Thursday, July 11, 2013

Secrecy at WikiLeaks, Accuracy at Wikipedia

Dear and Gentle Readers,

Madame L would like to bring to your attention the fact that the people at WikiLeaks, who are so keen to "leak" and expose the "secrets" of governments, businesses, religious groups, and, really, anyone they think needs exposure (i.e., anyone that someone at WikiLeaks has any kind of grudge against), have themselves decided that their own secrets must remain secret. 

According to a letter to the editor of Madame L's local newspaper, The Oregonian, WikiLeaks posted a message posted on Twitter saying that "it will not be identifying the six new countries to which Edward Snowden had applied for asylum." Madame L could not find the article cited by the letter-writer, and when she went to the WikiLeaks feed at Twitter, she found their motto, "We open governments," but no mention there, either, of the message cited by the letter-writer.

Madame L thinks that You, Dear and Gentle Readers, might agree with her idea that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, that people who throw stones shouldn't live in glass houses, and so on.

BTW, Wikipedia itself has published the wrong birth date for one of its own founders, Jimmy Wales. Do you still trust WikiLeaks and/or Wikipedia for reliable and accurate information? Madame L still does not. 

She doesn't think Wikipedia or WikiLeaks are actually "wicked" or "evil," but she knows that Wikipedia is not the only website you can access for free, and she knows that Jimmy Wales et al. can't possibly "police" all the information on the site. 

So, Madame L may still look at information on Wikipedia as she begins to research a topic, and she sometimes even provides links for articles from Wikipedia. But she despises hypocrisy, as practiced by big governments, do-gooders, and everyone else, and she does not trust everything she hears and reads, no matter who says or writes it. And she doesn't think anyone should.


Madame L

1 comment:

AskTheGeologist said...

I've wondered why Wikileaks doesn't provide honest information about why Julian Assange, a co-founder, is holed up in an Ecuadorean embassy in London, or why the Swedish government wants him. Nor does Wikileaks provide honest information about the co-founders who have left the organization in apparent disgust.

In absence of an honest answer, I must construct my own: Assange raped two different women in obscure circumstances, apparently because he felt he was above the law. Bill Clinton and Anthony Wiener also felt they were above the law, and both paid a hefty price for what they did - but they didn't rape anyone.

That leads to an additional conclusion: Assange is a mysogenist and sexual predator concerned only about himself. If the news media are to be believed, Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador, has belatedly come to this same conclusion, but is more concerned with saving face. He wants to stick it to the United States, which graciously supported him as he obtained an advanced degree there. The reasons are unclear, but appear to be rooted in racism and reverse racism.

It's hard to pick the bigger hypocrite here.