Information Leaks versus Julian Assange

[Yossarian]

In discussions about WikiLeaks both on this board and more generally, I have noticed a tendency to conflate that organisation and its aims solely with its founder, Julian Assange. In an article printed in the Sydney Morning Herald this morning, columnist Richard Ackland attempts to disentangle the business of information disclosure from Assange himself.

Hot air blows far and wide, and Assange is far from blameless

As Ackland rightly points out, information leaking itself is an old trick:

The confected outcry over the release of the US embassy cables shows an alarming degree of stupefaction and hypocrisy by those steering the ship of state...

Governments conspire to leak secrets on a regular basis, if it suits them. Jack Goldsmith, a former US assistant attorney-general, now at Harvard Law School, the other day queried why there had not been a witch-hunt into who disclosed national security information to the journalist Bob Woodward for his book Obama's Wars. This was, he said, ''opportunistic top-level leaking reflected in Woodward's book''.

The point is that vast troves of information are over-classified by the executive arm. The ''Top secret'' stamp is flung on documents that more properly should just be labelled ''Embarrassing''...

So the fundamental intent of WikiLeaks is not exactly novel. What is new is the multilateral nature of this disclosure - everybody is the target. However, in regards to the implications of this information, Ackland writes that some of the fallout may in fact be attributable to Assange's narcissistic character:

Unfortunately, overblown rhetorical flourishes are not the exclusive preserve of politicians. Assange has done himself no favours by suggesting that Julia Gillard has defamed him or that Hillary Clinton should resign if it is shown that she ordered her diplomats to spy on UN officials. He is quite fond of his own hype. He described the earlier Iraq documents as ''the most comprehensive and detailed account of any war ever to have entered the public record''.

Those familiar with the Pentagon Papers say that this is nonsense. What Daniel Ellsberg achieved was far more significant. Anyone who saw the SBS Dateline interview with Assange might forgivably get the impression that he he has a tendency to narcissistic overreach.

The upshot of this for me is that Assange has made himself partly to blame for the resultant media storm and public outcry by crowing so loudly about WikiLeaks' activities. Furthermore, it has encouraged people to think about WikiLeaks, and information leaking generally, solely with reference to Assange himself. This, I believe, is not a good thing.

In a society where government is expected to be accountable to the citizenry, the disclosure of information related to government activities is, prima facie at least, something to be encouraged. However, perhaps people such as Julian Assange are hindering the effective and reasonable realisation of this process.