It’s possible that Julian Assange is a rapist, or at least a guy with a dubious history of respecting his sexual partners’ wishes. That would not make Wikileaks as an organization any less worthwhile, or less significant. And the outrage so loudly trumpeted by some of the worst of the Media Villagers — people like Marc Thiessen and David Brooks — only makes it more likely that Wikileaks is doing an important job, and that Assange deserves some credit. Last week, when Assange’s arrest was still “immanent”, David Samuels at the Atlantic online published a piece on “The Shameful Attacks on Julian Assange” which deserves wider dissemination:
… Assange may or may not be grandiose, paranoid and delusional – terms that might be fairly applied at one time or another to most prominent investigative reporters of my acquaintance. But the fact that so many prominent old school journalists are attacking him with such unbridled force is a symptom of the failure of traditional reporting methods to penetrate a culture of official secrecy that has grown by leaps and bounds since 9/11, and threatens the functioning of a free press as a cornerstone of democracy.
__
The true importance of Wikileaks — and the key to understanding the motivations and behavior of its founder — lies not in the contents of the latest document dump but in the technology that made it possible, which has already shown itself to be a potent weapon to undermine official lies and defend human rights. Since 1997, Assange has devoted a great deal of his time to inventing encryption systems that make it possible for human rights workers and others to protect and upload sensitive data. The importance of Assange’s efforts to human rights workers in the field were recognized last year by Amnesty International, which gave him its Media Award for the Wikileaks investigation The Cry of Blood – Extra Judicial Killings and Disappearances, which documented the killing and disappearance of 500 young men in Kenya by the police, with the apparent connivance of the country’s political leadership.
__
Yet the difficulties of documenting official murder in Kenya pale next to the task of penetrating the secret world that threatens to swallow up informed public discourse in this country about America’s wars. The 250,000 cables that Wikileaks published this month represent only a drop in the bucket that holds the estimated 16 million documents that are classified top secret by the federal government every year…
__
It is a fact of the current media landscape that the chilling effect of threatened legal action routinely stops reporters and editors from pursuing stories that might serve the public interest – and anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or lying. Every honest reporter and editor in America knows that the fact that most news organizations are broke, combined with the increasing threat of aggressive legal action by deep-pocketed entities, private and public, has made it much harder for good reporters to do their jobs, and ripped a hole in the delicate fabric that holds our democracy together.
__
The idea that Wikileaks is a threat to the traditional practice of reporting misses the point of what Assange and his co-workers have put together – a powerful tool that can help reporters circumvent the legal barriers that are making it hard for them to do their job. Even as he criticizes the evident failures of the mainstream press, Assange insists that Wikileaks should facilitate traditional reporting and analysis. “We’re the step before the first person (investigates),” he explained, when accepting Amnesty International’s award for exposing police killings in Kenya. “Then someone who is familiar with that material needs to step forward to investigate it and put it in political context. Once that is done, then it becomes of public interest.”
The issue, of course, is that among the DC media aristocrats, “the traditional practice of reporting” has been reduced to “dutiful stenography of this news cycle’s talking points”. And the battle between those media professionals who consider themselves courtiers and those who prefer the role of gadfly hasn’t changed much since the original Gilded Age, when Finley Peter Dunne said that it was the job of reporters “to afflict the comfortable, and comfort the afflicted.”
catclub
“Yet the difficulties of documenting official murder in Kenya pale next to the task of penetrating the secret world that threatens to swallow up informed public discourse in this country about America’s wars.”
There are no difficulties at all in reporting much of what the US military does abroad. Al Jazeera does a pretty god job reporting on same.
And Americans do a pretty good job of sticking their fingers in their ears and saying lalalalala.
joe from Lowell
Why are Assange’s legal troubles, and not the content of the cables, the lead story to come out of this episode? That sure wasn’t the case with the Pentagon Papers.
Are the contents of the cables just not scandalous enough? Because I find the things I’ve found pretty damn interesting.
Maybe they’re just not negative enough.
gocart mozart
Today, Daniel Ellsburg would be vilified by the media.
beltane
The LA Times says Assange may be extradited to the US http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-assange-legal-20101208,0,2435271.story
Delia
@joe from Lowell:
Here’s the right piece for you.
Dear Interpol:
As a longtime feminist activist, I have been overjoyed to discover your new commitment to engaging in global manhunts to arrest and prosecute men who behave like narcissistic jerks to women they are dating.
Linda Featheringill
It probably would be better for Assange if he weren’t brought into the US.
And actually, it would be better for the US if he weren’t. It would be better if we didn’t make a complete travesty out of freedom of the press.
beltane
@Linda Featheringill: Maybe it would be better if the travesty became obvious to all.
Martin
“You’re either with us, or you’re with WikiLeaks”
At least the WaPo isn’t giving up on peak wingnut without a fight.
joe from Lowell
Delia,
The right piece for me would me one in which the policies, actions, and information revealed by the cables – remember those? – were analyzed and discussed.
I’m supposed to care more about this guy and his legal troubles, than about what this released information tells me about my government, why, exactly?
Mike G
@joe from Lowell:
Because it’s easier and less controversial for the celebrity-driven corporate PR droolers to make a story out of a ‘personality’ than the soooo booooring wonk work of actually investigating the cables.
And it’s easier for careerist moral cowards to dismiss anything embarrassing in the cables because “Assange’s a rapist. USA! USA!”. It’s the well-trodden “Michael Moore is fat” school of misdirection.
Jim, Once
Where’s asiangirlmn (?) with her rusty chainsaw? ‘Cause I really need that now. Jesus Crippled Christ, I can’t believe all the hyperventilating about and abuse of Assange going on in this country right now. He’s doing what every journalist worth his paper’s ink should have been doing for the last eight years. What joe from lowell says is exactly it – why is Assange the story, and not the content of the cables. God. I’m just reduced to sputtering obscenities on this one.
Corner Stone
What does Moving On Up to the East Side got to do with WL?
suzanne
I’m just so utterly not surprised in the slightest that no one gives a fuck about prosecuting rapists in order to attempt to rid the world of, you know, rape.
Let me know when the powers that be get the memo that I am, in fact, a person.
Linda Featheringill
@beltane:
Maybe. Or it might just make sucking-up-to-The-Man that passes for journalism even worse.
joe from Lowell
@Mike G:
That’s all well and good, Mike G., but take a look at this blog. Take a look at most of your favorite blogs. What do you see about Wikileaks?
It would be very pretty to think that this failure of journalistic priorities was only the fault of the media and the right-wingers, but it ain’t.
beltane
@joe from Lowell: Thank you. I really don’t care if Julian Assange is a combination of Jack the Ripper and Attila the Hun. He is only the messenger, not the message. We should not let ourselves be distracted by the messengers private life and/or legal troubles.
Jim, Once
Oh … and this too:@joe from Lowell:
Thanks, Joe. Your statements say it all.
jwb
@Linda Featheringill: It would be a strategic mistake of the worst kind to bring him here and the thinking side of the government appears to know this. The question is whether the thinking side can keep the stupid side at bay.
jwb
@joe from Lowell: When did this blog claim to be doing journalism?
joe from Lowell
Bringing him here would be pointless. The sex crimes he’s accused of committing didn’t take place in this jurisdiction, and we don’t have an Official Secrets Act, so he couldn’t be prosecuted for the leaks. In this country, the government is responsible for keeping its own secrets. It was illegal for Manning to leak all this stuff, and he’s going to be in the clink for a long time, but that’s because he was an agent of the state violating security regulations that applied to him as an agent of the state.
Linda Featheringill
@suzanne:
I think that what some people are saying is that the timing of these accusations is awfully “coincidental,” especially since Sweden gave him permission to leave the country. If they really thought he was guilty of forcible rape, why would they let him go? They could have kept him in the country while the investigation was going on. And if they don’t think that he is guilty, why send Interpol after him?
Not to mention, why is the UK not letting him see his lawyers?
joe from Lowell
@jwb:
There’s more to journalism than reporting, rounding up facts and publishing them. News commentary is journalism, too, and this blog has been doing that for a long time.
suzanne
@joe from Lowell: I concur with you for the most part. I don’t give a fuck about Assange in the particular.
But investigating and prosecuting alleged sexual violence is, at least to my mind, a vital role of a society in which women enjoy the same freedoms and opportunities as men. And no one seemed to give a fuck about that—until Assange pissed off people that ***really*** mattered.
Pardon me while I vomit.
joe from Lowell
@suzanne:
I care a little bit about him.
If somebody is getting railroaded because he pissed off the government, that’s a legitimate story.
If somebody who published a great deal of important secret, information actually is a sexual criminal, that’s a legitimate story.
I even think the damage these cables did to our reputation is a legitimate story, and the complaining and threats from our right-leaning, hawkish politicians are a legitimate story, too.
But they all pale in significance compared to the actual stories found in the contents of those cables, and the coverage of this episode and its particulars is way out of whack.
Yutsano
@suzanne: Sweden has rather progressive rape and sexual assault laws. So it’s possible for Assagne to engage in behavior that would seem boorish in Australia that is illegal there. Plus this whole chauvinistic tut-tutting over Sweden’s “broken condom rape” law is rather annoying to me. The Swedes have every right to decide what is legal and what is not in their own country.
Sly
You’re missing a step. The traditional practice of reporting has been to focus on drama and how wonderful and awful it is at the same time (“Boy, I sure do hate all this fighting… but I love this new flatscreen!”). The new feature of journalism is that drama has been boiled down to talking points. So analysis beyond talking points has become irrelevant.
@Mike G:
Its easier (as in cheaper), but controversy is their bread and butter. They like controversy. They like “what do YOU think” stories because they don’t have to actually think of anything themselves (as a corollary, that’s one of the secret reasons why we teachers like asking “what do YOU think” questions to our students… it lets us avoid boring lectures and activities that take work to make non-boring).
What we’ve likely been seeing is the decline of specialist journalism. Outlets don’t want to keep funneling money into hiring people who are experts in their fields (economics, law, education, political science, etc). Its far cheaper to hire a blowhard or an airhead to do all that work, even if they do it badly. Or they can outsource it to a recurring “guest” for less money.
Linda Featheringill
@suzanne:
I think I may understand. You are upset that his being accused of hurting a woman wasn’t reason enough to keep him in country but being accused to embarrassing a government or a bank is reason enough to send Interpol after him.
Yes?
If this is your point, you are quite correct. Sweden and all the rest of the powers-that-be have their priorities backwards.
suzanne
@Linda Featheringill:
Oh, it absolutely is. That’s my point: they’re only interested in investigating/prosecuting alleged rape as a pretext for making him “go away” without having to look like *real* bad guys. In a society in which women were truly valued, this would have been dealt with long ago, and not only as a convenient excuse, but as a worthy end in and of itself.
Jim, Once
@suzanne:
I doubt there’s a person here who would disagree with this … but as Linda F has gently pointed out, the timing of these charges just seems a little … off. And look at how many times these kinds of charges are made when the powers that be (i.e., CIA) are threatened. BTW – I, my sister, my niece and my sisters-in-law are rape victims, so don’t think I don’t know what you’re trying to say.
Dennis SGMM
@brickovensuzanne:
Neither of the complainants has ever alleged that Assage forcibly raped them. Both have stated that the sex was consensual.
beltane
@joe from Lowell: Perhaps there is something in the Patriot Act for which he can be prosecuted. They certainly would not seek to extradite him to the US for the rape charge.
Yutsano
@Jim, Once:
Has anyone seen a timeline or a sequence of how these events relate to each other temporally? It was my understanding the incident and the rape charge happened fairly quickly soon after the release of the first batch.
Linda Featheringill
@Jim, Once:
I’m sorry that you’re a member of the club. It’s a real bitch.
Lolis
@suzanne:
I would say the powers-that-be have heeded your call. I certainly have never heard of an international hunt for an accused and untried rapist before. This is probably why everyone is suspicious. Usually the powers-of-be don’t care about rapists.
Jim, Once
@Linda Featheringill:
Thanks. Yeah, it is. Hope you’re not one of the club. I was able to fight back, and so was my niece – and that’s made a huge difference in our lives. The others, not so much. But you know what? We’re all still living lives that are really OK – it just took us a little longer to get there.
suzanne
@Yutsano:
From a legal standpoint, yes, of course, you’re correct. But morally, I disagree. Rape, as in nonconsentual intercourse, is legal in many countries in the world, and I find that morally repugnant. Supposedly Assange wouldn’t stop the sex act after the first victim withdrew consent. I don’t know the particulars of Sweden’s rape laws, but if this is true, it’s pretty fucking disgusting, regardless of its legality.
@joe from Lowell:
I concur that the particulars of this story are less important than the geopolitical implications of the cables. I do think that the sexism that gave rise to this particular situation is, however, of equal importance.
suzanne
@Dennis SGMM:
From what I’ve read, at least one of the complainants withdrew her consent during the sex act. I could be wrong.
But thanks for the snark. I really and truly appreciate it.
suzanne
@Lolis: I am suspicious, too. I believe 100% that these charges are only being pursued because Assange pissed off important people.
freelancer
@Linda Featheringill:
This, a thousand times this. He addressed it when this shit blew up months ago, as far as I can tell, and then Sweden released him.
And from what I’ve read, it sounds like he’s being charged for rape, when he’s really just a philandering asshole. However, those are hugely conditional assumptions on my part, and the part of the sources that I read. No one here, that I can see is diminishing the severity, the criminality or the moral affront that is the act of rape. If Assange faces charges of rape, and he is proved to be guilty, he’s done. He’s a rapist, and he’s complete scum.
If the facts are as they have been largely in the press (and that’s a big IF), than even crackpot, batshit Naomi Wolf at the koo koo for cocoa puff Huffpo, who was linked above by Delia has a point.
No one here is objecting to suzanne’s rightful disgust, least of all me. I do worry that one thing this episode is doing in its latest twists and turns is that if the rape charges are trumped up, the outrage of moral men and women everywhere that consider themselves to be champions of women and their right to live freely will have been manipulated to shut down the voice of someone trying to speak truth to power.
Yutsano
@suzanne:
My understanding is that, under Swedish law, he committed a crime. What’s really remarkable is he hasn’t said shit about all of this, which honestly shows more about his regard for women than anything to me.
Seebach
Assange is basically proving that international institutions aren’t doing what they actually need to be doing. I can see why he might be willing to martyr himself over this, rapist or no.
Else, why not just pay $750 and be done with the incident?
suzanne
@freelancer:
That’s absolutely true. This whole case depresses the fuck out of me. Oi.
Yutsano
@suzanne:
Seconded.
suzanne
@Yutsano: I’m not sure if it’s respect for women or the desire to save his own skin/reputation that’s motivating him.
Yutsano
@suzanne: My own personal experience with this is that when a guy gets slapped with a rape allegation he tries tooth and nail to get it cleared if he believes or knows he’s innocent. The guilty are most likely to run. That makes me wonder if there’s indeed some fire here.
Just Some Fuckhead
I’m not understanding the relationship between Wikileaks and Court stenography.
suzanne
@Yutsano: I have no way of knowing whether or not he’s guilty, but I know that rape is one of the least likely crimes to be prosecuted here in the U.S., and I would imagine a similar situation in Sweden. That fact and its implications interest me just as much as the information Assange leaked.
catclub
@Lolis:
See my post in the other thread comparing the treatment of Julian Assange and Roman Polanski.
The hypocrisy writes itself.
cyntax
@gocart mozart:
Well, he is coming to Assange’s defense so we may see that vilification yet:
Corner Stone
@Yutsano:
Say what now?
Diomedes
My own personal experience with this is that when a guy gets slapped with a rape allegation he tries tooth and nail to get it cleared if he believes or knows he’s innocent.
Whereas the guilty don’t fight tooth and nail to get it cleared? Whut?
THE
My advice is wait until you see the full case that Sweden has.
I have great confidence in progressive Sweden.
They know their reputation is on the line.
GrammyPat
Last week, Al Giordano at The Field posted an insightful and reasonable take on Assange and his troubles:
Then today, Giordano links to what may be the last interview granted by Assange prior to his arrest:
As usual, Giordano is a worthwhile read.
Mike M
For all the talk about Assange on this blog, there has been precious little discussion about the content of the cables themselves. While commenters on this blog love to disparage the NY Times, the paper has actually done an excellent job of providing context and analysis to the cables, each day focusing on a different area of the world. I have only read some of the analysis from the Guardian, but it appears that they have taken their jobs as journalists seriously as well. In contrast, the events surrounding Assange have turned Balloon Juice into a gossip rag.
Other than being an agent for the distribution of the cables (really emails), what value has WikiLeaks provided? I don’t buy the notion that exposing a government’s confidential or secret information is justification in itself. Did releasing the list of facilities across the world that the US believes vital to its national security interests make the world a safer place? Will it lead to lives saved or more democracy?
It is easy enough for Ellsburg to say that people who object to WikiLeaks just won’t admit they oppose any and all exposure of misguided, secretive foreign policy. That is just rot, a false choice. It is not an all or nothing proposition.
Perhaps if the cables had exposed significant US duplicity or repeated, wanton violations of US or international law — or if WikiLeaks was providing its own careful analysis — then there might be less discussion on these pages of Assange’s sex life.
Dr. Brian Oblivion
Sadly irony choked itself to death as “World Press Freedom Day” was declared to cause heads to spontaneously explode from overload and to celebrate the continued irrelevance of the poodle press.
After a day of not biting any hand that might someday feed it, the poodle press will return to another few decades of slumber, safe in the knowledge that the whole Wikileaks incident spared it any further embarassment.
Good dog.
Although it is unlikely that Assange himself will appear for a live event featuring old sparky back from retirement, Joe Lieberman may have time to personally urinate on the spirit of the Constitution for reasons not really understood.
The Magical Unity Pony meanwhile can remain above the fray. Because transparency is hard work.
The shark has jumped America.
Dr. Brian Oblivion
Thanks for the tax cuts Magical Unity Pony, I knew you had suckers like me covered all along.
Next time, my consent belongs to [This space left blank].
I feel a bit like John Cole might have after he finally gave up on the corpse that used to be his party, except there’s no where for me to go. There’s not even a false choice to default to.
Swirling in the bowl. RIP EE.
bjacques
@Catclub48: I did a quick check to see whether Assange, like Polanski might rate the support of Bernard-Henry Lévy, but alas the superstar French philosopher with the great hair is probably still living down the embarrassment of denouncing Immanuel Kant with the help of the non-existent philosophy of Botulisme.
What’s ironic is that if Assange goes away for rape, the continuing leaky discharge will draw attention away from him, as he obviously can’t release documents from behind bars. Wikileaks is a collective.
Finally, here’s a good (though long) post that blows a big hole through at least one diplomat’s “secret cables area force for good” argument. As if Daniel Ellsberg’s “Pentagon Papers” (or hell, even publication of the Zimmerman Note) didn’t do that already.
joe from Lowell
@Mike M:
Indeed. There don’t seem to be any high crimes exposed in these cables.