skieblue: (Default)
[personal profile] skieblue
[Error: unknown template qotd]

This isn't the easiest question to answer, as it really depends on the circumstances. If any of the leaked documents really have placed people's lives in danger, as some people have accused WikiLeaks of having done, then no, the website should not be protected. And as a general rule, confidentiality exists for a reason. I mean, if there was a website that was publishing people's heath records where anyone could go and read them, that website would be doing something wrong. If it was ordinary citizens' financial records that were posted on the internet that would be a bad thing.

However, on the other side of the equation, when it comes to corporations and governments, there is such a thing as accountability. Some of the things that may be revealed could ultimately lead to something being changed for the better. To look at the corporation example, on a smaller scale, that is whistleblowers are doing. They find out that a corporation is doing something illegal, and they tell the authorities. Things like that should be revealed, but maybe not necessarily on a website.

I think what I'm trying to say here is that I don't think there is really one right answer to this question. I do think WikiLeaks is in the wrong to have published the things they did, but at the same time, I can't find a definite example as to why.

Profile

skieblue: (Default)
skieblue

August 2011

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
2829 3031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 09:45 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios