Where’s WikiLeaks’ Iraq Data Dump?

New Media Days/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/newmediadaysdk/4131068334/">Peter Erichsen</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Didn’t WikiLeaks promise us a dump of hundreds of thousands of classified Iraq War data today? Not according to the site’s shadowy editor in chief. On his Twitter account this morning, Julian Assange took some potshots at the mainstream media for hyping a secret-document bonanza that ain’t happening. (He also trumpeted a claim that WikiLeaks could have prevented 9/11. So they’ve got that going for them.) Assange’s rant:

Where do all these claims about WikiLeaks doing something on Iraq today (Monday) come from? A single tabloid blog at Wired Magazine!

That’s right. Over 700 articles, newspapers all over the world, and newswires fooled by a tabloid blog–and each other.

Of course you won’t see this blog cited, generally, in the mainstream press articles, because that would lessen the credibility of these articles back to where the belong — unsubstantiated, and indeed, false claims made by a source that is not credible. What is journalism coming to?

But, Wired’s blog is not just any source that lacks credibility. It is a known opponent and spreader of all sorts of misinformation about WikiLeaks…

Now, I’ll try not to quibble too much with Assange’s fundamental misunderstanding of media terms (a tabloid is a style of printed newspaper, man, not a blog). And I’ll just ignore for now the irony of a guy who advocates information democracy totally trashing a viral story, and denouncing Wired‘s Threat Level and Danger Room blogs as “mainstream media.” (OK, they are owned by Conde Nast. But Seymour Hersh, that guy who uncovered that My Lai thingy and the Abu Ghraib dealy, writes for the Conde-owned The New Yorker, and I wouldn’t quite call him mainstream.)

Assange would have you believe that he’s never hyped his group’s leaks in advance (um, “Collateral Murder,” anyone?), and he also wants you to believe this is a Wired-based vendetta.

Riiight.

Just spitballing here—we’ll report the story out as it develops—but here are a few possible reasons why we heard a data dump was happening, and now it’s not:

  • Assange and his clan are taking care with the Iraq documents so as not to endanger sources, or make the government’s case against the suspected leaker, Pfc. Bradley Manning. The may even be working with the US government to scrub the files of hazardous info.
  • They planned a leak, but their site got jammed. (It’s down for “scheduled maintenance” at the moment.)
  • Their preferred media collaborators—the New York Times, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel—want more time to research the goods.

In any case, while we wait for new developments, check out Spencer Ackerman’s WikiLeaks work at Danger Room—he’s been all over this issue like a pit bull on rump roast, and his rundown of the likely contents is eerily astute for someone who’s never worked for Uncle Sam with a security clearance. And as you read, judge for yourself whether Wired has it out for WikiLeaks…or treats it like every other (capricious, testy, high-maintenance, semi-unreliable) source for breaking news.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate