Thinking back to discussions from 15 or more years ago, when Assange was just becoming a celebrity and Wikileaks was being courted by news organisations, targeted by security services.
Even back to 2006, Others in the infosec / privacy sphere were highly concerned about how WL operated:
1) the concept of priveleged paid access to "spicy leaks" vs publicly available information
2) the intent of the anonymous leakers
3) transparency of the organisation, especially who was funding it and who was benefiting from the priveleged access
One element that stood out for me was the safety and security of individuals like Chelsea Manning, who were acting in good conscience.
From the above conversation:
"WikiLeaks reveals, but it is not primarily a tool of
revelation. There are many avenues on the internet for revelation. What does not exist is a social movement to that makes acting ethically by leaking a virtue. What does not exist is a comfortable way for everyone to leak safely and easily."
2/3
The left jumped on Assange's case but weren't aware or interested in these tensions. And at the same time have embraced the surveillance Googloligarchy.
https://cryptome.org/2014/08/google-wikileaks-note.htm
That for me is the disappointing part - whatever else has happened in the last decade or so, whatever happened on that couch in Sweden, that's the shot that Assange missed.
3/3
(way out of my swim lane here but these are narratives that I'm not seeing here much)
