Tag Results for WikiLeaks

The Sweden-based WikiLeaks site recently released a stunning collection of secret US military reports out of Afghanistan that it dubbed the "Afghan War Diaries." The release prompted howls of protest from some critics, who said some of the documents contained information about informants aiding US forces. Other analysts called the documents nothing new, even though their release has sparked renewed debate about whether continued American military intervention in the country can achieve anything.

We're back from our week off with a new show, centered on a theme of coverage US involvement in Afghanistan. We're also welcoming a couple of relatively unfamiliar guest panelists as we continue to search for Joe Sciacca's replacement.

Today's topics:

Sticky Wiki - The Sweden-based WikiLeaks site recently released a stunning collection of secret US military reports out of Afghanistan that it dubbed the "Afghan War Diaries." The release prompted howls of protest from some critics, who said some of the documents contained information about informants aiding US forces. Other analysts called the documents nothing new, even though their release has sparked renewed debate about whether continued American military intervention in the country can achieve anything.

In Your Face - TIME magazine's cover this week features an Afghan teenage bride who had her nose and ears cut off as punishment, on orders from a Taliban commander, for fleeing an abusive marriage. TIME also ran the provocative headline: "What happens when we leave Afghanistan." The cover prompted some to accuse the magazine of agenda journalism and exploitation - one critic even called it "war porn" - while others said it was an unflinching look at the future fate of Afghan women if the US leaves before the threat of a new Taliban takeover is diminished.

Plus Panel Peeves.

The Panel: Emily, hosting, Dan, Kara sitting in for Callie, WGBH Radio's Philip Martin making his second guest appearance, and Marjorie Eagan of WTKK and the Boston Herald making her debut in the second guest chair.

Like just about everyone else in the media world, I'm trying to make sense today of the WikiLeaks documents, the Pentagon Papers of our time. The documents — reported by the New York Times, the Guardian* and Der Spiegel — show that the war in Afghanistan has been undermined by untrustworthy "friends" in the Pakistani intelligence service, chaos and duplicity in Afghanistan, and mistakes by American and allied forces leading to civilian casualties.

In a sense, it's nothing we didn't know, and the White House argues that the situation has been improving since President Obama charted his own course. (The most recent documents in the cache are from December 2009.) Still, like the Pentagon Papers, the documents offer official confirmation that things are (or at least were) as bad as we feared, if not worse.

I think WikiLeaks' strategy of giving the three Western news organizations a month to go over the documents before making them public was brilliant. Earlier this year, WikiLeaks and its founder, Julien Assange, got a lot of attention over a video it had obtained of an American helicopter firing on civilians in Iraq, including two Reuters freelancers. Ultimately, though, it proved to be the wrong kind of attention — the heavy-handed editing made it appear more like an anti-American propaganda film than documentary evidence. (WikiLeaks also released a longer, unedited version.)

By contrast, in providing the latest documents to news organizations, Assange was able to get out of the way and let credible journalists tell the story. Jay Rosen, in a characteristically thoughtful post about WikiLeaks ("the world's first stateless news organization"), thinks Assange did it because he knew the story wouldn't get the attention it deserved unless the traditional media could break it.

I don't disagree, but I think a more important reason is that the public will take it more seriously.

Also: At the Nation, Greg Mitchell has been rounding up links about the WikiLeaks story here and here.

*Disclosure: I write a weekly online column for the Guardian about media and politics.

The web site WikiLeaks posted classified US military video of a helicopter attack that killed two Reuters journalists.  The Pentagon says the video only tells a portion of a story that needs much more context.