THE sudden appearance and instant popularity of Wilkileaks, the on-line whistleblower, in 2006 opened a new but apparently disturbing era of on-line journalism. Since its website was launched in 2006, the whistleblower has been leaking many of what were hitherto regarded as top secrets, especially in diplomatic circles. It has also moved beyond that to exposing ‘dirty deals’, and ‘ pedestrian comments’ reportedly made by highly regarded leaders and personalities around the world, as well as assessment of personages who had no idea that their statements, made, in most cases, at moments of leisure, were sources of data. But WikiLeaks has been doing this to the delight of many around the world. It has been revealing juicy slices of the foibles and weaknesses of people in high places. In short, WikiLeaks is demystifying diplomatic conversations and derobing people perceived to be powerful and presenting them as ‘men of like passion’.
The reactions of governments around the world whenever a negative secret cable is released about them is that of denial. The United States has dismissed cables leaked about her policies and officials as silly despite the usual reference made to these items as US cables. And so have other affected countries. In fact the man behind Wikileaks, Julian Assange, once had a warrant of arrest slammed on him. He was later arrested on allegations of sexual assault and released on bail. The impact of his organization’s revelations made the United States to attempt criminal investigations on WikiLeaks shortly after the leak of diplomatic cables began, an indication of the influence of its activities around the world.
Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa recently had doses of WikiLeaks’ revelations with devastating impacts leading to immediate reactions. Daily Trust was the first to make contents of a leaked cable from WikiLeaks its front page story on Tuesday, September 6, 2011. The story, ‘US cable says: Jonathan ineffective as governor’ was roofed on the top left corner of the page with ‘Jonathan can’t control Patience - WikiLeaks’. The Punch followed on Wednesday, September 7, 2011, also on its front page with ‘WikiLeaks names ex-first lady, others as oil thieves’, with a rider, VIPs, others steal 91 million barrels yearly.’ On Ghana, WikiLeaks published secret cables that claimed former President Jerry Rawlings was on drugs. Cables that described President Jacob Zuma of South Africa as an idiot and a dunce were also revealed. Another cable says Kgalema Mothlanthe is dumb and does exactly what the ANC tells him to do.
While Presidential spokesman, Dr. Reuben Abati, has reacted to the cables concerning Nigeria, the concern of this intervention is the attention, recognition and space that reputable media organisations in Nigeria are giving to cables released by WikiLeaks. I had thought that the ethics of journalism require thorough verification of stories and their sources before going to press but the reverse seems to be the case in this instance. It is baffling to know that Nigerian newspapers are according WikiLeaks so much respect at a time some of its partners and staffers are parting ways with it.
On September 25, 2010, after being suspended for disloyalty, insurbordiantion and destabilisation, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the German spokesman for WikiLeaks, told a newspaper, Der Spiegel, that he was resigning because WikiLeaks has a structural problem. Julian Assange had accused Domscheit-Berg of leaking information to Newsweek. A case of a kettle calling pot black. About the same time, Iceland MP, Birgitta Jonsdottir also left WikiLeaks, citing lack of transparency, lack of structure and poor communication flow in the organisation. And on September 5, 2011, Guardian (Britain) published a story on James Ball, a former staffer of WikiLeaks, explaining why he had to leave the organisation. The report quoted Ball as saying WikiLeaks has no board, no governance and no effective rules among other alleged unethical practices . ( Please, visit www.guardian.co.uk). On what moral and ethical ground does WikiLeaks stand to publish and comment on leaked documents alleging government and corporate misconducts?
The issue of stealing information for publication should also be of concern to media scholars and professionals, especially with the availability of legislations that give journalists access to necessary information. The modus operandi of WikiLeaks in an environment where journalists are believed to have greater access to information defies logic. Stealing information is also a professional misconduct on the part of WikiLeaks. To redress this and situate its operations within mainstream journalism, it should follow due process in obtaining and releasing sensitive information. Only then will it be seen to be fair on sources and those relying on it to publish such information. Where this is made difficult with the availability of legislation granting access, the law courts should be approached for adjudication.
The birth of the Freedom of Information Act in Nigeria heralded a new climate of professionalism for the country’s journalists. One had therefore expected Daily Trust and The Punch to have obtained further information, confirming and refuting the allegations against the First Lady from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), before publishing the WikiLeaks expose. Curiously,the cables did not reveal the name of the airport where the EFCC reportedly seized a whopping sum of 13 million US Dollars from the First Lady neither is the name of ‘a former First Lady’ allegedly involved in illegal bunkering business in the Niger Delta mentioned. In the same vein, it is not enough to describe the President as being ineffective as a Governor, instances and events to support this position should accompany the revelations. These are the leaking areas in the reports by the two dailies. By giving the WikiLeaks revelations front page prominence without moving beyond the reports, Daily Trust and The Punch only succeeded in putting those editions of their papers in the category of soft-sell which thrives on rumours and hearsay to sensationalise.
It is therefore important that media houses ascertain and analyse the operational philosophy of WikiLeaks and similar websites, before giving their revelations front page prominence. We will be expanding the frontiers of media imperialism (which we all detest) if we continue to celebrate the revelations by WikiLeaks because of the simple claim that contents emanate from US cables when, as it appears, no verification and authentication were made. Media houses wishing to publish such also ought to identify the target audience and determine the uses to which the revelations will be put. I do not think the revelations on President Jonathan and his wife published by Daily Trust and The Punch serve a greater social significance other than an attempt by WikiLeaks to present President Jonathan as a weak husband and an incompetent leader. I expect the media to respond to the challenge posed by the Presidency by approaching the EFCC to investigate the allegations of corruption against Mrs. Jonathan. The authenticity of the cables should equally be ascertained. Only then will it be seen that investigative journalism is the norm and the principles of Freedom of Information Act are being applied. Relying on information from an organisation without an identifiable structure and mechanism for verification and authentication is dangerous. It could jeopardise the relevance and future of journalism in Nigeria and other parts of the world .
|
