In the history of Wikileaks, nobody has claimed that the material being put out is not authentic.
True information does good.
The corruption in reporting starts very early. It’s like the police reporting on the police.
It is the role of good journalism to take on powerful abusers, and when powerful abusers are taken on, there’s always a bad reaction. So we see that controversy, and we believe that is a good thing to engage in.
We have a way of dealing with information that has sort of personal – personally identifying information in it. But there are legitimate secrets – you know, your records with your doctor; that’s a legitimate secret. But we deal with whistleblowers that are coming forward that are really sort of well motivated.
I mean there’s enormous pressures to harmonize freedom of speech legislation and transparency legislation around the world – within the E.U., between China and the United States. Which way is it going to go? It’s hard to see.
Well, there’s a question as to what sort of information is important in the world, what sort of information can achieve reform. And there’s a lot of information. So information that organizations are spending economic effort into concealing, that’s a really good signal that when the information gets out, there’s a hope of it doing some good.
As we’ve gotten more successful, there’s a gap between the speed of our publishing pipeline and the speed of our receiving submissions pipeline. Our pipeline of leaks has been increasing exponentially as our profile rises, and our ability to publish is increasing linearly.
We have some material on spying by a major government on the tech industry. Industrial espionage.
Stopping leaks is a new form of censorship.