Leaked Wikileaks memo to media on what not to say about Assange

It’s anyone’s guess what the intent of this the confidential memo from Wikileaks to media telling them what they couldn’t publish about Julian Assange – ars Technica Please don’t repeat these things WikiLeaks says you can’t say about Assange

A representative of WikiLeaks has sent a “confidential” memo to news outlets including an updated “defamation list” (version 1.2), advising reporters not to mention or publish it. The memo was promptly leaked (update: the first out of the gate to leak was Emma Best of MuckRock). WikiLeaks then linked to a revised, heavily edited and redacted version (version 1.3) they posted “anonymously” on a text paste site.

Here, without further comment or editing, and in its entirety, is the WikiLeaks advisory.

The memo is published.

It is well documented that there is a pervasive climate of inaccurate claims about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, including purposeful fabrications planted in large and otherwise “reputable” media outlets.

Consequently journalists and publishers have a clear responsibility to carefully fact-check from primary sources and to consult the following list to ensure they are not spreading, and have not spread, defamatory falsehoods about WikiLeaks or Julian Assange.

A number of items on the list start with “It is false and defamatory to suggest…”. Eg:

It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has been, “hiding” in the embassy [in fact, his location is well known and his formal legal status is “political refugee”; it is incorrect to suggest that refugees, by virtue of being in the jurisdiction of refuge, are “hiding”].

It is bizarre for a transparency organisation to be trying to tell media what they shouldn’t say.

Media should carefully fact check, but consulting the Wikileaks list should not be the end of any investigation.

I expect that some journalists will take up the challenge and go through the list doing some fact checking of points raised. This one might be worth a look.

It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks does not have a perfect record of accurately verifying its publications.

 

14 Comments

  1. artcroft

     /  January 8, 2019

    His Spanish must be pretty good after all this time in that embassy.

  2. Noel

     /  January 8, 2019

    Ahhh can I continue to call Wikileaks a thief?

    • Pickled Possum

       /  January 8, 2019

      if Wikileaks stole the data they printed then YES
      if WikiLeaks was given stolen data they printed then NO

      • NOEL

         /  January 8, 2019

        What if the Australian hacker groomed the provider how to get around the passwords?

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 8, 2019

          If they knew it was stolen, they are receiving stolen goods, and they must have known.

          • Duker

             /  January 8, 2019

            Slater tried that line with Hagers book…didn’t work

  3. acrossthespectrum

     /  January 8, 2019

    Why should Wikileaks get all the attention?
    Let’s whip up a storm here on YNZ.
    1. Sudden SE geographical shift means Australia will
    collide with NZ in March next year.
    2. Hitler found alive and well in Morrinsville.
    3. Southern Alps found to be made up entirely of Diamond.
    Greens oppose mining.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  January 8, 2019

      He’d have to be 131. Pol Pot might be more credible.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  January 8, 2019

        I love the idea of a diamond mountain. The world’s diamond merchants would have apoplectic fits, as it would kill the market. Hum…could we make it a believable source of diamonds, one that would make NZ the diamond capital of the world because of the purity of the stones and still have the Greens opposing it ?

        I LOVE diamonds.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 8, 2019

          Pol Pot running an Asian supermarket under a false name…there’d be no need to deport him, the local Cambodians would make sure that he didn’t live long enough.

      • acrossthespectrum

         /  January 8, 2019

        @Kitty Catkin. “He’d have to be 131” .
        Celebrates his 130th on April 20th.
        You going to the do? 🙂

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 8, 2019

          I’d dance on his grave if I knew where it was.

          Some apologies for human beings will celebrate it, no doubt.

          Have you read Mein Kampf ? I began, but even allowing for the natural abhorrence that I felt, I found it so repetitive, contradictory and DULL that I didn’t get very far.I felt that I should read the actual book, but couldn’t keep ploughing through such tedious twaddle.

          I was forgetting that someone isn’t one when they’re born.

  4. acrossthespectrum

     /  January 8, 2019

    No I have hardly read any books. I could not find books about real NZ people I could relate. NZ writers tried to be like British writers until the 1980’s. I’d given up by then.

    • Gezza

       /  January 8, 2019

      Barry Crump was a character much like a couple of uncles of mine & some blokes I encountered in my teens around Taranaki.