[seleniumBubbles]

It's good to see EFF taking a principled stance on Assange. Too many organizations have chosen to throw WikiLeaks under the bus after their 2016 election leak harmed the "wrong" American political team.

It's a shame that the American political machine is so good at character assassination (of both Assange and WikiLeaks), despite the sorely-needed transparency they've offered to many modern democracies. The world needs more organizations like WikiLeaks, not fewer.

[BonesJustice]

I very much approve of the 'idea' of WikiLeaks. I am not particularly fond of WikiLeaks as an organization. I don't like the way they hold on to material until they think it will make the biggest impact. It makes me wonder how much they've held on to for other reasons, e.g., because it might harm someone they support. To me, WikiLeaks withholding information for political reasons is no better than the originator of the information keeping it secret for political reasons.

I politely called them out on this once, in a comment on one of their early Facebook posts. The comment was deleted quickly. Apparently they are not fans of criticism either.

In spite of my misgivings, and my general disdain for Assange as an individual, I too am glad to see the EFF taking a principled stance.

[duxup]

I think a lot of people, including the media really liked the idea of WikiLeaks, me included.... until it became clear that whatever WikiLeaks was, it wasn't the the open and nobody gets a pass kind of leak site folks wanted it to be.

But yeah whatever the situation here the law should be applied evenly. We'll see.

[ryanlol]

>It makes me wonder how much they've held on to for other reasons, e.g., because it might harm someone they support.

Has anyone ever tried to call them out on this by releasing a leak that wikileaks refused to publish?

I don’t remember ever hearing such a claim.

[chris11]

This has definitely happened. Wikileaks refused to release info on Russia during the 2016 election. Wikileaks may have started out with good intentions, but it seems to be making some explicitly political actions.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/world/europe/russian-docu...

[whamlastxmas]

There's plenty of legitimate reasons to not release information. Verifying the informations accuracy, that it hasn't been tampered with, and the source is credible is a really high bar to meet. Just because someone dumps data doesn't mean WikiLeaks is going to publish it

[senectus1]

So selectively Open Democracy but not Open Truth?

[ryanlol]

Was that info any good? Haven’t really seen many stories about it.

[duxup]

I don't know if anyone tried, but if you followed early tweets they talked a lot about having something that was damning and then ... never mentioned it again.

Just taking them at their word you have to wonder what was up.

[0_gravitas]

I'm still personally shocked that Snowden is so widely vilified by my fellow citizens. The guys exposes massive violations of right-to-privacy and the people that he informed call him a traitor.

[colejohnson66]

I’ve heard people say that he released it and fled to Russia. As in, he released it for Russia. The news and people’s biases twisted the story to fit their worldview

[kadendogthing]

>Too many organizations have chosen to throw WikiLeaks under the bus after their 2016 election leak harmed the "wrong" American political team.

I think it was about the fact that he selectively decided what to release in order to harm his own opponents. Wasn't very principled of him, and he effectively did the same thing he pretends to be fighting against.

[zwieback]

Agree on the EFF part but what did the "political machine" do in this case? I thought it was more of the media reporting making Assange look like the dick he actually is. Would be nice to have Wikileaks without him.

[jerkstate]

Sooo.. you've hung out with Assange? edit: My point is, the fact that you feel comfortable calling him actually a dick despite only knowing him through media portrayal means that the character assassination has worked.

[mikeyouse]

Just about everyone who has ever worked with him has come to the same conclusion, including many people who have entirely overlapping ideologies. See Emma Best's Twitter account for a prime example.

[zwieback]

Right, good point. Almost everyone will only know Assange through media portrayal so if you run something like Wikileaks, which relies on reputation to remain relevant, it's important to have a leader that knows how stay out of the spotlight. It's difficult in such a polarized arena.

[duxup]

I think it was more news organizations rightfully view WikiLeaks less as a journalistic org and one that wants to craft their leaks to their liking in order to achieve outcomes. Amusingly, that's sort of what you seem to accuse the other news organizations of....

After that started to become clear news sites were less likely to simply cite Wikileaks copy and paste style as they had been in the past. I think that was a responsible choice.