How is the British media coping with Wikileaks? As a broadcaster, journalist and trainer it's a good question to ask at the end of another fascinating week.
It's been difficult to remember at times that Wikileaks is not the same as Julian Assange. And as John Naughton says, the real story here is the former, not the latter.
But for journalism to have an impact the story must be relevant and accessible. The best way to do that is to humanise it. Assange has therefore become the face of Wikileaks.
[I did a Google image search on 'wikileaks' this morning and half the images on page one are of Assange. Most of the others are rather dull screengrabs. Plus, bizarrely, one photo of Sarah Palin.]
This has been partly deliberate on the part of Assange and his co-workers. He has said it's better to be the organisation's front man than have journalists constantly speculating on who's behind it.
He's also deliberately blurred two distinct issues this week, calling Sweden "a cipher" for the US. Full marks to Will Heaven in the Telegraph for pointing out the difference. [For an outline of the Swedish charges, see the Daily Mail.]
So Assange has done little to dissuade anyone of the view that he and Wikileaks are the same thing. This no doubt benefits Wikileaks in the short term. With all the attention on one man, others can get on with their work. [For more on Assange promoting the Wikileaks agenda, read City University's George Brock.]
But does that help us understand what's going on?
Focusing on one man - who happens to look distinctive and have a foreign sounding name - no doubt helps sell papers and get viewers. But parallels with a Bond villain, and headlines about a 'fugitive', don't get to the bigger story about Wikileaks.
Any digital native will point out that Wikileaks is more leak than wiki, but its actions have certainly encouraged new ways for people to express mistrust of governments, and anger when commercial operations are leant on.
Hacktivists - a word I learnt this week - appear to come straight out of a Stieg Larsson thriller, adding to the intrigue around Wikileaks, and bringing DDoS to the news pages.
I suspect DDoS attacks on Visa or Mastercard are the digital equivalent of chaining yourself to the railings: a nuisance to the target institution, but probably more damaging to reputation than to daily operations.
That's not to belittle the implications. Some admirable causes down the ages have successfully included railings.
But Wikileaks is more an idea - even a philosophy - than an organisation. Very hard to pin down, and almost impossible to strangle. Equally hard to frame in a news story, not least as there are implications for journalism itself.
You simply have to engage with it. And we've hardly started down that road.
Comments