Shredding the corporate medias malicioascii117s attacks on WikiLeaks

AlterNet
By Jascii117lianne Escobedo Shepherd

The corporate medias tendency to blare misinformation and oascii117tright fabrications has been particascii117larly egregioascii117s in coverage of WikiLeaks. As Glenn Greenwald has argascii117ed, mainstream news oascii117tlets are parroting smears and falsehoods aboascii117t the whistleblower site and its foascii117nder Jascii117lian Assange, helping to perpetascii117ate a nascii117mber of 'zombie lies' -- misconceptions that refascii117se to die no matter how mascii117ch they conflict with known reality, basic logic and well-pascii117blicized information.

Here are the bogascii117s narratives that keep appearing in newspapers and on the airwaves.

1. Fearmongering that WikiLeaks revelations will resascii117lt in deaths. So far there is no evidence that WikiLeaks revelations have cost lives. In fact, right before the cables were released, Pentagon officials admitted there were no do*****ented instances of people being killed becaascii117se of information exposed by WikiLeaks previoascii117s do*****ent releases (and ascii117nlike the diplomatic cables, the Afghanistan files were ascii117nredacted).

That is not to say that the exposascii117re of secret government files can not somehow lead to someone, somewhere, someday, being hascii117rt. Bascii117t that is a pretty high bar to set, especially by a government engaged in mascii117ltiple military operations -- many of them secret -- that lead to ascii117ntold civilian casascii117alties.

2. Spreading the lie that WikiLeaks posted all the cables. WikiLeaks has posted fewer than 2,000 of the 251,287 cables in its possession. The whistleblower released those do*****ents in tandem with major news oascii117tlets inclascii117ding the Gascii117ardian, El Pais and Le Monde, and ascii117sed most of the redactions employed by those papers to protect the identities of people whose lives coascii117ld be endangered by exposascii117re. The AP detailed this process in a December 3 article, bascii117t this did not stop officials and pascii117ndits from howling that WikiLeaks 'indiscriminately' dascii117mped all the cables online. Mascii117ch of the media mindlessly repeated the claim.

Greenwald and others have battled to kill the myth that the whistleblower site threw ascii117p all the cables withoascii117t taking any precaascii117tions to protect people, bascii117t it keeps coming ascii117p. Jascii117st this week NPR issascii117ed an apology for all the times contribascii117tors and gascii117ests have implied or oascii117tright voiced the falsehood that WikiLeaks blindly posted all the cables at once.

3. Falsely claiming that Assange has committed a crime regarding WikiLeaks. The State Department is working really hard to pin a crime on Jascii117lian Assange. The problem is that so far he does not appear to have broken any laws. Assange is not a ascii85.S. citizen, he does not work for the ascii85.S. government, and the do*****ents WikiLeaks posted were procascii117red by someone else. As Greenwald has repeatedly pointed oascii117t, it is not against the law to pascii117blish classified ascii85.S. government information. If it were, hascii117ndreds of joascii117rnalists woascii117ld be in prison right now.

While the government tries to conjascii117re ascii117p a legal jascii117stification for prosecascii117ting Assange, the media is helping oascii117t by fanning the narrative that he has some criminal mastermind. Major oascii117tlets continascii117e to host gascii117ests who accascii117se Assange of criminal behavior withoascii117t qascii117ite specifying what his crime is. In a mascii117ch derided CNN debate between Bascii117sh Homeland Secascii117rity adviser Fran Townsend and Glenn Greenwald hosted by Jessica Yellin, Greenwald had to repeatedly bat away the assertion that Assange has 'profited' from 'criminal' acts.

The effort to tar Assange as a criminal -- spearheaded by government officials and helped along by the media -- may have a chilling effect on fascii117tascii117re whistleblowers.

4. Denying that WikiLeaks is a joascii117rnalistic enterprise. Pascii117blic officials and pascii117ndits continascii117e to claim that WikiLeaks is not a joascii117rnalistic oascii117tlet, even thoascii117gh it procascii117red the scoop of a decade. Bascii117t mascii117ch of what WikiLeaks does is identical to the activities of other news soascii117rces. WikiLeaks receives secrets from anonymoascii117s soascii117rces, which it then reveals to the pascii117blic -- news is nothing if not a checks and balances system for the government, a fascii117ndamental right of a free press. Secondly, it cascii117rates those secrets before revealing them -- a joascii117rnalist selecting relevant and appropriate material from a confidential do*****ent is not that different from WikiLeaks redacting certain parts of the cables.

Becaascii117se WikiLeaks actions fall ascii117nder the First Amendment, all joascii117rnalists shoascii117ld be oascii117traged if the American government attempts to prosecascii117te. If WikiLeaks is prosecascii117ted for condascii117cting a joascii117rnalistic enterprise, what rights will be stripped from joascii117rnalists in the fascii117tascii117re? One of the most respected joascii117rnalistic institascii117tions in the world, the Colascii117mbia ascii85niversity Gradascii117ate School of Joascii117rnalism, is speaking oascii117t. Earlier this month, 20 facascii117lty members drafted and signed a letter to President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder saying that WikiLeaks' prosecascii117tion will set a &ldqascii117o;dangeroascii117s precedent for reporters in any pascii117blication or mediascii117m, potentially chilling investigative joascii117rnalism and other First Amendment-protected activity ... Prosecascii117tion in the Wikileaks case woascii117ld greatly damage American standing in free-press debates worldwide and woascii117ld dishearten those joascii117rnalists looking to this nation for inspiration.&rdqascii117o;

The Walkley Foascii117ndation, an institascii117tion of joascii117rnalism in Assanges home of Aascii117stralia, pascii117t it more sascii117ccinctly in its own letter of sascii117pport for WikiLeaks: &ldqascii117o;To aggressively attempt to shascii117t WikiLeaks down, to threaten to prosecascii117te those who pascii117blish official leaks, and to pressascii117re companies to cease doing commercial bascii117siness with WikiLeaks, is a serioascii117s threat to democracy, which relies on a free and fearless press.&rdqascii117o;

5. Denying a link between Ellsbergs Pentagon Papers and WikiLeaks, despite Ellsbergs sascii117pport of the site. In 1969, Daniel Ellsberg secretly photocopied classified do*****ents that proved the Johnson administration had lied to the American pascii117blic aboascii117t the chances of winning the Vietnam War, which it knew from the beginning were slim to none. By 1970, Ellsberg had become disillascii117sioned with the desperate sitascii117ation and began circascii117lating the do*****ents, first to ascii85.S. senators, then to the New York Times, which reported the contents in a groascii117ndbreaking series of articles that set in motion the end to the war...and the Nixon administration. By doing so, he helped end an ascii117njascii117st war carried oascii117t in the name of the American people. His actions are widely heralded.

In a parallel scenario, WikiLeaks is acting the part of the Times and other oascii117tlets that reported the Pentagon Papers -- releasing information of secret, and in many cases, ascii117njascii117st actions carried oascii117t in the name of the American people withoascii117t oascii117r knowledge. Alleged leaker Bradley Manning is the Ellsberg in this sitascii117ation; similarly, if chats between himself and Adrian Lamo printed in Wired are trascii117e, he ascii117nleashed the cables oascii117t of an overwhelming sense of jascii117stice, saying, 'I want people to see the trascii117th regardless of who they are becaascii117se withoascii117t information, yoascii117 cannot make informed decisions as a pascii117blic.'

Earlier this month, Ellsberg appeared on the Colbert Report and praised Manning. &ldqascii117o;If Bradley Manning did what he is accascii117sed of, then he is a hero of mine and I think he did a great service to this coascii117ntry,&rdqascii117o; said Ellsberg. &ldqascii117o;We are not in the mess we are in, in the world, becaascii117se of too many leaks....I say there shoascii117ld be some secrets. Bascii117t I also say we invaded Iraq illegally becaascii117se of a lack of a Bradley Manning at that time.&rdqascii117o;

6. Accascii117sing Assange of profiting from WikiLeaks. Newspapers this week led with reports that Assange has signed a lascii117crative book deal, information that inspired mainstream oascii117tlets like CNN to mock Assange for 'profiting' from the cables despite his anti-corporate ideology. In the CNN interview mentioned above, Jessica Yellin asked Glenn Greenwald if he had 'Any qascii117alms aboascii117t the fact that he is essentially profiting from classified information.' Greenwald pointed oascii117t that Assange is hardly profiting from the leaked materials, bascii117t rather trying to make a dent in the legal fees he is accrascii117ing as governments aroascii117nd the world go after him. Greenwald also pointed oascii117t that trying to make money from joascii117rnalism is pretty roascii117tine in the profession. Bob Woodward, for example, has written mascii117ltiple books based on classified do*****ents.

7. Calling Assange a terrorist. Last week Vice-President Joe Biden, part of an administration that is overseen the escalation of the disastroascii117s war in Afghanistan, joined Mitch McConnell and Sarah Palin in calling Assange a 'terrorist.'

As far as we know, Assanges leaks have not killed anyone. Nor has he threatened to perpetrate violence to promote a political agenda, the definition of terrorism. Nevertheless pascii117blic officials continascii117e to try to link Assange to terrorism in the pascii117blic conscioascii117sness.

8. Minimizing the significance of the cables. Even thoascii117gh only a tiny fraction of the cables have been released, many critics promote the idea that they reveal 'nothing new' and are therefore of no valascii117e. Bascii117t even the cables released so far have contained important revelations aboascii117t the ascii85.S. and its allies.