Julian Assange, the hero or the villain?
People who know me well will tell you I ALWAYS have an opinion about everything and for better or worse I love to argue that opinion (even when I'm wrong!). But this WikiLeaks business has definitely caught me with a picket up my you know what. I just can't decided whether this guy is the peoples champ or a Peter Hore type serial pest.
My recent attempt to come to my own conclusions by having everyone else Twitt me their opinions hasn't really solved my problem. It seems that on the whole we, as whoever we are, are undoubtably split on what to think. On one hand many people such as @MrAndrewD believe "he helps transparency in government", and others like @NatTaylorZach reckon Assange "is exposing corruption and has no obligation to keep things confidential". This I suppose is fair considering we elect the government to speak and act on our behalf however we also buy shares in public companies where boards of directors act and speak on our behalf as well. But in this circumstance we don't expect to be privy to their private conversations or meetings (board meetings exempt) and any attempt to release tapped phone calls or meetings would in my opinion lead to charges being pressed. So where does it differ?
A good mate with a wise head and chiselled jaw (for any ladies interested!) known here as JQ says he agrees with Assange in principle but doesn't necessarily agree that everything he published was done so responsibly, that in fact "he may have gone too far sometimes". Like I said wise man, and did I say he's very funny too (for the ladies again), so I tend to agree with JQ. BUT saying that I don't know if we can condone Assange's actions on a 'per leak' basis. In that I mean just because we think one released document is for 'our' benefit doesn't mean he's done the right thing when all of a sudden we disagree with another one and go against him for it...
Our mate from Ch7 news Kate Osborn (@kateosborn7news) was pretty helpful with her Twit which she put very simply, "Promoting press freedom = good. Outing Afghan informers and endangering lives = bad".. Can't really argue with that! But once again the thing I'm grappling with most is can we really choose to love him for some of his leaks and hate him for others? In my opinion this isn't a workable path because when it comes down to it a decision needs to be made on whether WikiLeaks is right or wrong, legal or illegal or this poor guy is never going to get out of prison, and that is most definitely wrong!
Anyway I'm no more decided on the issue having written this blog than I'm sure you are for having read it! So if you're like me and love to argue go ahead, I'm all ears!![]()
People who know me well will tell you I ALWAYS have an opinion about everything and for better or worse I love to argue that opinion (even when I'm wrong!). But this WikiLeaks business has definitely caught me with a picket up my you know what. I just can't decided whether this guy is the peoples champ or a Peter Hore type serial pest.
My recent attempt to come to my own conclusions by having everyone else Twitt me their opinions hasn't really solved my problem. It seems that on the whole we, as whoever we are, are undoubtably split on what to think. On one hand many people such as @MrAndrewD believe "he helps transparency in government", and others like @NatTaylorZach reckon Assange "is exposing corruption and has no obligation to keep things confidential". This I suppose is fair considering we elect the government to speak and act on our behalf however we also buy shares in public companies where boards of directors act and speak on our behalf as well. But in this circumstance we don't expect to be privy to their private conversations or meetings (board meetings exempt) and any attempt to release tapped phone calls or meetings would in my opinion lead to charges being pressed. So where does it differ?
A good mate with a wise head and chiselled jaw (for any ladies interested!) known here as JQ says he agrees with Assange in principle but doesn't necessarily agree that everything he published was done so responsibly, that in fact "he may have gone too far sometimes". Like I said wise man, and did I say he's very funny too (for the ladies again), so I tend to agree with JQ. BUT saying that I don't know if we can condone Assange's actions on a 'per leak' basis. In that I mean just because we think one released document is for 'our' benefit doesn't mean he's done the right thing when all of a sudden we disagree with another one and go against him for it...
Our mate from Ch7 news Kate Osborn (@kateosborn7news) was pretty helpful with her Twit which she put very simply, "Promoting press freedom = good. Outing Afghan informers and endangering lives = bad".. Can't really argue with that! But once again the thing I'm grappling with most is can we really choose to love him for some of his leaks and hate him for others? In my opinion this isn't a workable path because when it comes down to it a decision needs to be made on whether WikiLeaks is right or wrong, legal or illegal or this poor guy is never going to get out of prison, and that is most definitely wrong!
Anyway I'm no more decided on the issue having written this blog than I'm sure you are for having read it! So if you're like me and love to argue go ahead, I'm all ears!
