Saturday, January 29, 2011

OpenLeaks

An article on MakeUseOf.com is reporting the opening of OpenLeaks, an alternative to WikiLeaks. OpenLeaks will be a platform where private information can be submitted anonymously to be used by the public. Unlike WikiLeaks, OpenLeaks will not publish or write articles on the information, but rather act as a "digital dropbox" for members of the site to send and receive information. The process is explained further in this video:

OpenLeaks 101 from openleaks on Vimeo.


We have been studying WikiLeaks in my Mass Communication Law class this semester. On one hand, OpenLeaks could be a great resource for news organizations and other outlets to obtain classified information that can be reported to the public. After all, freedom of speech and the press are part of our First Amendment rights. However, as in the case of WikiLeaks, OpenLeaks could be another avenue to cause more international tension if very sensitive information is revealed (as what occurred when WikiLeaks released a quarter of a million U.S. diplomatic cables). Should there be a limit on this type of information if it jeopardizes our safety?

Also, there's the issue of anonymity of the whistleblowers. Supposedly through OpenLeaks it will be more difficult to trace the original source of the information submitted. However, is this necessarily a positive thing? Technology such as this could help people who break the law get away with it. Also, if the source is unknown, how truly reliable can it be? The video does mention that members of the OpenLeaks community will have to go through some sort of application process before being granted access.

Websites such as WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks could be seen as either helping expand free speech and democracy or hindering it.

1 comment:

  1. It used to be if you said or wrote something, you would be held personally responsible for it. Lies, slander, and sensitive information used to be difficult to spread without losing credibility. I don't like the way this is going. Some things have a right to remain private, especially when lives are concerned.

    My two cents :)

    ReplyDelete