• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    moral righteousness is irrelevant to the fact that he is being persecuted for journalism.

    I think the question is, when does the line between journalist and espionage intersect?

    Does his state sponsored participation in election interference count as journalism? Did his misinformation campaign during the Catalan independence movement count as journalism? How about the attempt to bribe the Trump administration for the ambassador seat to Australia?

    There’s a reason every serious journalist that Assange utilized to launch wikileaks has not only abandoned the project, but has accused Assange of financial fraud, miss handling information, and endangering their sources.

    I don’t think Julian Assange is a journalist, I think he just likes being famous, and at one point journalism was a way to do that. I don’t think he should be in jail for the rest of his life, but I also don’t think he deserves Carte Blanche for everything he’s done based on his prior “journalistic integrity”.

    • queermunist she/her
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      There’s a reason every serious journalist that Assange utilized to launch wikileaks has not only abandoned the project, but has accused Assange of financial fraud, miss handling information, and endangering their sources.

      Yeah, because they’d be hunted down by the US government right alongside Assange.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Most of the early members of wikileaks left before the first leaks pertaining to the US. Wikileaks original focus was to expose authoritarian governments in the Middle East, ex Soviet block, and primarily China’s actions in Tibet. John Young, one of the founders actually left the group after accusing Assange of being a CIA plant after Assange wanted to do a multimillion fund raising drive.

        The largest group to leave was before the 2010 Iraq leak, when the actual journalist at wikileaks warned Assange that the batches had not been properly redacted, and he published them anyway.

        Fear for their source’s safety actually led wikileak’s security team to steal data from wikileaks and keep the data encrypted until Assange agreed to improve opsec. Assange ended up kicking them off the team, and they ended up having to delete the data.

        I would really suggest reading what his early colleagues thought about his work, it really gives a lot of perspective about how poorly wikileaks was actually run, and how shady of a character Assange is.

        Again, I’m not condoning life in prison. I just don’t think he’s the titan of ethics and moral integrity that people make him out to be. And he shouldn’t be immune to prosecution for the unethical and illegal activities he committed outside the scope of legitimate journalism.

        • queermunist she/her
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          It sounds like you are, in fact, saying he should be persecuted for the 2010 Iraq leak.

            • queermunist she/her
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Because no one is addressing my point and it’s pissing me off. They just drag things off topic because Assange bad.

              • livus@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                It’s one of the uglier sides of human nature - thinking that human rights should only apply to those humans they like/agree with.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                You’re not making any point by simply putting words in other people’s mouths then ending your comment there.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            9 months ago

            Lol, I think you like to make assumptions that fulfill your biases. My response was simply an example of how his public image and his personal actions differ. Even if the release was sloppy and he may have potentially compromised his sources, it was still an act of journalism.

            The acts that I believe to be outside the credible scope of journalism consist of misinformation campaigns in Spain, the election interference, and the bribe offered to the trump administration for the ambassador seat to Australia.

            I can’t really see how any of those actions are defensible for someone who considers themselves a journalist.

            • queermunist she/her
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Sorry, I assumed we were still talking about his extradition. I didn’t realize we had gone off topic.

              • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                I wouldn’t say we were off topic, I was just specifically responding to “His moral righteousness is irrelevant to the fact that he is being persecuted for journalism.”

                The State is for sure requesting extradition in response to his prior journalistic work (and I do consider the 2010 leak as journalism), and that is of course wrong. However, I think it’s still important to point out that he did engage in subversive actions that cannot be excused as journalism.

                Doing so set a dangerous precedent for future journalist who look up to the man. The ironic thing is he wouldn’t likely be in the situation he is in now if he has stuck to his stated principles, or listened to his colleagues. He would still be hounded by the US gov, but he would have still had countries that would safeguard him. Wikileaks would still be operational, and most importantly less sources would have faced federal prosecution.

                • queermunist she/her
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I honestly don’t see how it helps anyone but the US prosecution to point out that he was a subversive. Whether he’s good or bad is irrelevant to whether the journalism he did should be made illegal.

                  And being subversive shouldn’t be a crime either tbh

                  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    helps anyone but the US prosecution to point out that he was a subversive

                    Lol, I doubt my opinions on Lemmy will be influencing any federal prosecutors. I already stated that it’s important for future generations to learn from both the success and mistakes of Assange. I don’t really see how white washing his past really helps anyone.

                    Whether he’s good or bad is irrelevant to whether the journalism he did should be made illegal.

                    Again, with the strawman? I’ve explicitly stated I don’t agree with the prosecution of any legitimate journalistic endeavor. My point was that if there was any justification for prosecution it would be for his activities that do not fit within the scope of journalism. Since they are not charging him based on those actions, there is no legitimate justification for his current prosecution.

                    I dont really see the point in trying to deify a person as some sinless martyr. People are perfectly capable of doing both good and bad things, and I don’t think we should shy from that fact. Your beliefs are being limited to a false dichotomy of Saint or sinner, when reality is rarely that simple.