I don’t think I am alone in seeing Wikileaks’ strategy of bringing in major media outlets to vet and help produce massive caches of documents as being smart strategy. It guarantees maximum publicity. It takes a great deal of heat of Wikileaks as the prime malefactor in the eyes of the national security state. It also impresses on the leaks the imprimatur of the mass media, lending it immediate gravitas:
Overton said that his group is working on the new cache of documents with major television networks and print-media outlets in several countries, including the United States, to produce documentaries and stories based on them. The collaboration is similar to what was done in July when WikiLeaks worked with three news outlets ”” The New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel ”” to simultaneously publish stories on the Afghan War logs.
It also appears that Wikileaks, as opposed to the military and national security state is a learning organization, taking substantive criticism into consideration:
WikiLeaks, which published unredacted raw documents on its website at the same time the news outlets published their stories, was criticized by the Defense Department and others for potentially disclosing identifying information that could put the lives of informants and their families in danger. There has been no evidence to date, however, that anyone has suffered actual harm due to the documents.
”œWe are hugely aware that this is an issue, and we’re taking it very seriously,” Overton said, noting that his organization would not be publishing raw documents but would instead be mining them for information for stories.
I still believe that having a sole spokesman strategy is bad for Wikileaks. But on the whole I’m glad to see them doing what they do.