STAFF EDIT: All systems are ‘no’

Despite a precedent for information sharing that was set with the emergence of superior technology, Wikileaks still galvanized information transparency and questioned our perception of privacy. These leaks further questioned the price we place on information, and offered to cater to a growing call for transparency in governmental operations. Members of the general public revelled in the novelty of accessing hundreds of covert documents on a public domain. Originally hailed as a grassroots operation in search of illuminating truths, its instigator Julian Assange fashioned himself as dangling keys to a flood of information that would impact modern security.

Dividing opinion and stirring controversy for his activity both pertinent to and away from Wikileaks, Assange dared to push informational boundaries. However, this apparent beacon of righteous information sharing tumbled in spectacular fashion amidst financial difficulty and administrative friction, notably when volunteers walked out in the summer of 2010. These barriers proved challenging: Wikileaks was taken off the Internet and has remained dormant for approximately a year.

In a fresh wave of fervor, Assange has promised a “dramatic month” in which a new system for submitting information will be unveiled in December. Assange and his team are eager to unveil a new system, which will offer protection to its sources and perpetuate its goal of information for all. With regard to financial woes, he has also proclaimed Wikileaks will be seeking millions of dollars in donations to maintain the website’s functionality. Where this money will emerge from, and more importantly who will supply these funds will play a pivotal role in dictating what information is shared. Could this emergence into a more commercial business plan be detrimental to the heart of the Wikileaks’s ethos?

A niche for free exchange of information definitely exists, but if Wikileaks is the most suitable solution remains to be seen. In the interest of national security and privacy in an increasingly dangerous world, one must be wary of getting entangled in a web of secrets and potential lies. In such a heated political environment, Assange may appear to be trustworthy in comparison to an average politician. Nevertheless, questions of ethics and morality arise with regard to whistle blowing activity, and the role this form of citizen journalism will play in the near future is yet to be defined.