Reception of WikiLeaks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Sheffield Indymedia spoke at a public meeting in Sheffield on 23 February 2011 about the persecution of WikiLeaks, and in defense of Julian Assange

The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks has received praise as well as criticism. The organisation has won a number of awards, including The Economist's New Media Award in 2008 at the Index on Censorship Awards[1] and Amnesty International's UK Media Award in 2009.[2][3] In 2010, the New York Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news",[4] and Julian Assange received the Sam Adams Award[5] and was named the Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year in 2010.[6] The UK Information Commissioner has stated that "WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen".[7] In its first days, an Internet petition calling for the cessation of extrajudicial intimidation of WikiLeaks attracted over six hundred thousand signatures.[8] Supporters of WikiLeaks in the media and academia have commended it for exposing state and corporate secrets, increasing transparency, supporting freedom of the press, and enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15]

At the same time, several U.S. government officials have criticized WikiLeaks for exposing classified information and claimed that the leaks harm national security and compromise international diplomacy.[16][17][18][19][20] From the perspective of the U.S. security establishment, the issue of concern is not only the publication of sensitive information but also, at a deeper level, the anonymity afforded by the internet.[21] Several human rights organisations requested with respect to earlier document releases that WikiLeaks adequately redact the names of civilians working with international forces, in order to prevent repercussions.[22] Some journalists have likewise criticised a perceived lack of editorial discretion when releasing thousands of documents at once and without sufficient analysis.[23] In response to some of the negative reaction, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed her concern over the "cyber war" against WikiLeaks,[24] and in a joint statement with the Organization of American States the UN Special Rapporteur has called on states and other actors to keep international legal principles in mind.[25]

Response from governments[edit]


On 16 March 2009, the Australian Communications and Media Authority added WikiLeaks to their proposed list of sites that will be blocked for all Australians if the mandatory internet filtering scheme is implemented as planned.[26][27] The blacklisting had been removed by 29 November 2010.[28]

On 2 December 2010, Prime Minister Julia Gillard made a statement that she 'absolutely condemns' WikiLeaks' actions and that the release of information on the site was 'grossly irresponsible' and 'illegal.'[29] WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is Australian and he responded two days later by accusing his prime minister of betraying him as an Australian citizen.[30] However, on 8 December 2010 – after WikiLeaks published U.S. diplomatic cables in which United States diplomats labelled him a "control freak", former Australian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister (now resigned) Kevin Rudd said the leak of the US secret cables raised questions about US security. Rudd said, "The core responsibility, and therefore legal liability, goes to those individuals responsible for that initial unauthorised release."[31][32] In an article in The Australian, Assange claimed, "The Australian attorney-general is doing everything he can to help a US investigation clearly directed at framing Australian citizens and shipping them to the US."[33] However, Australian officials later said that Assange has done nothing illegal.[34] Since then, representatives of the Australian Federal Government and the major opposition including Craig Emerson the Minister for Trade have come out in support of WikiLeaks and against some violent rhetoric directed against them, stating; "We condemn absolutely the threats that have been made by some people in the United States against Julian Assange."[35]


President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva expressed his "solidarity" with Julian Assange following Assange's 2010 arrest in the United Kingdom. Lula went on to state – in reference to WikiLeaks disclosure of classified US diplomatic cables in November and December 2010 – WikiLeaks had "exposed a diplomacy that had appeared unreachable."[36][37] He further criticised the arrest of Julian Assange as "an attack on freedom of expression".[38]


The WikiLeaks website claims that the government of the People's Republic of China has attempted to block all traffic to websites with "wikileaks" in the URL since 2007, but that this can be bypassed by encrypted connections or by using one of WikiLeaks' many covert URLs.[39]


In late November 2010, a representative of the government of Ecuador made what was, apparently, an unsolicited public offer to Julian Assange to establish residency in Ecuador. Deputy Foreign Minister Kinto Lucas stated "we are going to invite him to come to Ecuador so he can freely present the information he possesses and all the documentation, not just on the Internet, but in various public forums."[40] Lucas went on to state his praise for WikiLeaks and Assange calling them "[people] who are constantly investigating and trying to get light out of the dark corners of [state] information."[41] The following day, however, president Rafael Correa distanced his administration from the offer stating that Lucas had been speaking for himself and not on the government's behalf. Correa then criticised Assange for "breaking the laws of the United States and leaking this type of information."[42]


The French Industry Minister Éric Besson said in a letter to the CGIET technology agency, WikiLeaks "violates the secret of diplomatic relations and puts people protected by diplomatic secret in danger." Therefore, it would be 'unacceptable' that the site was hosted on servers based in France. The minister asked for measures to bar WikiLeaks from France.[43]


The home of Theodor Reppe, registrant of the German WikiLeaks domain name,, was raided on 24 March 2009 after WikiLeaks released the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) censorship blacklist.[44] The site was not affected.[45][46]


After the release of the 2007 Baghdad airstrikes video and as they prepared to release film of the Granai airstrike, Julian Assange has said that his group of volunteers came under intense surveillance. In an interview and Twitter posts he said that a restaurant in Reykjavík where his group of volunteers met came under surveillance in March; that there was "covert following and hidden photography" by police and foreign intelligence services; that an apparent British intelligence agent made thinly veiled threats in a Luxembourg car park; and that one of the volunteers was detained by police for 21 hours. Another volunteer posted that computers were seized, saying "If anything happens to us, you know why... and you know who is responsible."[47] According to the Columbia Journalism Review, "the Icelandic press took a look at Assange's charges of being surveilled in Iceland [...] and, at best, have found nothing to substantiate them."[48]

In August 2009, Kaupthing Bank secured a court order preventing Iceland's national broadcaster, RÚV, from broadcasting a risk analysis report showing the bank's substantial exposure to debt default risk. This information had been leaked to WikiLeaks and remained available on the WikiLeaks website; faced with an injunction minutes before broadcast, the channel aired a screen-shot of the WikiLeaks site instead of the scheduled piece on the bank. Citizens of Iceland were reported to be outraged that RÚV was prevented from broadcasting news of relevance.[49] Therefore, WikiLeaks has been credited with inspiring the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, a bill meant to reclaim Iceland's 2007 Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans frontières) ranking as first in the world for free speech. It aims to enact a range of protections for sources, journalists, and publishers.[50][51] Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a former WikiLeaks volunteer and member of the Icelandic parliament, is the chief sponsor of the proposal.


In identical statements to both Houses of Parliament on 18 March 2011, then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh rejected all allegations against his government revealed by the United States diplomatic cables leak, including allegations of bribery during the 2008 Lok Sabha vote of confidence. Singh told Parliament, "The Government of India cannot confirm the veracity, contents or even the existence of such communications. I may point out that many of the persons referred to in those reports have stoutly denied the veracity of the contents. An issue was raised that the offence of bribery was committed in India. Government rejects that allegation absolutely and firmly."[52][53][54]

In an interview with Times Now, Julian Assange labelled the Indian government's response as "one of the worst in the world" and a "clear attempt to mislead the nation on what the cables were". Assange stated, "The response by the government left a lot to be desired. Before it was clear to me that Prime Minister Mr. Singh was deliberately attempting to mislead the Indian people on what type of material this was. People tell me that he is not personally corrupt, I do not know myself as I don't have information on that. But, his reaction left a lot to be desired. It wasn't to fully and frankly investigate what was going on and then provide finding to the parliament. Rather, it was attempt to spin the issue and I suspect that has come from experience in dealing with similar scandals in the past."[55]


The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also criticised WikiLeaks following the release of United States diplomatic cables. Ahmadinejad claimed that the release of cables purporting to show concern with Iran by Arab states was a planned leak by the United States to discredit his government, though he did not indicate whether he believed WikiLeaks was in collusion with the United States or was simply an unwitting facilitator.[56]


Muammar Gaddafi blamed WikiLeaks for the Tunisian revolution "[Do not be fooled by] WikiLeaks which publishes information written by lying ambassadors in order to create chaos."[57]


President Benigno Aquino III condemned WikiLeaks and leaked documents related to the country, saying that it can lead to massive cases of miscommunication.[58]


In December 2010, the office of the Russian president Dmitry Medvedev issued a statement calling on non-governmental organisations to consider "nominating [Julian] Assange as a Nobel Prize laureate." The announcement followed commentary by Russian ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin who stated that Julian Assange's earlier arrest on Swedish charges demonstrated that there was "no media freedom" in the west.[59]


The Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) is currently censoring the WikiLeaks website in Thailand[60] and more than 40,000 other websites[61] because of the emergency decree declared in Thailand at the beginning of April 2010 as a result of political instabilities.[62]


The Turkish government blocked access to Wikileaks on 20 July 2016 after it released nearly 300,000 emails involving the ruling Justice and Development Party. The email releases were in response to the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt.[63]


Hugo Chávez, president of Venezuela, stated his support for WikiLeaks following the release of US diplomatic cables in November 2010 that showed the United States had tried to rally support from regional governments to isolate Venezuela. "I have to congratulate the people of WikiLeaks for their bravery and courage," Chávez commented in televised remarks.[64]

United Nations[edit]

In December 2010 United Nations Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression Frank LaRue stated he agreed with the idea that Julian Assange was a "martyr for free speech." LaRue went on to say Assange or other WikiLeaks staff should not face legal accountability for any information they disseminated, noting that, "if there is a responsibility by leaking information it is of, exclusively of the person that made the leak and not of the media that publish it. And this is the way that transparency works and that corruption has been confronted in many cases."[65] High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, subsequently voiced concern at the revelation that private companies were being pressured by states to sever their relationships with WikiLeaks.[66]

United States[edit]

On 17 July 2010, Jacob Appelbaum spoke on behalf of WikiLeaks at the Hackers on Planet Earth conference in New York City, replacing Assange because of the presence of federal agents at the conference.[67][68] He announced that the WikiLeaks submission system was again operating, after it had been suspended temporarily.[67][69][70] Assange was a surprise speaker at a TED conference on 19 July 2010 in Oxford, England, and confirmed that the site had begun accepting submissions again.[71]

Upon returning to the US from the Netherlands, on 29 July, Appelbaum was detained for three hours at the airport by US agents, according to anonymous sources.[72] The sources told CNET that Appelbaum's bag was searched, receipts from his bag were photocopied, and his laptop computer was inspected, although in what manner was unknown.[72] Appelbaum reportedly refused to answer questions without a lawyer present, and was not allowed to make a telephone call. His three mobile telephones were reportedly taken and not returned.[72] On 31 July, he spoke at a Defcon conference and mentioned his telephone being "seized". After speaking, he was approached by two FBI agents and questioned.[72]

Access to WikiLeaks is currently blocked in the United States Library of Congress.[73] On 3 December 2010 the White House Office of Management and Budget sent a memorandum forbidding all unauthorised federal government employees and contractors from accessing classified documents publicly available on WikiLeaks and other websites.[74] The U.S. Army, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Justice Department are considering criminally prosecuting WikiLeaks and Assange "on grounds they encouraged the theft of government property",[75] although former prosecutors say doing so would be difficult.[76] According to a report on the website Daily Beast, the Obama administration asked the UK, Germany, and Australia among others to also consider bringing criminal charges against Assange for the Afghan war leaks and to help limit Assange's travels across international borders.[77] Columbia University students have been warned by their Office of Career Services that the U.S. State Department had contacted the office in an email saying that the diplomatic cables which were released by WikiLeaks were "still considered classified" and that "online discourse about the documents 'would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information'".[78]

All U.S. federal government staff have been blocked from viewing WikiLeaks.[79]

As for individual responses, government officials had mixed feelings. Although Hillary Clinton refused to comment on specific reports, she claimed that the leaks "put people's lives in danger" and "threatens national security".[80] Former United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates commented, "Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest."[80]

Following the November 2010 release of United States diplomatic cables, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denounced the group saying, "this disclosure is not just an attack on America's foreign policy interests, it is an attack on the international community."[81] Peter King, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee of the United States House of Representatives has stated his support of Clinton's position for listing WikiLeaks as a "foreign terrorist organisation" explaining that "WikiLeaks presents a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States."[82] In a contrary statement, secretary of Defense Robert Gates has said that concerns about the disclosures were "over-wrought" in terms of their likely adverse impact on ordinary diplomatic activities.[83] Philip J. Crowley, United States Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, stated on 2 December 2010 that the US State Department does not regard WikiLeaks as a media organisation. "WikiLeaks is not a media organisation. That is our view." Crowley said and with regard to Assange;"Well, his – I mean he could be considered a political actor. I think he's an anarchist, but he's not a journalist."[84] US Senator Joe Lieberman called on to shut down a WikiLeaks web-site, praised the company for doing so, and called for other companies to follow suit.[85] He also proposed new legislation targeting similar cases – Securing Human Intelligence and Enforcing Lawful Dissemination Act (SHIELD Act).[86][87] Lieberman later said that also The New York Times and other news organisations publishing the US embassy cables being released by WikiLeaks could be investigated for breaking US espionage laws.[88] After these statements the US Ambassador to Australia assured the Australian government and people that "The concerns we have do not centre on Julian Assange and they never should have"[89]

U.S. Secretary of State and former CIA Director Mike Pompeo has held mixed views on WikiLeaks, citing leaked e-mails from Hillary Clinton, campaign chair John Podesta, and former Democratic National Committee chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz even using his Twitter as a platform to call attention to the "newly released emails of Hillary Clinton and her cronies," before a FOX appearance on the same topic.[90] In April 2017, as CIA Director Mike Pompeo called WikiLeaks "a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia."[91]

In April 2017, AG Jeff Sessions stated that arresting Julian Assange of Wikileaks was a priority: "We have professionals that have been in the security business of the United States for many years that are shocked by the number of leaks and some of them are quite serious. So yes, it is a priority. We've already begun to step up our efforts and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail."[92]

Response from media[edit]

People's Republic of China[edit]

Chinese journalist Shi Tao was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, in 2005 after publicising an email from Chinese officials about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.[93] An article in The New Yorker said:

One of the WikiLeaks activists owned a server that was being used as a node for the Tor network. Millions of secret transmissions passed through it. The activist noticed that hackers from China were using the network to gather foreign governments' information, and began to record this traffic. Only a small fraction has ever been posted on WikiLeaks, but the initial tranche served as the site's foundation, and Assange was able to say, "[w]e have received over one million documents from thirteen countries."[94]

— Raffi Khatchadourian, The New Yorker

Assange responded to the suggestion that eavesdropping on Chinese hackers played a crucial part in the early days of WikiLeaks by saying "the imputation is incorrect. The facts concern a 2006 investigation into Chinese espionage one of our contacts was involved in. Somewhere between none and handful of those documents were ever released on WikiLeaks. Non-government targets of the Chinese espionage, such as Tibetan associations were informed (by us)".[95]

Russian Federation[edit]

Russian investigative reporter Andrei Soldatov has criticised WikiLeaks for disclosing documents "without checking of the facts, without putting them in context, and without analysing them." Soldatov believes WikiLeaks is "filling the gap" left by the decline of investigative journalism with a sensationalist alternative while journalistic support of WikiLeaks is motivated by anger over declining funding and resources for investigative reporting.[96]

Response from corporations[edit]

U.S. diplomatic cables leak responses[edit]

According to The Times (London), WikiLeaks and its members have complained about continuing harassment and surveillance by law enforcement and intelligence organisations, including extended detention, seizure of computers, veiled threats, "covert following and hidden photography."[97] Two lawyers for Julian Assange in the United Kingdom told The Guardian that they believed they were being watched by the security services after the U.S. cables leak, which started on 28 November 2010.[98]

Furthermore, several companies ended association with WikiLeaks. After providing 24-hour notification, American-owned EveryDNS deleted WikiLeaks from its entries on 2 December 2010, citing DDoS attacks that "threatened the stability of its infrastructure".[99][100] The website's 'info' DNS lookup remained operational at alternative addresses for direct access respectively to the WikiLeaks and Cablegate websites.[101] On the same day, severed its association with WikiLeaks, to which it was providing infrastructure services, after an intervention by an aide of U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman.[85][86][102] Amazon denied acting under political pressure, citing a violation of its terms of service.[103] Citing indirect pressure from the U.S. Government, Tableau Software also deleted WikiLeaks' data from its website for people to use for data visualisation.[104][105]

During the days following, hundreds of (and eventually more than a thousand)[106] mirror websites of the WikiLeaks website were established, and the Anonymous group of Internet activists asked sympathizers to attack the websites of companies which opposed WikiLeaks,[107] under the banner of Operation Payback, previously directed at anti-piracy organisations.[108] AFP reported that attempts to deactivate the address had resulted in the website surviving via the so-called Streisand effect, whereby attempts to censor information online causes it to be replicated in many places.[109]

On 3 December, PayPal, the payment processor owned by eBay, permanently ended the account of the Wau Holland Foundation that had been redirecting donations to WikiLeaks. PayPal alleged that the account violated its "Acceptable Use Policy", specifically that the account was used for "activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity."[110][111] The Vice President of PayPal stated later that they stopped accepting payments after the "State Department told us these were illegal activities. It was straightforward." Later the same day, he said that his previous statement was incorrect, and that it was in fact based on a letter from the State Department to WikiLeaks.[112] On 8 December 2010, the Wau Holland Foundation released a press statement, saying it has filed a legal action against PayPal for blocking its account used for WikiLeaks payments and for libel due to PayPal's allegations of "illegal activity".[113]

On 6 December, the Swiss bank PostFinance announced that it had frozen the assets of Assange that it holds, totalling €31,000. In a statement on its website, it stated that this was because Assange "provided false information regarding his place of residence" when opening the account.[114] WikiLeaks released a statement saying this was because Assange, "as a homeless refugee attempting to gain residency in Switzerland, had used his lawyer's address in Geneva for the bank's correspondence".[115]

On the same day, MasterCard announced that it was "taking action to ensure that WikiLeaks can no longer accept MasterCard-branded products", adding "MasterCard rules prohibit customers from directly or indirectly engaging in or facilitating any action that is illegal."[116] The next day, Visa Inc. announced it was suspending payments to WikiLeaks, pending "further investigations".[117] In a move of support for WikiLeaks, the organization XIPWIRE established a way to donate to WikiLeaks, and waived their fees.[118] Datacell, the Iceland-based IT company controlled by Swiss investors that enabled WikiLeaks to accept credit card donations, announced that it would take legal action against Visa Europe and MasterCard, in order to resume allowing payments to the website.[119]

On 7 December 2010, The Guardian stated that people could donate to WikiLeaks via Commerzbank in Kassel, Germany, or Landsbanki in Iceland, or by post to a post office box at the University of Melbourne or at the domain.[120]

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay stated that Visa, MasterCard, and Amazon may be "violating WikiLeaks' right to freedom of expression" by withdrawing their services.[121]

On 21 December, media reported that Apple Inc. had removed an application from its App Store, which provided access to the embassy cable leaks.[122]

As part of its 'Initial Assessments Pursuant to... WikiLeaks', the US Presidential Executive Office has issued a memorandum to the heads of Executive Departments and Agencies asking whether they have an 'insider threat program'.[123][124]

On 14 July 2011, WikiLeaks and DataCell ehf. of Iceland filed a complaint against the international card companies, VISA Europe and MasterCard Europe, for infringement of the antitrust rules of the EU, in response to their withdrawal of financial services to the organisation. In a joint press release, the organisations stated: "The closure by VISA Europe and MasterCard of Datcell's access to the payment card networks in order to stop donations to WikiLeaks violates the competition rules of the European Community."[125] DataCell filed a complaint[126] with the European Commission on 14 July 2011.

Response from the financial industry[edit]

Since the publications of CableGate, WikiLeaks has experienced an unprecedented global financial blockade by major finance companies including MasterCard, Visa and PayPal although there has been no legal accusation of any wrongdoing.

In October 2010, it was reported that the organization Moneybookers, which collected donations for WikiLeaks, had ended its relationship with the website. Moneybookers stated that its decision had been made "to comply with money laundering or other investigations conducted by government authorities, agencies or commissions."[127]

On 18 December 2010, Bank of America announced it would "not process transactions of any type that we have reason to believe are intended for Wikileaks," citing "Wikileaks might be engaged in activities... inconsistent with our internal policies for processing payments". WikiLeaks responded in a tweet by encouraging their sympathizers who were BoA customers to close their accounts. Bank of America has long been believed to be the target of WikiLeaks' next major release.[128]

Late in 2010, Bank of America communicated with the law company Hunton & Williams to stop WikiLeaks. Hunton & Williams assembled a group of security specialists, HBGary Federal, Palantir Technologies, and Berico Technologies.

During 5 and 6 February 2011, the group Anonymous hacked HBGary's website, copied tens of thousands of documents from HBGary, posted tens of thousands of company emails online, and usurped Barr's Twitter account in revenge. Some of the documents taken by Anonymous show HBGary Federal was working on behalf of Bank of America to respond to WikiLeaks' planned release of the bank's internal documents. Emails detailed a supposed business proposal by HBGary to assist Bank of America's law company, Hunton & Williams, and revealed that the companies were willing to violate the law to damage WikiLeaks and Anonymous.

CEO Aaron Barr thought he'd uncovered the hackers' identities and like rats, they'd scurry for cover. If he could nail them, he could cover up the crimes H&W, HBGary, and BoA planned, bring down WikiLeaks, decapitate Anonymous, and place his opponents in prison while collecting a cool fee. He thought he was 88% right; he was 88% wrong.[129]

— Leigh Lundin, Criminal Brief

In October 2011, Julian Assange said the financial blockade had destroyed 95% of WikiLeaks' revenues and announced that it was suspending publishing operations in order to concentrate on fighting the blockade and raising new funds.[130]

On 18 July 2012, WikiLeaks, shunned by the financial industry and almost insolvent, announced that it had found a new method to accept donations. Accordingly, the Fund for the Defense of Net Neutrality (FDNN) had agreed to channel contributions via Carte Bleue, and WikiLeaks claimed that contractual obligation would prevent Visa and MasterCard blocking participation with such transactions.[131]

On 24 January 2014, WikiLeaks announced via Twitter that the majority of its donations came from (the cryptocurrencies) Litecoin and Bitcoin.[citation needed] WikiLeaks massive returns from early investment into Bitcoin cryptocurrency has helped the organisation to survive various legal and financial hardships.[132]

In December 2017, after five years of processing donations on behalf of WikiLeaks, Freedom of the Press Foundation's board unanimously found that the financial blockade of WikiLeaks by major payment processors was no longer in effect, and severed ties with WikiLeaks as of 8 January 2018.[133][134]


Daniel Ellsberg (2006) has made numerous media interviews supporting WikiLeaks.[135][136]

In July 2010 Veterans for Peace president Mike Ferner editorialised on the group's website "neither Wikileaks nor the soldier or soldiers who divulged the documents should be prosecuted for revealing this information. We should give them a medal."[137]

Documentary filmmaker John Pilger wrote an August 2010 editorial in the Australian publication Green Left titled "Wikileaks must be defended." In it, Pilger said WikiLeaks represented the interests of "public accountability" and a new form of journalism at odds with "the dominant section ... devoted merely to taking down what cynical and malign power tells it."[138]

Daniel Ellsberg, the man who released the Pentagon Papers in 1971, has been a frequent defender of WikiLeaks. Following the November 2010 release of U.S. diplomatic cables, Ellsberg rejected criticism that the site was endangering the lives of U.S. military personnel and intelligence assets stating "not one single soldier or informant has been in danger from any of the WikiLeaks releases. That risk has been largely overblown."[135] Ellsberg went on to note that government claims to the contrary were "a script that they roll out every time there's a leak of any sort."[136] Following the US diplomatic cable release, which a number of media reports sought to differentiate from Ellsberg's whistleblowing,[139] Ellsberg claimed, "EVERY attack now made on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was made against me and the release of the Pentagon Papers at the time."[140]

On 3 December 2010 Republican Congressman of Texas, Ron Paul, spoke out publicly during a Fox Business interview in support of WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange; "In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," Paul said. "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble." Paul went on to state, "Why don't we prosecute The New York Times or anybody that releases this?"[141] In another speech at US House of Representatives Paul again defended WikiLeaks against criticism for revealing the truth and warned the US administration that "lying is not patriotic".[142]

Fellow Republican congressman Connie Mack IV of Florida also praised WikiLeaks, stating that Americans have a right to know the contents of the leaks, "no matter how we acquire that knowledge."[143]

Australia's most senior and high-profile media professionals expressed their support for WikiLeaks in a letter to Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard.[144] The letter was initiated by the Walkley Foundation, who present the yearly Walkley Awards for Excellence in Journalism. The letter was signed by "the ten members of the Walkley Advisory Board as well as editors of major Australian newspapers and news websites and the news directors of the country's three commercial TV networks and two public broadcasters." Their position (an extract from the letter) is summarised as follows:

In essence, WikiLeaks, an organisation that aims to expose official secrets, is doing what the media have always done: bringing to light material that governments would prefer to keep secret. It is the media's duty to responsibly report such material if it comes into their possession. To aggressively attempt to shut WikiLeaks down, to threaten to prosecute those who publish official leaks, and to pressure companies to cease doing commercial business with WikiLeaks, is a serious threat to democracy, which relies on a free and fearless press."[145]

Following the November 2010 leak of United States diplomatic cables The Atlantic, in a staff editorial, opined "Wikileaks is a powerful new way for reporters and human rights advocates to leverage global information technology systems to break the heavy veil of government and corporate secrecy that is slowly suffocating the American press." Calling legal and physical threats against WikiLeaks volunteers "shameful" the magazine went on to state, "Not since President Richard Nixon directed his minions to go after Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg and New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan ... has a working journalist and his source been subjected to the kind of official intimidation and threats that have been directed at Assange and Manning by high-ranking members of the Obama Administration."[146]

On 4 December 2010, Reporters Without Borders condemned the "blocking, cyber-attacks and political pressure" being directed at WikiLeaks. The organisation is also concerned by some of the extreme comments made by American authorities concerning WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange.[147] On 21 December the organisation announced it will host a mirror website for the leaked US diplomatic cables being published by WikiLeaks.[148]

In an article titled "Only WikiLeaks can save US policy" published on the online foreign affairs magazine The Diplomat, former long-time CIA counter-terrorism expert Michael Scheuer said the source of interest in WikiLeaks revelations was in the inherent dishonesty of recent U.S. administrations. "In recent years, the US public has had to hear its leaders repeatedly tell Americans that black was white," Scheuer wrote, referencing the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama.[149]

Evan Hughes, editor-in-chief of published his support for WikiLeaks in an online editorial titled "Why WikiLeaks is Good for America." Despite an often contentious relationship between Wired and WikiLeaks, with the former having been accused by the latter of complicity in the identification and arrest of Chelsea Manning, Hughes argued that "WikiLeaks stands to improve our democracy, not weaken it." He went on to note that "The greatest threat we face right now from WikiLeaks is not the information it has spilled and may spill in the future, but the reactionary response to it that's building in the United States that promises to repudiate the rule of law and our free speech traditions, if left unchecked."[150]

A December 2010 rally in Australia protesting the Australian government's treatment of Julian Assange

The New York Times reported that over 200 WikiLeaks mirror sites sprang up after some hosting companies cut their services to the company.[151] On 5 December, a group of activists and hackers known as "Anonymous" called upon supporters to attack sites of companies that oppose WikiLeaks as part of Operation Avenge Assange.[152] PayPal has been targeted following their decision to stop processing donations for WikiLeaks.[153][154] Gregg Housh, who previously worked on other projects with Anonymous, said that he had noticed an organised attempt taking place to attack companies that have not supported WikiLeaks. In reference to the support being shown for WikiLeaks, Mr. Housh said; "The reason is amazingly simple, we all believe that information should be free, and the Internet should be free."[155] On 8 December 2010, the PayPal website was victim of a denial-of-service attack by Anonymous.[156][157][158] Later that day, PayPal announced in their blog that they will release all remaining funds in the account to the foundation that was raising funds for WikiLeaks.[159][160] On the same day, the websites of Visa and MasterCard were attacked by WikiLeaks supporters. By then over 1,200 mirror sites had been set up for hosting content no longer accessible at Anonymous also issued a fresh statement; "While we don't have much of an affiliation with WikiLeaks, we fight for the same reasons. We want transparency, and we counter censorship ... This is why we intend to utilise our resources to raise awareness, attack those against, and support those who are helping lead our world to freedom and democracy."[161]

In December 2010, the Internet Society stated that despite the international concern about the content released by WikiLeaks, "we nevertheless believe it must be subject to the same laws and policies of availability as all Internet sites" and that "free expression should not be restricted by governmental or private controls over computer hardware or software, telecommunications infrastructure, or other essential components of the Internet". ISOC also called for appropriate action to "pursue and prosecute entities (if any) that acted maliciously to take it [WikiLeaks] off the air" because suppressing communication would merely serve to "undermine the integrity of the global Internet and its operation".[162]

On 8 December 2010 a petition was launched on Avaaz in support of WikiLeaks, which was signed by over 250 thousand people within the first few hours, the total number went up to 600 thousand by 15 December 2010.[163][164]

In early December 2010, Noam Chomsky offered his support to protesters across Australia planning to take to the streets in defence of WikiLeaks.[165] In an interview for Democracy Now!, Chomsky criticized the government response, saying, "perhaps the most dramatic revelation ... is the bitter hatred of democracy that is revealed both by the U.S. Government – Hillary Clinton, others – and also by the diplomatic service."[166]

In 2015, Randy Credico made news for being handcuffed and thrown out of the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner for supporting Assange.[citation needed] Randy appeared in an interview with Jimmy Dore after and described the experience, "I'm really feeling guilty about Julian Assange, being in that room, and everybody here about to be celebrated, CNN... and so I walked into the middle of the room[...] and I went up there before the program actually started. I just couldnt hold back because I didn't want to interrupt the comedian. So i started yelling out to the stage, 'We should be celebrating and supporting Julian Assange. He's the greatest journalist, god bless..." and so i went to about three different spots, as loud as I possibly could bellow out those words, 'We, CNN, all of the news organisations, should be celebrating, and we should be commending Julian Assange. 100% accuracy! he's sacrificing his liberty!'[167]

Awards and nominations[edit]

In 2008, Index on Censorship presented WikiLeaks with their inaugural Economist New Media Award.[168]

In 2009, Amnesty International awarded WikiLeaks their Media Award for exposing "extra judicial killings and disappearances" in Kenya.[169]

In 2009, Ars Electronica awarded WikiLeaks an Award of Distinction in the Digital Communities category.[170]

In 2010, TIME Magazine Person of the Year, People's Choice (highest global vote) and the Sam Adams Award for Integrity.[171]

In 2011, Walkley Foundation for Journalism awarded the "Most outstanding contribution to journalism" Walkley Award to WikiLeaks.[172] The Sydney Peace Foundation Gold Medal, the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, the Blanquerna Award for Best Communicator, the Walkley Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism, the Voltaire Award for Free Speech, the International Piero Passetti Journalism Prize of the National Union of Italian Journalists,[171] the "VII José Couso Press Freedom Award" from Colexio Profesional de Xornalistas de Galicia and Club de Prensa de Ferrol[173] and the Blanquerna Faculty of Communication awarded the "Blanquerna Best Communicator Award" to WikiLeaks.[174]

In 2012 the Privacy International Hero of Privacy.[171]

In 2013 the Global Exchange Human Rights People's Choice Award, the Yoko Ono Lennon Courage Award for the Arts and the Brazilian Press Association Human Rights Award.[171]

In 2014 the Kazakhstan Union of Journalists Top Prize.[171]

Additionally, Wikileaks was nominated for awards but did not win:

1 February 2011, Norwegian politician and musician Snorre Valen nominated WikiLeaks for the Nobel Peace Prize, totaling six nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize in consecutive years (2010-2015) for the organization [175]

2015 Wikileaks received a nomination for the UN Mandela Prize.[171] six nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize in consecutive years (2010-2015)


WikiLeaks has attracted criticism from a variety of sources.[176]

In 2007 John Young, operator of Cryptome, left his position on the WikiLeaks Board of Directors accusing the group of being a "CIA conduit". Young subsequently retreated from his assertion but has continued to be critical of the site.[177] In a 2010 interview with Young accused the group of a lack of transparency regarding their fundraising and financial management. He went on to state his belief that WikiLeaks could not guarantee whistleblowers the anonymity or confidentiality they claimed and that he "would not trust them with information if it had any value, or if it put me at risk or anyone that I cared about at risk."[178]

When asked to join their initial advisory board, Steven Aftergood declined and told TIME that "they have a very idealistic view of the nature of leaking and its impact. They seem to think that most leakers are crusading do-gooders who are single-handedly battling one evil empire or another."[179] Citing the leaking of the sorority rituals of Alpha Sigma Tau, Steven Aftergood has opined that WikiLeaks "does not respect the rule of law nor does it honor the rights of individuals." Aftergood went on to state that WikiLeaks engages in unrestrained disclosure of non-governmental secrets without compelling public policy reasons and that many anti-corruption activists were opposed to the site's activities.[180]

In 2010, Amnesty International joined several other human rights groups in strongly requesting that WikiLeaks redact the names of Afghan civilians working as U.S. military informants from files they had released, in order to protect them from repercussions. Julian Assange responded by offering Amnesty International the opportunity to assist in the tedious document vetting process. When Amnesty International appeared to express reservations in accepting the offer, Assange stated that he had "no time to deal with people who prefer to do nothing but cover their asses." Other groups that joined Amnesty International in criticising WikiLeaks subsequently noted that, despite their displeasure over the issue of civilian name redaction, they generally appreciated WikiLeaks' work.[181]

In an August 2010 open letter, the non-governmental organisation Reporters Without Borders praised WikiLeaks' past usefulness in exposing "serious violations of human rights and civil liberties" but criticised the group over a perceived absence of editorial control, stating "indiscriminately publishing 92,000 classified reports reflects a real problem of methodology and, therefore, of credibility. Journalistic work involves the selection of information. The argument with which you defend yourself, namely that WikiLeaks is not made up of journalists, is not convincing."[182] The group subsequently clarified their statement as a criticism of WikiLeaks release procedure and not the organisation itself, stating "we reaffirm our support for Wikileaks, its work and its founding principles."[183]

On 30 November 2010, former Canadian government adviser Tom Flanagan, while appearing on the CBC television program "Power & Politics", called for Julian Assange to be killed. "I think Assange should be assassinated," Flanagan stated, before noting to host Evan Solomon, "I'm feeling pretty manly today." Flanagan subsequently retracted his call for the death of Assange while reiterating his opposition to WikiLeaks.[184] Dimitri Soudas, spokesman to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, decried Flanagan's comments and said the former Tory strategist's remarks are "simply not acceptable." Ralph Goodale, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party in the House of Commons, called Flanagan's remarks "clearly contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms."[185]

Public opinion[edit]

  •  Australia: A UMR Research December 2010 poll showed that the majority of Australians are against the official government position on WikiLeaks. The findings which were done on 1,000 individuals show 59% support WikiLeaks' action in making the cables public and 25% oppose it. This was asked a few weeks after the initial release of the cables. The poll also looked at issues in relation to Julian Assange, with the results showing a positive opinion on him.[186]
  •  Germany: According to a telephone survey of 1,004 German residents age 18 and older, which was conducted end of November for the German public broadcaster ARD, a majority of 53% disapprove of WikiLeaks, while 43% are generally in favour of the platform. Asked about the specific release of US diplomatic cables, almost two-Thirds (65%) believe that these documents should not be published, compared to 31% that agree that they are being released to the public.[187]
  •  Pakistan: A December 2010 a Gallup poll found that 52% of Pakistanis believe that "America herself has published the documents on purpose to create unrest," while 24% believe that this is not the case and 24% did not respond.[188]
  •  United Kingdom: A CNN poll of 2,010 British adults conducted in December 2010 revealed that more people agree than disagree that WikiLeaks was right to release the cables, by 42% to 33%. The remaining 25% did not have a position. According to the same poll 41% of Britons believe that Assange should not be prosecuted for releasing the secret diplomatic cables, while 30% do want him prosecuted. Almost half of the respondents (44%) also believe that the sex charges against Assange are "an excuse" to keep him in custody so that the U.S. government can prosecute him for releasing secret diplomatic cables, while only 13% disagree. Nevertheless, almost half of Britons stated that their government should send Assange to Sweden for questioning. Older people were significantly more likely to oppose WikiLeaks. While 42% of persons 65 and older say Assange should be prosecuted for releasing the secret diplomatic cables, this view is only held by 21% of those between 25 and 34.[189]
  •  United States: According to a telephone survey of 1,029 US residents age 18 and older, conducted by the Marist Institute for Public Opinion in December 2010, 70% of American respondents – particularly Republicans and older people – think the leaks are doing more harm than good by allowing enemies of the United States government to see confidential and secret information about U.S. foreign policy. Approximately 22% – especially young liberals – think the leaks are doing more good than harm by making the U.S. government more transparent and accountable. A majority of 59% also want to see the people behind WikiLeaks prosecuted, while 31% said the publication of secrets is protected under the First Amendment guarantee of a free press.[190]


  1. ^ "Winners of Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Announced". Index on Censorship. 22 April 2008. Retrieved 15 December 2010.
  2. ^ "The Cry of Blood. Report on Extra-Judicial Killings and Disappearances". Kenya National Commission on Human Rights. 2008. Archived from the original on 9 February 2014. Retrieved 15 December 2010.
  3. ^ "Amnesty announces Media Awards 2009 winners" (Press release). Amnesty International UK. 2 June 2009. Archived from the original on 22 October 2013. Retrieved 15 December 2010.
  4. ^ Reso, Paulina (20 May 2010). "5 pioneering Web sites that could totally change the news". Daily News. New York. Retrieved 8 June 2010.
  5. ^ Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence. "WikiLeaks and Assange Honored". Consortium News. Retrieved 22 February 2011.
  6. ^ Friedman, Megan (13 December 2010). "Julian Assange: Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year 2010". Time. New York. Retrieved 15 December 2010.
  7. ^ Curtis, Polly (30 December 2010). "Ministers must 'wise up not clam up' after WikiLeaks disclosures". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 1 January 2011.
  8. ^ "Media says government's reaction to WikiLeaks 'troubling'". The Sydney Morning Herald. 14 December 2010. Retrieved 28 December 2010.
  9. ^ Kampfner, John (29 November 2010). "Wikileaks shows up our media for their docility at the feet of authority". The Independent. London. Retrieved 19 December 2010.
  10. ^ Shafer, Jack (30 November 2010). "Why I Love WikiLeaks". Slate. Retrieved 19 December 2010.
  11. ^ Greenwald, Glenn (30 November 2010). "WikiLeaks reveals more than just government secrets". Retrieved 19 December 2010.
  12. ^ Gilmore, Dan (6 December 2010). "Defend WikiLeaks or lose free speech". Retrieved 19 December 2010.
  13. ^ "First, They Came for WikiLeaks. Then..." The Nation. New York. 27 December 2010. Retrieved 19 May 2011.
  14. ^ Ruane, Medb (11 December 2010). "Where's the democracy in hunting Wikileaks off the Net?". Irish Independent. Dublin. Retrieved 19 December 2010.
  15. ^ Nayar, Pramod K. (25 December 2010). "WikiLeaks, the New Information Cultures and Digital Parrhesia" (PDF). Economic & Political Weekly. Mumbai. Archived from the original (PDF) on 18 January 2011. Retrieved 8 January 2011.
  16. ^ "Congress Mulls How to Stop WikiLeaks in Its Tracks". Fox News. Associated Press. 7 April 2010. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  17. ^ Richter, Paul (19 November 2010). "U.S. tries to contain damage from WikiLeaks disclosures". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 29 November 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2012.
  18. ^ Epstein, Jennifer (1 December 2010). "Bill Clinton: WikiLeaks will cost lives". Politico. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  19. ^ "Clinton blasts 'deeply distressing' leak of US sites". AFP. 6 December 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2012.
  20. ^ "Outrage and Apologies: Washington Fights to Rebuild Battered Reputation". Spiegel International. Hamburg. 6 December 2010. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  21. ^ Zajacz, R (2013). "WikiLeaks and the problem of anonymity: A network control perspective". Media, Culture & Society. 35 (4): 489. doi:10.1177/0163443713483793. S2CID 145540359.
  22. ^ "WikiLeaks asked to censor secret files". Herald Sun. Melbourne. Associated Press. 11 August 2010. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  23. ^ "Open letter to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange: "A bad precedent for the Internet's future"". Reporters Sans Frontières. 12 August 2010. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  24. ^ "UN human rights chief voices concern at reported 'cyber war' against WikiLeaks" (Press release). United Nations. 9 December 2010. Retrieved 28 December 2010.
  25. ^ "Joint Statement on WikiLeaks". Organization of American States. August 2009. Retrieved 28 December 2010.
  26. ^ Moses, Asher (16 March 2009). "Banned hyperlinks could cost you $11,000 a day". The Age. Melbourne. Archived from the original on 6 November 2012. Retrieved 16 March 2009.
  27. ^ "Australia secretly censors Wikileaks press release and Danish Internet censorship list, 16 Mar 2009". 16 March 2009. Archived from the original on 15 April 2011. Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  28. ^ Taylor, Josh (29 November 2010). "Wikileaks removed from ACMA blacklist". ZDNet Australia. Archived from the original on 29 November 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  29. ^ Paul Ramadge, ed. (2 December 2010). "Gillard condemns WikiLeaks". The Age. Australia: Fairfax Media. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  30. ^ Gordon, Josh (5 December 2010). "PM has betrayed me: Assange". The Age. Melbourne: Fairfax Media. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  31. ^ "Wikileaks: Australia FM blames US, not Julian Assange". BBC. 8 December 2010. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  32. ^ "Australia says U.S, not WikiLeaks founder, responsible for leaks". Reuters. 8 December 2010. Archived from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  33. ^ Assange, Julian (8 December 2010). "Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths". The Australian. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  34. ^ Kelly, Joe (17 December 2010). "Law not broken by WikiLeaks' publication of US cables: AFP". The Australian. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  35. ^ Q&A Series 4: Episode 2 (TV, Online Streaming). Australia: abc. 14 February 2011.
  36. ^ Antonova, Maria (9 December 2010). "Putin leads backlash over WikiLeaks boss detention". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  37. ^ "President Lula Shows Support for Wikileaks (video available)". 9 December 2010.
  38. ^ "Wikileaks: Brazil President Lula backs Julian Assange". BBC News. 10 December 2010. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  39. ^ "Is Wikileaks blocked by the Chinese government?". WikiLeaks. 2008. Archived from the original on 16 February 2008. Retrieved 28 February 2008.
  40. ^ "Ecuador offers asylum to WikiLeaks founder". The Jerusalem Post. 30 November 2010.
  41. ^ "Ecuador rebuts Assange refuge offer". Al Jazeera. 1 December 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011.
  42. ^ "Ecuador backs off offer to WikiLeaks' Assange". Archived from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  43. ^ "WikiLeaks Flees to Switzerland as U.S., France Options Narrow". Bloomberg Businessweek. UK. 3 December 2010. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  44. ^ Kuri, Jürgen (25 March 2009). "Hausdurchsuchung bei Inhaber der Domain" [Search of owner of the domain]. Heise Online (in German). Hannover. Archived from the original on 3 June 2009. Retrieved 21 September 2009.
  45. ^ Pauli, Darren (25 March 2009). "Wikileaks raided by German police". Network World. Framingham, MA. Archived from the original on 7 April 2014. Retrieved 30 April 2010.
  46. ^ "Police raid home of domain owner over censorship lists". WikiLeaks. 24 March 2009. Archived from the original on 19 April 2014.. Mirror available: 24 March 2009 Archived 16 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine
  47. ^ Campbell, Matthew (11 April 2010). "Whistleblowers on US 'massacre' fear CIA stalkers". The Sunday Times. London. Archived from the original on 14 August 2011.
  48. ^ Hendler, Clint (1 April 2010). "Thin ice: The man behind WikiLeaks has some allegations". Columbia Journalism Review. New York. Archived from the original on 12 December 2013. Retrieved 1 August 2010.
  49. ^ Sigurgrimsdottir, Herdis (4 August 2009). "Iceland court lifts gag order after public outrage". The San Diego Union-Tribune. Associated Press. Retrieved 19 May 2011.
  50. ^ "Iceland's journalism freedom dream prompted by Wikileaks". BBC News. 13 February 2010. Archived from the original on 9 February 2014.
  51. ^ "Icelandic Modern Media Initiative". Reykjavik: International Modern Media Institute. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 19 May 2011.
  52. ^ "Transcript: India PM on WikiLeaks". WSJ.
  53. ^ "Wikileaks India: PM says no one from Cong, govt bought votes". timesofindia-economictimes.
  54. ^
  55. ^ "'Indian govt response to WikiLeaks the worst' - Latest Breaking News, Big News Stories, News Videos". Archived from the original on 23 July 2015. Retrieved 25 April 2015.
  56. ^ Black, Ian; Sherwood, Harriet (23 November 2010). "WikiLeaks claims are 'psychological warfare' says Ahmadinejad | World news". The Guardian. UK. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  57. ^ "Libya's Gaddaffi pained by Tunisian revolt, blames WikiLeaks". Monsters and Critics. 16 January 2011. Archived from the original on 19 February 2011.
  58. ^ Esplanada, Jerry E. (15 December 2010). "Foreign Office slams WikiLeaks". Philippine Daily Inquirer. Archived from the original on 18 December 2010. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
  59. ^ Harding, Luke (9 December 2010). "Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  60. ^ "Thailand blocks access to WikiLeaks website". Thai Visa Forum. Bangkok. Agence France-Presse. 18 August 2010. Retrieved 25 August 2010.
  61. ^ Barta, Patrick (17 August 2010). "Thai Groups Denounce Website Censorship". The Wall Street Journal. New York. Archived from the original on 27 September 2013. Retrieved 25 August 2010.
  62. ^ Fuller, Thomas (6 July 2010). "Citing Instability, Thailand Extends Emergency Decree". The New York Times. Retrieved 25 August 2010.
  63. ^ "Turkey blocks access to WikiLeaks after ruling party email dump". Reuters. 20 July 2016. Retrieved 20 July 2016.
  64. ^ Cancel, Daniel (29 November 2010). "Chavez Praises Wikileaks for 'Bravery' While Calling on Clinton to Resign". Bloomberg. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  65. ^ Hall, Eleanor (9 December 2010). "UN rapporteur says Assange shouldn't be prosecuted". ABC Online. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  66. ^ Nebehay, Stephanie (9 December 2010). "UN rights boss concerned at targeting of WikiLeaks". reutres. Reuters. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  67. ^ a b Singel, Ryan (19 July 2010). "Wikileaks Reopens for Leakers". Wired. New York. Archived from the original on 9 February 2014. Retrieved 1 August 2010.
  68. ^ McCullagh, Declan (16 July 2010). "Feds look for WikiLeaks founder at NYC hacker event | Security". CNET News. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 1 August 2010.
  69. ^ "Jacob Appelbaum WikiLeaks Next HOPE Keynote Transcript". "Hackers on Planet Earth" conference. 17 July 2010. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  70. ^ WikiLeaks (16–18 July 2010). Saturday Keynote at The Next HOPE (Audio). Archived from the original (MP3) on 26 April 2012. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  71. ^ Anderson, Chris (July 2010). Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks (Videotape). TED. Event occurs at 11:28. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 2 August 2010. November last year... well blowouts in Albania... Have you had information from inside BP? Yeah, we have a lot...
  72. ^ a b c d Mills, Elinor (28 July 2010). "Researcher detained at U.S. border, questioned about WikiLeaks". CNET. Archived from the original on 10 March 2013. Retrieved 1 August 2010.
  73. ^ Raymond, Matt (3 December 2010). "Why the Library of Congress Is Blocking Wikileaks". Library of Congress blog. Archived from the original on 9 January 2011. Retrieved 3 December 2010.
  74. ^ de Sola, David (4 December 2010). "U.S. agencies warn unauthorized employees not to look at WikiLeaks". CNN. Archived from the original on 21 October 2013. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  75. ^ Entous, Adam; Perez, Evan (21 August 2010). "Prosecutors Eye WikiLeaks Charges". The Wall Street Journal. New York. Archived from the original on 11 May 2013. Retrieved 21 August 2010.
  76. ^ Nakashima, Ellen; Markon, Jerry (30 November 2010). "WikiLeaks founder could be charged under Espionage Act". The Washington Post. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  77. ^ Shenon, Philip (10 August 2010). "U.S. Urges Allies to Crack Down on WikiLeaks". The Daily Beast. Archived from the original on 27 March 2011.
  78. ^ "Columbia U diplomacy students warned about cables". Newsday. Newsday. 4 December 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2012.[dead link][dead link]
  79. ^ MacAskill, Ewen (3 December 2010). "US blocks access to WikiLeaks for federal workers". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 26 June 2011. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  80. ^ a b Calabresi, Massimo (2 December 2010). "WikiLeaks' War on Secrecy: Truth's Consequences". Time. New York. Archived from the original on 20 May 2013. Retrieved 19 December 2010. Reportedly spurred by the leak of the Pentagon papers, Assange unveiled WikiLeaks in December 2006.
  81. ^ "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls WikiLeaks documents 'an attack on the international community'". New York Post. 29 November 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  82. ^ McCullagh, Declan (28 November 2010). "Congressman wants WikiLeaks listed as terrorist group". CNet. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  83. ^ Weiler, Jonathan (1 December 2010). "Let Us Now Praise Wikileaks". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  84. ^ Crowley, Philip J. (2 December 2010). "WikiLeaks". Daily Press Briefing. U.S. Department of State. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  85. ^ a b MacAskill, Ewen (2 December 2010). "WikiLeaks website pulled by Amazon after U.S. political pressure". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 26 June 2011. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  86. ^ a b Welch, Dylan (4 December 2010). "Attacks shut down WikiLeaks". The Age. Melbourne. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  87. ^ Poulsen, Kevin (2 December 2010). "Lieberman Introduces Anti-WikiLeaks Legislation". Condé Nast Digital. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  88. ^ Owen, Paul; Adams, Richard; MacAskill, Ewen (7 December 2010). "WikiLeaks: US Senator Joe Lieberman suggests New York Times could be investigated". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  89. ^ "US not out to get Assange". 10 February 2011.
  90. ^ Kaczynski, Andrew. "CIA director Mike Pompeo repeatedly cited WikiLeaks to attack Clinton during campaign". CNN. Retrieved 24 October 2017.
  91. ^ Warren Strobel & Mark Hosenball (13 April 2017). "CIA chief calls WikiLeaks a 'hostile intelligence service'". Reuters.CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  92. ^ "Sources: US prepares charges to seek arrest of WikiLeaks' Julian Assange | CNN Politics". 20 April 2017.
  93. ^ Marks, Paul (12 January 2007). "How to leak a secret and not get caught". New Scientist. London. Archived from the original on 3 February 2014. Retrieved 28 February 2008.
  94. ^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (7 June 2010). "No Secrets: Julian Assange's Mission for total transparency". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 8 June 2010.
  95. ^ Leyden, John (2 June 2010). "Wikileaks denies Tor hacker eavesdropping gave site its start". The Register. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 10 July 2010.
  96. ^ "Kyiv Post. Independence. Community. Trust – Opinion – OP-ED – WikiLeaks case highlights crisis in journalism". Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  97. ^ Campbell, Matthew (11 April 2010). "Whistleblowers on US 'massacre' fear CIA stalkers". The Sunday Times. London. Archived from the original on 14 August 2011. Retrieved 12 December 2010.
  98. ^ Jones, Sam (5 December 2010). "Julian Assange's lawyers say they are being watched". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 16 July 2011. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  99. ^ Satter, Raphael G.; Peter Svensson (3 December 2010). "WikiLeaks fights to stay online amid attacks". Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Bloomberg Businessweek. Archived from the original on 4 December 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2012.
  100. ^ Palsule, Mahendra (3 December 2010). " Terminates DNS Services, Back Up in Switzerland". Skeptic Geek. Archived from the original on 17 January 2011. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  101. ^ Pauli, Darren (2 December 2010). "WikiLeaks loses domain name after DoS attacks". ZDNet UK. London. Archived from the original on 30 April 2011. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  102. ^ Vance, Ashlee (3 December 2010). "WikiLeaks Struggles to Stay Online After Attacks". The New York Times. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  103. ^ "Amazon Web Services Message". Amazon Web Services. Archived from the original on 3 December 2010. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  104. ^ Klint, Finley (2 December 2010). "Another Falls: Tableau Software Drops WikiLeaks Data Visualizations". ReadWriteCloud. Archived from the original on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  105. ^ Fink, Elissa (2 December 2010). "Why We Removed the WikiLeaks Visualizations". Seattle: Tableau Software blog. Archived from the original on 7 January 2011. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  106. ^ "Pro-Wikileaks activists abandon Amazon cyber attack". BBC News. 9 December 2010. Archived from the original on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  107. ^ Somaiya, Ravi (5 December 2010). "Hundreds of WikiLeaks Mirror Sites Appear". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  108. ^ Bradley, Tony (7 December 2010). "Operation Payback: WikiLeaks Avenged by Hacktivists". PC World. San Francisco. Archived from the original on 8 January 2011. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  109. ^ "How the Barbra Streisand Effect keeps WikiLeaks online". The New Zealand Herald. Auckland. Agence France-Presse. 6 December 2010. Retrieved 19 May 2011.
  110. ^ "PayPal Turns Off Tap for WikiLeaks Donations". CBS News. Associated Press. 4 December 2010. Archived from the original on 15 July 2013. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  111. ^ Galante, Joseph (4 December 2010). "PayPal Restricts WikiLeaks Account as Website Comes Under Global Scrutity". Bloomberg. New York. Archived from the original on 18 October 2013. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  112. ^ Tsotsis, Alexia (8 December 2010). "PayPal VP on Blocking WikiLeaks: "State Department Told Us It Was Illegal"". TechCrunch. Archived from the original on 26 October 2013. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  113. ^ "Presseerklärung der Wau Holland Stiftung zur Sperrung ihres Account bei PayPal" (Press release) (in German). Hamburg: Wau Holland Stiftung. 7 December 2010. Archived from the original on 20 April 2014. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  114. ^ "WikiLeaks: Swiss bank freezes Julian Assange's account". BBC News. 6 December 2010. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  115. ^ Weaver, Matthew; Adams, Richard (6 December 2010). "WikiLeaks US embassy cables: As it happened". News Blog. London. Archived from the original on 11 January 2011. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  116. ^ McCullagh, Declan (6 December 2010). "MasterCard pulls plug on WikiLeaks payments". CNET News. Archived from the original on 16 December 2010. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  117. ^ "Visa says it has suspended all payments to WikiLeaks 'pending further investigation'". Newsday. Newsday. 7 December 2010. Retrieved 14 March 2012. Visa says it has suspended all payments to WikiLeaks 'pending further investigation.'[dead link][dead link]
  118. ^ Webster, Stephen C. (7 December 2010). "MasterCard, Visa shut down electronic donations to WikiLeaks". The Raw Story. Archived from the original on 7 February 2011. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  119. ^ "Wikileaks' IT firm says it will sue Visa and Mastercard". BBC News. 8 December 2010. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  120. ^ Arthur, Charles (7 December 2010). "WikiLeaks under attack: the definitive timeline". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 26 June 2011. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  121. ^ "UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay voices concern at reports of pressure being exerted on private companies to halt financial or internet services for WikiLeaks". United Nations. 9 December 2010. Archived from the original on 24 March 2012.
  122. ^ Mitchell, Stewart (21 December 2010). "Apple pulls WikiLeaks app". PC Pro. London. Archived from the original on 13 October 2013. Retrieved 21 December 2010.
  123. ^ "Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies (M-11-08)" (PDF). Executive Office of the [U.S.] President. 3 January 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 January 2011. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
  124. ^ "US urges action to prevent insider leaks". BBC News. 5 January 2011. Archived from the original on 20 July 2011. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
  125. ^ "Press release, 14 July 2011". Archived from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 5 December 2012.
  126. ^ "Complaint to the EU commission" (PDF). Retrieved 5 December 2012.
  127. ^ Leigh, David; Evans, Rob (14 October 2010). "WikiLeaks says funding has been blocked after government blacklisting". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 26 June 2011. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  128. ^ "Bank of America stops handling Wikileaks payments". BBC News. 18 December 2010. Archived from the original on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  129. ^ Lundin, Leigh (20 February 2011). "WikiLicks". Crime. Orlando: Criminal Brief. Archived from the original on 25 October 2013.
  130. ^ Addley, Esther; Deans, Jason (24 October 2011). "WikiLeaks suspends publishing to fight financial blockade". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 27 October 2011., Esther Addley and Jason Deans, The Guardian, 24 October 2011
  131. ^ Greenberg, Andy (18 July 2012). "WikiLeaks Reopens Channel For Credit Card Donations, Dares Visa And MasterCard To Block Them Again". Forbes. Archived from the original on 20 July 2012. Retrieved 20 July 2012.
  132. ^ O'Neill P.H. (30 July 2014). "Massive returns on early Bitcoin investment helped WikiLeaks survive". The Daily Dot. Retrieved 3 August 2014.
  133. ^ Blake, Andrew (20 December 2017). "Free press group votes unanimously to stop funding WikiLeaks, citing end of banking blockade". The Washington Times. Retrieved 4 January 2018.
  134. ^ "Beyond the blockade". Freedom of the Press Foundation. 20 December 2017. Retrieved 4 January 2018.
  135. ^ a b Room, Press (29 November 2010). "Greg Mitchell and Daniel Ellsberg on the WikiLeaks Document Dump". The Nation. Retrieved 1 December 2010. Cite magazine requires |magazine= (help)
  136. ^ a b "WikiLeaks: view of man behind Pentagon Papers leak". BBC News. 30 November 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  137. ^ "WikiLeaks revelations will spark massive resistance to Afghanistan War". Veterans For Peace. 27 July 2010. Archived from the original on 3 November 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  138. ^ "John Pilger: Wikileaks must be defended | Green Left Weekly". 29 August 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  139. ^ "Why Julian Assange Is No Daniel Ellsberg". CBS News. 7 December 2010. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  140. ^ Kazakoff, Lois (7 December 2010). "Opinion Shop: Daniel Ellsberg praises WikiLeaks". SFGate. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  141. ^ Dooe, Mary (3 December 2010). "Ron Paul Defends WikiLeaks Founder's Rights". CBS News. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
  142. ^ "Ron Paul: Lying is Not Patriotic". (Youtube video). December 2010. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  143. ^ Levey, Cooper. "Rep. Mack: Americans 'have a right to know' contents of WikiLeaks dump". Archived from the original on 6 December 2010. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  144. ^ "Statement from Australian Newspaper Editors, Television and Radio Directors" (PDF). Alliance Online. Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance. 13 December 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2010. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  145. ^ Walkeys "Australian Media's Finest Defend Wikileaks" 13 December 2010 The Walkey Foundation
  146. ^ Samuels, David (3 December 2010). "The Shameful Attacks on Julian Assange". The Atlantic. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  147. ^ "Wikileaks hounded?". CBS News. 4 December 2010. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  148. ^ "Reporters Without Borders to host mirror site for WikiLeaks". 21 December 2010. Retrieved 21 December 2010.
  149. ^ "When WikiLeaks Meets US Policy". The Diplomat. Archived from the original on 27 June 2012. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  150. ^ Hansen, Evan (4 January 2009). "Why WikiLeaks Is Good for America | Threat Level". Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  151. ^ "More than 200 sites copy WikiLeaks content". 25 October 2010. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
  152. ^ Mackey, Robert (6 December 2010). "Latest Updates on Leak of U.S. Cables, Day 9". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  153. ^ Leyden, John (6 December 2010). "Anonymous attacks PayPal in 'Operation Avenge Assange'". The Register. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  154. ^ "Operation Avenge Assange manifesto". Archived from the original on 13 December 2010. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  155. ^ Somaiya, Ravi (5 December 2010). "Hundreds of WikiLeaks Mirror Sites Appear". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  156. ^ Addley, Esther; Halliday, Josh (9 December 2010). "WikiLeaks supporters disrupt Visa and MasterCard sites in 'Operation Payback'". The Guardian. UK. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  157. ^ Horn, Leslie (8 December 2010). "'Anonymous' Launches DDoS Attacks Against WikiLeaks Foes". PC Magazine. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  158. ^ Jardin, Xeni (8 December 2010). "Continuing pro-Wikileaks DDOS actions, Anonymous takes down". Boing Boing. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  159. ^ Muller, John (8 December 2010). "Updated Statement about WikiLeaks from PayPal General Counsel, John Muller". PayPal. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  160. ^ Vasquez, Bertrand (8 December 2010). "PayPal Vows to Release WikiLeaks Funds, Account to Remain Blocked". Erictric. Retrieved 9 December 2010.
  161. ^ "Visa, MasterCard targeted by WikiLeaks allies". Archived from the original on 22 December 2010. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  162. ^ Curtis, Sophie (8 December 2010). "ISOC: WikiLeaks Attacks Threaten Free Expression". Eweek Europe. Archived from the original on 29 July 2012. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  163. ^ Kraft, Andreas (10 December 2010). "Kämpfer für Wikileaks" (in German). Frankfurter Rundschau. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
  164. ^ Ritchie, Alice; Kemp, Danny (15 December 2010). "Assange granted bail in London but not yet free". Retrieved 17 December 2010.
  165. ^ "Noam Chomsky backs Wikileaks protests in Australia". Green Left Weekly. 10 December 2010. Retrieved 11 December 2010.
  166. ^ "WikiLeaks Cables Reveal "Profound Hatred for Democracy on the Part of Our Political Leadership"". Noam Chomsky website. Retrieved 25 December 2010.
  167. ^
  168. ^ "Winners of index on censorship freedom of expression awards announced". Index on Censorship. 22 April 2008. Retrieved 21 January 2011.
  169. ^ "Amnesty International Media Awards 2009: full list of winners". The Guardian. UK. 3 June 2009. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  170. ^ Ars Electronica archive, 2009
  171. ^ a b c d e f Why You Need to Listen to WikiLeaks and Not CNN - Live Trading News, accessdate: 4.11.2016
  172. ^ "2011 Walkley Award winners". Walkley Foundation for Journalism. 2011. Archived from the original on 10 May 2013. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  173. ^ Kristinn Hrafnsson receives the VII José Couso Award on behalf of WikiLeaks, 6 May 2011
  174. ^ WikiLeaks somia amb un nou periodisme, 18 Marzo 2011
  175. ^ Dwyer, Devin. "Norwegian Nominates Wikileaks' Julian Assange for Nobel Peace Prize". ABC News. Retrieved 3 February 2011.
  176. ^ Williams, Richard (28 November 2010). "WikiLeaks Revelations Get Global Prominence". Sky News Online.
  177. ^ Nast, Condé. "Exposed: Wikileaks' secrets (Wired UK)". Wired UK. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  178. ^ McCullagh, Declan (20 July 2010). "Wikileaks' estranged co-founder becomes a critic (Q&A) | Privacy Inc. – CNET News". Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  179. ^ Schmidt, Tracy Samantha (22 January 2007). "A Wiki for Whistle-Blowers". Time. ISSN 0040-781X. Retrieved 13 April 2016.
  180. ^ Aftergood, Steven (28 June 2010). "Wikileaks Fails "Due Diligence" Review". Secrecy News. Federation of American Scientists. Retrieved 18 December 2010.
  181. ^ Whalen, Jeanne (9 August 2010). "Human Rights Groups Press WikiLeaks Over Data -". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  182. ^ "Reporters Sans Frontières – Open letter to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange: A bad precedent for the Internet's future". Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  183. ^ "Reporters Sans Frontières – "Criticism of Wikileaks is not a call for censorship or support for the war"". Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  184. ^ "Flanagan regrets WikiLeaks assassination remark". 1 December 2010. Archived from the original on 3 December 2010. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
  185. ^ "WikiLeaks founder: U of C professor Flanagan's comments criminal". 30 November 2010. Archived from the original on 7 December 2010. Retrieved 7 December 2010.
  186. ^ Lester, Tim (6 January 2011). "Strong support for WikiLeaks among Australians". The Age. Australia. Retrieved 22 January 2011.
  187. ^ "ARD Deutschland Trend" (PDF). Infratest dimap. December 2010. pp. 5–6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 23 December 2010.
  188. ^ "WikiLeaks cables 'deliberately published' by US: Pak survey". 28 December 2010.
  189. ^ Martinez, Michael (14 December 2010). "Poll: Almost half of Britons feel WikiLeaks sex charges are "excuse"". CNN. Retrieved 23 December 2010.
  190. ^ "McClatchy-Marist Poll National Survey December 2010" (PDF). Marist Institute for Public Opinion. 10 December 2010. pp. 21–24. Retrieved 15 December 2010.

External links[edit]