Meanwhile, our enemies hijack commercial airliners and fly them into buildings, killing thousands of innocent civilians. They are balances that people involved in journalism have a professional ethical obligation to strike conscientiously. First, let me say we are talking about the massive leak of diplomatic cables, and whether or not anyone can be prosecuted for publishing them. The press will cover the reality of that stolen property. We can't get the - all the answers because it's too much still to be developed, questions that we don't have answers to.
And I do agree with Bob Baer to the extent the government does have a right to keep secrets. WikiLeaks has posted to its website only 960 of the 251,297 diplomatic cables it has. There are hosts of white-collar crimes that need the sunlight disinfectant. Thank you again very much. This demonstrates what helped lead us to our present state. You're questioning whether or not there is? The boundaries of ethics which codified right and wrong are increasingly absent.
Concerning Afghan War Diary, the Pentagon pressured WikiLeaks to return all documents. And that's a tough call. And that's a tough call. It is one of the largest government leaks in history. The benefit to tae stakeholders is that the outcome will not cause as much harm as the manner in which the situation is currently being handled. We delve into the ethical issues first, and later in the hour, we will address the legal ramifications, as well. And to join the conversation at our website, just go to npr.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it an attack on U. The greater topic of information ethics and whistle-blowing would be a great starting point for the final paper. But then they say: Where we don't draw the line is we won't cover official embarrassment. It's what a reporting officer does. Indeed WikiLeaks went so far as to cloak itself in the honourable, truth-telling traditions of the fourth estate. They have to have participated in violent acts, as I understand that law. So he violated his contractual duty with the U.
If we're going to go with this, we better be sure we have a good case and that we can get the person. And, you know, Senator Kerry is the one who should be looking at documents like this in his office and deciding what's going to go out there, or other members of Congress. It's going to be really hard to nail Julian Assange, even though he comes across as an egomaniac to me. Attorney General Eric Holder announced an ongoing criminal investigation into the leak and those responsible. Has a crime been committed? As I was reading your post, I had an idea about Edward Snowden—you might want to look him up in detail and see if he can be included.
Dead and mangled bodies covered the road, bloody and disfigured. No matter if we are looking to WikiLeaks, or our own lives and homes this fundamental principle should be remembered. The only place you can go are though shall not reveal classified information or defense information. Abstract This case is about the celebrated collaboration between , the secure website for whistleblowers, and the mainstream media — focusing on the British Guardian newspaper. However, it will require an analytic discussion to recognize both pros and cons in their activities. Now, I say this having supported the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.
And historically, or at least in the last decade or so, the United States has gone to, when it has seen fit, to extraordinary lengths to deal with it. WikiLeaks was founded in 2006 by Chinese dissidents, journalists and mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, South Africa Australia, and Europe. This includes their home addresses and, in some cases, their cellphone numbers. Presently, it looks like WikiLeaks has raised dozens of political and legal questions which will take time to respond to. More than 250,000 secret diplomatic documents were obtained by WikiLeaks, which released some of them Sunday in agreement with media outlets in the United States and Europe.
It changed so WikiLeaks started working with mainstream media outfits to validate and check the information they were being given. However, some information between states can be sensitive. Government secrecy in home affairs is defensible insofar as the government is entrusted with private information about individuals. The issue however is that access and exposure alone is not a reliable ethic. It is one of the largest government leaks in history.
So he violated his contractual duty with the U. So I give you that as a preface for this caller that I'm about to take from Topeka, Kansas. The problem is, you know, somebody like Tom's organization is responsible, and they work with the government, and they're not going to put things out that there's not an agreement. Hey, I think everyone is missing a huge point. Alternative solution 1 Deontological Ethics would be helpful to utilize in this situation. For example: Was publishing them right, or was it wrong? The reasoning behind their support is based on the fair rules and justified functionality of democracy and civil society. Let's take a phone call.