A website created in 2007 that allows Internet users to post government-related documents and information is meeting a cluster of controversy upon its boost in popularity.WikiLeaks is a nonprofit site founded by a group of volunteers called The Sunshine Press. It is “designed to protect whistle-blowers, journalists and activists who have sensitive materials to communicate to the public,” according to the “About Us” portion of the site. WikiLeaks aims to increase government transparency by allowing users to submit political-minded information to the site anonymously. Submitted documents are screened by the site’s owners and verified for authenticity. The founders claim the publication of the information will lead to “reduced corruption, better government and stronger democracies.” But some political pundits doubt the beneficial nature of the site, claiming another incident similar to the Pentagon Papers could occur.  The Pentagon Papers was a top-secret set of documents containing inside information about the United States’ involvement with the Vietnam War. The papers were leaked to the front page of the New York Times in 1971, bringing about an onslaught of protest, controversy and legal battles.Now the site is accumulating a wave of skepticism concerning its national security implications after a video was posted in April showing a U.S. helicopter attack in Iraq killing a dozen civilians, according to a July 7 story by CNN. Regina Lawrence, political science and mass communication professor, said the site poses both positive and negative political opportunities.”It’s in some ways a bit of a hybrid of capabilities between new social media and traditional journalism,” Lawrence said. “It’s not necessarily a bad thing to have a website that is dedicated to bringing whistle-blowers’ information to life.”Lawrence said people being given the opportunity to create their own news is not new.
“The last two presidential cycles have been elections in which candidates have had to deal with someone who put something out on the web,” she said. “The difference about this is that in some cases it’s information the government doesn’t even want released.” Johanna Dunaway, an assistant professor of political science and mass communication, said websites like WikiLeaks present the opportunities for news organizations plagued by budget and staff cuts to receive easy access to important news without having to do extensive investigations.”It fits in with the whole idea that journalism is now much more interactive,” Dunaway said. “Audiences are no longer passive, and citizens can have just as much voice as anyone else. In this case, a citizen who works for the government maybe sees something untoward, and this gives them another outlet. Communication streams are much more two-way.”The site provides a strong conduit for whistle-blowers to be able to publish worthwhile news thanks to its guaranteed anonymity.WikiLeaks has received moderate attention for having published former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s personal emails, as well as manuals from the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, according to CNN. “Because whistle-blowers are not protected and often punished, I can’t help but think it might be a good opportunity,” Dunaway said. “We just have to be cautious about when WikiLeaks becomes WikiRumors.”–Contact Matthew Jacobs at [email protected]