The Fourth Estate’s Digital Evolution: Assessing the Ripple Effects of Wikileaks

Abstract

This paper discusses Wikileaks as a digital archive of classified information that contributes to how the Fourth Estate functions in light of recent developments in digital news media. My research considers Wikileaks’ published classified materials on the digital platform in relation to the traditional methods of leaking classified information in journalism. I argue that, through its digital archive, Wikileaks has effectively constructed a network between itself, journalists, citizens and the government. Wikileaks represents a historic development in the dissemination of classified information.

Introduction

Fundamental processes of democracy involving free speech and a free press have been preserved by whistleblowers engaging with the press throughout history. The significance of the press in assisting public scrutiny and upholding democratic processes is seen in the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 by former U.S. military analyst Daniel Ellsberg.¹ The U.S. government subsequently indicted both Ellsberg and The New York Times. However, the Supreme Court ruled to de-classify the papers and with historical resonance the Court stated:

In the First Amendment, the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. (Justice Hugo Black, 1971)

This ruling shows one moment in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court’s preservation of First Amendment rights to free speech and a free press. It effectively promoted the role of whistleblowers and journalists as “revealers” of governmental deception and “upholders” of democracy. This role of the press in holding a government accountable for deception by informing the public is known historically as the function of the “Fourth Estate.”² In creating a digital archive of classified materials, Wikileaks creates what I will refer to throughout this paper as “a network” that links itself, journalists, citizens and the government. How the network functions in relation to the digital archive represents a historic change in the way the Fourth Estate functions in U.S. democracy. Consideration must now be made over how digital media channels contribute to the dissemination of classified information. The purpose of this paper is to understand how Wikileaks’ digital archive provides a source for the dissemination of classified material by journalists and to attempt to determine the limits of governmental accountability resulting from Wikileaks’ published material. The purpose is also to show how a digital Fourth Estate contributes to secondary democratic processes, such as public debate, and that the digital processes within the network demonstrate a historical evolution of the Fourth Estate.³

            Founded in 2007 by editor-in-chief Julian Assange, Wikileaks receives classified information through an electronic drop-box secured by “cutting-edge cryptographic information technologies”⁴ which protects a source’s identity. The greater historical significance of this digital cryptography cannot be fully gaged, as the organization has only been active for seven years. However, Wikileaks’ archiving of the Iraq war video log entitled “Collateral Murder”⁵ is one example of how the dissemination of classified material, through digital journalism, represents a historical shift in the ways information is leaked. This historical shift is evident in the impact the video’s release has had on the network, which I will discuss throughout this paper. The more-recent developments in cryptography and the Internet’s ability to instantly spread information across the world create this historic shift because it also affects how journalists disseminate classified information to the public. Wikileaks’ digital archive evidences this shift. Whistleblowers are now able to place classified documents immediately into the hands of the public meaning that Fourth Estate duties no longer rest solely on print media or direct relationships between whistleblowers and journalists (constraints of time and place). I argue that digital cryptography has transformed how journalists and citizens interact with classified materials and this has subsequently transformed modern U.S. democratic process which center around free speech and a free press. The government is now subject to public exposure of its secrets with an increased degree of immediacy that possess volatile consequences. Nevertheless, this is a modern development of democracy. Wikileaks’ “About” page reminds the public of the democratic foundation the organization’s work is built on:

The broader principles on which our work is based are the defense of freedom of speech and media publishing, the improvement of our common historical record and the support of the rights of all people to create new history. We derive these principles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (Wikileaks 2011)  

The Network and U.S. Governmental Accountability 

Wikileaks establishes itself as a source for journalists within the Fourth Estate and does this through its digital archiving (what Wikileaks calls “principled leaking”⁶) of classified information. Establishing itself as a source with this archive, Wikileaks also seeks out relationships with journalists and this point is brought up in Lynch’s article that considers these relationships:

. . . the “About” section also suggests Wikileaks is a tool for journalists, characterizing the leaks they provided as “an enabling jump-of point for media,” and asserting that “it’s hard for a journalist to be an expert in all areas they cover [so] the comments attached to the documents online will provide the journalist with an instant source. (Lynch 2010)

Wikileaks also appeals directly to citizens through the very act of publishing sensitive military documents for purposes of holding the U.S. government accountable. The Fourth Estate’s role within U.S. democracy, which links whistleblowers, journalists, citizens and the government, has changed alongside Wikileaks’ inception. The organization has digitally systematized the process of whistleblowing and its digital archive has been created in the tradition of a “free and unrestrained press” in order to expose governmental deception and secrecy. However, McNair insists on the distinction between what Wikileaks does and journalism because Wikileaks “dumps data.”⁷ He reminds us that the job of journalists in uncovering governmental deception is in sifting through the thousands of “diplomatic or military cables” and performing close scrutiny of the information found. He mentions that information needs to be translated from the “official and often unpenetrable jargon” by journalists and released through “mainstream media channels” because this very translation and method of dispersal is what creates an impact politically. The work Wikileaks is doing not only contradicts this line of thought McNair is reminding us of, it represents a change already taken place in how the Fourth Estate functions. Digital cryptography, through Wikileaks, has evolved the free press. Perhaps this rapid evolution is the distinction between the fate of Daniel Ellsberg and that of Chelsea Manning. Ellsberg was working within a Fourth Estate system already established in the U.S. and although Manning was charged under the espionage act, she represents a precarious first wave of digital whistleblowers in U.S. history.

Connections between Wikileaks and journalism are reflected visually in their interface which mimics a digital newspaper and the organization promotes itself as an “independent”⁸ form of journalism which is, therefore, less susceptible to influence from powerful organizations in society. However, Lynch’s article addresses struggles Wikileaks has encountered in its attempts to integrate their “independent” journalism into public realms. This demonstrates a limit or struggle faced by the organization in enacting the role of a Digital Fourth Estate, which demonstrates a limit to the ripple effects it has on U.S. democratic processes. Lynch analyzes Wikileaks’ expressed frustrations over a lack of coverage on their leaks by journalists. For example, some documents, leaked copies of the “2003 and 2004 Guantanamo Bay officers’ handbook”⁹ took almost a year to receive coverage from mainstream media channels.  

1.1 Context and Recontextualizations Of the Iraq War Video Log in The Network

In looking closely at the components of the Fourth Estate (represented by the network) I want to draw attention to the impact that Wikileaks’ digital archive has had on how U.S. government accountability occurred following the release of the collateral murder video in 2010. One way this impact is seen is through, what Hasian calls, “recontextualizations”¹⁰ of the classified material in public spheres (digital and print news media). Understanding the government’s rcontextualization of the collateral murder video, which depicts the 2007 “New Baghdad engagement,”¹¹ is an attempt to understand the extent with which Wikileaks and digital journalism was successful in holding the U.S. government responsible for questionable acts of war.  

Hasian discusses the “independent” journalism of Wikileaks, seen in their lack of restraint in “showing the faces of the dead,” which often is observed by journalists documenting tragedies of war due to difficulty in “decoding” or creating a context for the “visual depictions of wartime deaths.” He also addresses that Wikileaks is distinctly and deliberately promoting “public debate about standard operating procedures in Iraq.” Hasian relates this work historically to painter Francisco Goya and shows another way the Fourth Estate has digitally evolved:

Wikileaks employees described themselves as investigative journalists who were willing to ask the tough questions that were ignored by mainstream media outlets . . . they were willing to use their revelatory images in critiques of Coalition practices in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in many ways, their supporters could say that they were adopting the types of tactics that can be traced back to the time when Goya’s prints of the dead in Los Desastres de la Guerra were used to comment on the actions of the French battles with Spanish guerillas . . . (Hasian 2012)  

The video Wikileaks released was recorded in 2007 during the Iraq War and depicts U.S. soldiers in an Apache helicopter shooting Iraqi civilians and 2 Reuters journalists in two distinct rounds of fire. The video exposes dehumanization of Iraqi civilians. In publishing this video alongside transcripts, a timeline of events, links to various digital news publications which covered the event, and a recorded eye witness account by U.S. ground soldier Ethan McCord Wikileaks provides context and a detailed scrutiny of the event available to the public at all times. Providing these documents through an accessible digital archive for public scrutiny opens up the possibility for a greater democratic debate amongst journalists and citizens as this scrutiny engages pathos, logos and ethos when analyzing them. Furthermore, this engagement fulfills the secondary democratic effects of public debate within the U.S. system of government that the Fourth Estate enacts. 

Releasing the video into the public domain has created a lasting ripple effect in the public record. The archive of this event will be available for the scrutiny of future generations and the complexities of its usefulness can be considered within the context of leaked information throughout history. McNair draws attention to the effectiveness of classified information in altering the future of our democratic system, specifically. Classified information is not meant for public consideration or use but is composed in secret for and by “elites.” It therefore possesses a level of “authenticity” which creates greater consequences for them upon its exposure. The quality of information Wikileaks works with can be seen and heard in the collateral murder video and its release was so significant because, as McNair brings up, it “gave publicity and visibility to atrocity.”¹²

Wikileaks’ release of the video elicited a response from the U.S. government that consisted of, as Hasian describes, rhetorical strategies to domesticate the event. Hasian is critical of how the government’s rhetorical techniques, which attempted to restructure how the event was perceived by Iraqi and U.S. civilians, were used to neutralize “political fallout” following the video’s release. He argues that the U.S. military “took advantage of a number of dominant military narratives and cultural forces” in order to domesticate “these visual wars.”¹³ The reframing of events by the government involved the release of public versions of the original U.S. military reports compiled very shortly after the New Baghdad engagement in 2007, which claimed that engagement in the surrounding area just before and after it presented cause for the soldiers actions. Hasian’s critique of these recontextualizations draws our attention to the government’s adherence to “dominant” perspectives and discourses about the war in order to “challenge and domesticate” the events depicted in the video Wikileaks published in their digital archive. The reports also used documentation to “persuade potential readers”¹⁴ of what the military claimed to be responsible decision-making on the part of the soldiers involved. Hasian further develops a critical perspective of the government’s attempts to domesticate the collateral murder event by scrutinizing their “apologetic performances,” which entailed handing out “condolence payments” to the Iraqi families on behalf of the Department of Defense. None of the soldiers faced “official censure” or “public recrimination” for their actions and even after the classified materials were published in 2010 “Coalition forces found no reason to open up any new investigations.”¹⁵ In providing these examples my attempt was to show that the government is an aspect of the network Wikileaks creates through its digital archive and also to show techniques of debate it adhered to following the exposure of the video as a way of determining how successful Wikileaks is in holding governments accountable. Hasian’s rhetorical analysis and use of logos in developing critical perspectives towards acts of war involving the U.S. government, made possible through Wikileaks’ digital publications, suggests another manner in which a Digital Fourth Estate functions in relation to the U.S. government.

1.2 Communication Wikileaks Generates within the Digital Fourth Estate

Tracking citizen engagement with online public discourse provides further consideration of how Fourth Estate functions evolve digitally. Aharony’s study looks closely at public discussions generated in online newspapers around the world following the 2010 additions to Wikileaks’ digital archive (thousands of diplomatic and military “cables”¹⁶). The “user generated content” shows a predominance of pathos. Aharony’s findings reveal that “uncensored” platforms shape how public discourse happens because they provide a channel for emotional outlet that would not be seen in formal news publications. In light of Hasian’s argument that the job of mainstream media channels is to translate obscure information for the public in an effort to make a political impact, Aharony’s findings suggest that the interaction between the public and Wikileaks’ digital archive via mainstream media represents a secondary function of a digital Fourth Estate that is public debate:

These findings can be interpreted in two ways. The first is that the WikiLeaks phenomenon is controversial, thus it arouses emotions and pathos. The second is that perhaps the specific platform of comments or talk-backs which is usually uncensored, may encourage users to write superficial comments, in comparison with other internet platforms that enable users to express more thoughtful and deep comments. (Aharony 2012)

             

Aharony considers the secondary effects of public debate (within the network Wikileaks generates through its digital archive) rhetorically in terms of ethos, pathos and logos. A predominance of pathos was discovered in these public discussions and these findings were attributed to either the controversial nature of Wikileaks, or the uncensored nature of these specific digital platforms which encouraged comments that were less thoughtful, but also more superficial. Aharony maintains an objective viewpoint in the study and allows an independent platform for data to “encourage further exploration” into how and when these conversations occur and develop within a democratic system. This study shows another ripple effect of the Digital Fourth Estate. The findings demonstrate how the “nature of the relationship between media texts and reactions to them” is related to Wikileaks’ digital archive. It also demonstrates that the ripple effect of this digital archive possesses limits due to a lack of structure within a digital platform like an online new publication. This point reflects the nature of a given digital platform to shape and evolve democratic processes because a predominance of pathos was linked to its structure, which lacked censure. Perhaps, this suggests possibilities of a continued evolution of democracy alongside these developing forms of digital media.

Conclusion

Wikileaks’ relies on its cryptographic information technology to publish classified information and this format has contributed to how the role of the Fourth Estate has evolved. Conducting an analysis of Wikileaks as a Digital Fourth Estate is helpful for understanding the historical evolution of free speech and a free press in this digital world. It also helps us understand the significance and impact the Digital Fourth Estate has had on U.S. democracy. The use of cryptography within a digital platform allows Wikileaks to continue working at creating social and political impact and evaluating aspects of the network in the U.S. assist in understanding democratic processes related to the evolution of the Fourth Estate. The importance of public knowledge over governmental secrecy Wikileaks adheres to is a central concern upholding their commitment to efforts made in the name of free speech and freedom of the press. Considering the different aspects of the network draws attention to how the Fourth Estate informs the public and, subsequently, how digital media impacts the way democratic processes are enacted today.

  

Notes

     1. For more information on the circumstances surrounding Daniel Ellsberg’s release of the Pentagon Papers visit http://www.ellsberg.net/bio.

     2. Lynch p. 311

     3. In The French Revolution: A History Thomas Carlyle wrote about the Fourth Estate. This phrase refers to the role fulfilled by the press in monitoring and reporting on governmental activities. It’s name refers to the three “estates” in medieval society (Great Britain) which included the clergy, the nobility and the commoners. The Fourth Estate emerged in the mid 19^th century when the press began to function as a distinct entity impacting democratic processes in society.

     4. https://wikileaks.org/About.html

     5. http://www.collateralmurder.com

     6. https://wikileaks.org/About.htm    

     7. McNair p. 83

     8. https://wikileaks.org/About.html

     9. Lynch p. 313

     10. Hasian p.197    

     11.Hasian p.193

     12. McNair p.85

     13. Hasian p.197

     14. Hasian p.199

     15. Hasian p. 198

     16. Aharony p.833

Works Cited

Aharony, Noa. “WikiLeaks Comments: A Study of Responses to Articles.” Online Information

Review. 36.6 (2012): 828-845. Web. 29 October 2014.

Black, Justice Hugo. “New York Times Co. v. United States (No. 1873).” Cornell University

Law School. Web. 1 December 2014.

Carlyle, Thomas.  Project Gutenberg. 1301. “The French Revolution: A History.” The Project

Gutenberg, 15 February 2006. Web. 7 December 2014.

Ellsberg, Daniel. “Bio.” Daniel Ellsberg’s Website. Word Press. Web. 1 December 2014.

Hasian Marouf A. “Watching the Domestication of the Wikileaks Helicopter

Controversy.” Communication Quarterly. 60.2 (2012) 190-209: Web. 30 October 2014.

Lynch, Lisa. “We're Going to Crack the World Open. Wikileaks and the Future of Investigative Reporting.” Journalism Practice. 4.3 (2010) 309-318: Web. 24 October 2014.

McMahon, Mary. “What is the Fourth Estate?” wiseGeek. 18 November 2014. Web. 30 October 2014.

McNair, Brian. “WikiLeaks, Journalism and the Consequences of Chaos.” Media International Austrailia. 144 (2012) 77-86: Web. 30 October 2014.

Wikileaks. “About.” WikiLeaks. 7 May 2011. Sunshine Press, 2006. Web. 2 October 2014.