new sources, so their voices would be heard. The leaked documents mark an important aspect of Journalism, to reveal the truth to the public. Participatory Journalism is illustrated through sources released by WikiLeaks because the photos and videos are shoot by the civilians, and the documents record the suffering and the experience of Iraqis.

– Yu-Ting (Tiffany) Cheng

The impact social media has on our daily lives is significant, especially during times of turmoil. Many social movements credit social media as it facilitates their movement. The Iran Election Protests in 2009 is nicknamed the “Twitter Revolution”, as Twitter was a platform where civilians shared their stories with the world. In recent years, social movements are increasingly turning to the Internet, relying on social media platforms to spread their messages. Kony 2012 is the latest movement to become viral, with over 84 million views on YouTube. Despite gaining worldwide attention, is social media the key to mobilize social movements? Most importantly, is there truly visible change as a result of Internet activism?

The Iranian election protests started on June 12, 2009 and ended on February 11, 2010. Shortly following Iran’s tenth presidential election, it was announced that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had overwhelmingly won the the election over Mir-Hossein Mousavi in a 62/36 percent split. Civilians were immediately outraged when hearing of the news, with many claiming the polls were rigged. Some people argued that it was impossible for Ahmadinejad the election, as Mousavi had the majority of public support pre-elections. Additionally, it would have been nearly impossible to announce election results two hours after polls closed, as voter participation was high. In addition to Mousavi, two other people running for president brought forward that it is impossible to count 40 million votes by hand in the span of two hours. Outraged citizens took their anger to the streets on June 13. During this time, civilians used Twitter as their main platform as a way of reporting to the world the events in Iran, as foreign media was banned from the streets. Amateur videos were uploaded onto YouTube, showing the world what is not being televised from an insider’s perspective. Despite a ban on various websites, people used proxies to access these websites.

The Twitter Revolution clearly demonstrates the vital role social media plays in important world events. In fact, Twitter delayed its scheduled 90 minute site maintenance, in order for Iranians to report on the chain of events. However, critics argue that the importance of social media during times of urgency has been overblown. More importantly, the assumption that social media results in democracy is very delusional. In this RSA Animate, Evgeny Morozov presents his argument on what he calls “cyber-utopianism”. This is the idea that the Internet plays a large emancipatory role in global politics. In the video, Morozov points out that less than 20,000 Twitter users took part of the “Twitter Revolution”, which is roughly half of UBC’s combined student population of both undergraduates and graduates.

The assumption that the Internet is a good thing when it comes to promoting democracy is an illusion. I’m not denying that social media doesn’t play an important role in world events- it does, and it greatly assists in organizing events. However, people must be realistic about the real impact of events such as the Iranian protests. Just because the word was getting out about the scandal and subsequent protests, it doesn’t necessarily translate into action elsewhere in the world. Similarly, this was one of the biggest controversies of Kony 2012. I believe that everybody should live by Facta non Verba, Latin for “actions not words”. I firmly believe that unless real action is taken, then whatever is being spoken about is irrelevant to the situation.

-Jenny Ho

It amazes me how some people are stripped of their rights to use the Internet or certain western media sources through the World Wide Web. In modern society, when a disaster hits, social media and the Internet play key roles in distributing updates and developing information on the event to a global audience.

On May 12^th, 2008 an Earthquake struck the Sichuan Province, one of China’s most popular provinces, killing over 69,000 people. This devastation wasn’t immediately reported to the rest of the world, as many western news outlets such as Facebook, You Tube, and Twitter are banned in China. In an article written by Malcolm Moore in the Telegraph (a UK newspaper), he explains that the Chinese government needed to “relax its reporting restrictions” as 29 journalists, 19 of whom are bloggers, are in prisons. If they had not been in prisons, word about the quake would have travelled much faster making it easier for medical teams to respond to the catastrophe (along with many other things).

Despite China’s extremely up-tight Internet laws, sites like Tweetburner and TwitterLocal, both completely un-related to the banned site Twitter, made it possible for people across the world to search topics such as the earthquake. Most reports weren’t in English, forcing many to use GoogleTranslate. Another website was key in providing the public with information, as American blogger Robert Scoble tweeted “lots of people saying summize.com is best search for quake info” (summize.com was a site for reviews and blog discussions that was bought out by Twitter). A weblog based in Shanghai called Shanghaiist posted videos and pictures of the earthquakes and posted them online through massive Chinese file-sharing sites such as Tudou, where by September 2007 served over 55 million videos every day.

This event was the first disaster where social media played a significant role. Others would follow, such as the Arab Spring two years after the earthquake, which led to leaders in many countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, and Lybia to be forced from their power. Now, countries who try to hide atrocities that occur to their populations are being exposed on Facebook and other social media outlets. The reports on the earthquake in China contributed to a breakthrough moment for new media, as many people switched from old media sources to websites like Twitter for their breaking news updates.

First of all, if you would like to view the full WikiLeaks story, the hour long documentary “WikiRebels” is available in its entirety here. The documentary is very well done and provides a lot of the footage leaked by WikiLeaks, as well as interviews with many of the people involved. Also on the page is a forty-minute YouTube clip – originally leaked by WikiLeaks – of unedited military footage showing civilians being murdered in Baghdad.

WikiLeaks is an international, not-for-profit organization that publishes submissions of private, secret, and classified media from anonymous news sources, news leaks, and business whistleblowers. The group has released a number of significant documents which have become front-page news items. Early releases included documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the Afghanistan war and corruption in Kenya. In October 2010, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organizations. This allowed every death in Iraq, and across the border in Iran, to be mapped. One of the most incriminating documents showed that around 15,000 civilian deaths had not been previously admitted by the US government, which brought the total civilian death count to 66,000 civilians. The Guardian provides a whole section of their website dedicated to the archived articles related to WikiLeaks as well as any current activity – you can access it here.

WikiLeaks is a prime example of how citizen journalism can bring otherwise completely unavailable information to the masses. But this also raises a big question: How can journalists deal with the massive explosion of primary source data made available on the Internet? Citizen journalists themselves need to understand and learn how to contextualize their outputs to make them effective, useable and legitimate. Many are also considering that journalists need to reevaluate their ethics for this age. Should this secretive information be released? If so, is it ok for technically unaccredited citizen journalists like WikiLeaks to be the ones releasing it and analyzing it?

Regardless, I believe that this sort of closed-book information should be out in the public and discussed. But we have to be careful with the way we respond and contextualize this information. Multiple sources of input must be considered and citizens should always be critical of raw data or primary sources.

Alec Leibsohn

May 12, 2008 marks the date when an earthquake in the Wenchuan County in the province of Sichuan hit China. This was China’s deadliest earthquake since the 1976 Tangshan earthquake. The Sichuan earthquake left devastating consequences leaving 69, 197 dead, 374, 176 injured, 18, 222 missing, 4.2 million homeless.

When a natural disaster such as the Sichuan earthquake takes place, media networks and journalists have to first find eyewitnesses and reporters at the scene.  They then fact check the information and edit out the irrelevant details and then report back to people. This process can take a while.

Twitter served as the fastest and most efficient source to get updates on the Sichuan earthquake. Survivors from the disaster were tweeting in information. The sources seemed reliable as the tweeters were on the scene of the event and seemed to know more information than any of the other networks on television.

Robert Scoble an American blogger and author said “when I couldn’t find any news of the earthquake at CNN or Google News, I went to tweetscan, which allows you to monitor Twitter discussion by keyword.” Survivors would constantly update the people interested in the earthquake. Ana from Wenchuan County tweeted in at 12:21 AM “breathing normal again. Feeling an earthquake from the 31^st floor was not fun.” Twitter was able to spread insight from locals faster than old media.

A lot of the tweeters happened to be tweeting in Mandarin making it impossible for foreign tweeters to understand what was going on in China. People turned to GoogleTranslate for fast and efficient translations for their tweets. Newspapers and broadcasters could not translate and convey information at this speed. People didn’t have to turn to old media; they could just login on twitter and translate tweets for themselves instead of waiting on old media to deliver the information.

However, the credibility of these tweets can easily be questioned. Anybody is able to tweet in at any time. The information is not always reliable, as we do not know who is tweeting in. The credibility of old media is not as questioned. Old media has a whole team of professionals working to make sure that the information they send out is correct and credible. Information is always fact checked and edited but this takes time. Twitter is the best source to receive information quickly.

In the People’s Republic of China Internet censorship is strongly conducted under laws and administrative regulations. The Chinese government wants to censor media and have total control over the flow of information on the Internet. However, civilians have found their own ways around government restrictions. They usually log on through virtual private networks to go around the censors. Most of the civilians that were tweeting in were using a proxy server where they are able to request service to the Internet from a different service.

The Sichuan earthquake represents how effective social media is for spreading fast information. Twitter was able to beat all the established networks in giving out information regarding the earthquake. Twitter is a great source through which people all around the world can interact and share information.

-Hajra Kath

The Arab Spring officially began on the 18th of December, 2010 in Tunisia with the Burning Man. It references all demonstrations, protests and revolutions in Northern Africa and the Middle East (Map).What isn’t shown is that many countries had been dealing with oppression and injustice for many years before all this international attention. Most of the countries have been under a group of dictators for many years, waiting for a chance to free themselves. Social media however, created a platform for both communication between participants and could be seen by the outside world. The fact everyone also has cellphones (meaning cameras and access to the internet) the speed at which information can be communicated at is must faster then it was a few years ago.

Protestors used social media such as Facebook and Twitter to mobilize and spread international awareness of the problems they face within their countries and governments. As the movements have progressed, more and more people began moving to these media sites to discuss the state. Twitter even postponed upgrades to allow for the flow of people fighting for democracy. Due to the fact governments monitored the feeds, the bloggers had to change their locations and time zones to try to hide. However, some did in fact go missing, supposedly jailed by their governments for speaking out. These sites were also blocked by the government in Egypt on January 27th to try to stop the movement against the government and rigged election. There is a fantastic timeline of the Arab Springs which goes up until December 2011 and shows the evolution of the revolutions in Egypt, Libya and Syria. The movements that began in the north are now influencing more African and Middle-Eastern countries to try to dislodge oppressive dictatorships or un-democratic policies.

This is one of the first movements that mobilized via the internet against a government. Occupy Wall Street based many of it’s tactics off of those used in the Arab Springs, though with much less success due to lack of organization. Governments were unprepared, though they could sensor their own media, the information being put online was up and being circulated before they even knew it was happening. Police had begun to arrest anyone they caught filming, but the sheer number of people with cameras, including those filming for the roofs made sure that videos were still getting out. People didn’t need weapons to take down their governments anymore, all they needed was to show what was happening – and the world would do the rest. The governments tried to block all access to the sites, but people would just proxy through them, as they’d done with other sites for years.

Governments all over the world have now seen the power social media and the new generations have. Also for any government trying to control the population, the problem is, if the population does move against them, how to prevent it if they can’t stop the internet? These movements have brought many questions to light, such as the way in which revolutions will be fought in the future. They prove that change is possible and can’t just be silenced.

K.A. Zazubovits

Social media has begun to not only connect people on a global scale, but has started to create social change within societies. The Arab Spring is a revolutionary wave of demonstrators and protesters in the Arab that began on December 18^th, 2010 with intentions to force rulers out of power through civil uprisings.  The triggering event that caused this uprising throughout many countries was the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi in protest of police corruption and ill treatment in Tunisia.  This sparked unrest within Algeria, Jordan, Egypt and Yemen as well as other countries.  There has been success within these four countries as the public has overthrown the government.

The way in which this revolution is different from those in the past is that the Internet has played an important role whereas before, the Internet was not a contributing factor whatsoever.  With social networking websites such as Facebook and Twitter being incorporated into these social movements, people are able to spread information much quicker as well as voice their opinions and start online communities.  The role of social media:

a)    Allows the mobilization of protesters rapidly

b)   Undermines a regimes legitimacy

c)   And increases national and international exposure to a regimes atrocities

Internet usage within the Middle East had grown an exponential 1,825.3% between 2000 and 2010 including an increasing number of Facebook users to this day.  In April 2010 there were close to 15 million users on Facebook and one year later the numbers had nearly doubled to 27,711,503 users.  As of March 2011, there were 1,150,292 active users on the micro-blogging site Twitter that generated 22,750,000 tweets.  Twitter user Hani Morsi from Egypt tweeted “Social media has created a sort of Alternate Space for receiving a dormant public consciousness, into a sentient, dynamic social discourse” in 2011.

Internet traffic within Egypt dropped drastically on January 27^th 2011 due to authorities restricting access by shutting down the countries official Domain Name System in order to prevent the mobilization of anti-government protesters.  However, on February 2^nd after President Barak Obama stated that the Internet ban should come to an end, connectivity had been re-established by the four main Egyptian service providers.

The Internet and social media has allowed for people all over the world to come together for causes, like the Arab Spring to create change.  During the presentation, I was continuously reminded of other social movements that took place and were highly public due to the publicity received on social networking sites.  Two that came to mind were the Occupy Movement, and KONY 2012.  Both of these movements, although not political, revolved largely around social networking sites.  For example almost all of the publicity gained by the KONY 2012 movement were gained through Twitter and Facebook.  The Invisible Children organization which created the KONY 2012 movement asked celebrities like Rihanna to tweet about the subject creating awareness.   This created a great deal of publicity on a global scale.  Allowing the public to be emotionally moved by what they know and band together to create awareness can lead to change.  Regardless of the controversy surrounding the KONY 2012 movement, it shows great similarities to the Arab Spring.  I believe that this recent use of the Internet and social networking sites will continue to create change in the future.

– Alyssa Gauk