WikiLeaks defines “principled leaking” as a necessary element to fight corporate, individual, and government corruption. But is it legal?
WikiLeaks is a popular non-profit international organization that publishes news leaks based on their political, historical, and ethical significance. On the WikiLeaks website, it is stated that their work is based on Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It defines the human rights of expression and receiving information without limits as civil rights. This is the primary reason WikiLeaks is considered legal. The site further defines “principled leaking” as a necessary element to fight corporate, individual, and government corruption.
US policymakers have been both supportive and critical of the content and actions of WikiLeaks. The platform has also become a controversial and dividing issue among civil rights organizations. Many organizations agree on the undeniable value that the platform has had by signifying violations of civil liberties and human rights. While the value of leaked information cannot be denied, the tactics, strategies, and mistakes of WikiLeaks have been criticized time and again.
Is Wikileaks Bad?
Whether or not WikiLeaks is bad is a matter of trust and perspective. Overall, the platform is reliable. They put very powerful information on the web. Governments and politicians typically don’t like them and consider them bad, perhaps because they are afraid of the truth. The information on WikiLeaks is factual and the content posted there is unedited. Their mission is to make people aware of the truth so they are empowered to change. The platform is pushing for transparency in government and they are very reliable in that respect.
Why Are There No WikiLeaks on Trump?
According to the founder Julian Assange, there are no WikiLeaks on Donald Trump because there is simply a lack of good enough information on him. The information they have is not tactical and practical enough to post.
Donald Trump: ‘I know nothing about WikiLeaks’
According to Assange, they cannot publish what they don’t have. To date, WikiLeaks has not received any reliable information on Trump or his campaign that fulfils their editorial criteria. The reason is clearly posted on WikiLeaks’ website. Some consider the lack of WikiLeaks content on Trump as an indication that the platform supports him. However, that does not appear to be the case as Assange has denied supporting him in one of his statements.
Are There Any WikiLeaks Alternatives?
Yes, there are several reliable WikiLeaks alternatives available. They include (but not limited to) the following:
The Leak is a news site specifically focused on leaks. Unlike the other alternatives and WikiLeaks it reports rather than leaks. It also includes more than political news, but covers tech, gaming, film and music news. The site is new but is quickly becoming an important voice in the news landscape. As the website states, “The Leak strives to be the leading platform for whistleblowers and insiders”.
GlobaLeaks has a very large network of “nodes’ ‘ that exchange information between them. This makes the original source of information or leak difficult, if not impossible, to track. Some compare GlobaLeaks to BitTorrent for leaked information and documents because of this.
BalkanLeaks is similar to WikiLeaks but their primary focus is on exposing political corruption and organized crime. The leaked or confidential information on the site is reliable as the platform only publishes documents after thoroughly checking and reviewing them. It is, however, outdated as of 2022.
Cryptome was founded in 1996 and their website still features the same old design. The platform is a great WikiLeaks alternative. It has a focus on freedom of speech and exposing spying method techniques that world’s corporations and governments use. It doesn’t seem to be active any longer.
The mission of WikiSpooks is to publish articles and documents on the political frontier. The platform is widely used by average joe whistleblowers and it provides collaborative modification of its content and structure similar to Wikipedia.