Wikileaks is an international online journalistic organisations that publishes secret information including classified media from anonymous sources and news leaks. The release of some documents on Wikileaks has become front page news. The websites aim is to provide the public with information that they see it has a right to know, this involves exposing corruption amongst other things.

One leak Edward Snowden revealed himself as the source of several Wikileaks and found himself subject to legal action. His leaks found him facing up to 30 years in jail for violating the Espionage act after revealing secrets linked to national security. However Snowden has exposed massive gaps in internet safety and privacy that the public can benefit from. What does the impact of Snowden’s legal campaign say about the websites legitimacy and its continued use?

Journalism has long since used anonymous sources to write stories and release information into the public sphere, this in itself is no new news. There has always been a risk to whistleblowers that they could face repercussions over their leaks but rarely to this severity.

The question up for debate is whether or not Wikileaks is less a whistleblower and more a spy. In order to be a whistleblower you must break confidentiality but this is done for the greater good and is often seen as the purpose of a free press.

However critics say that Wikileaks is more of a spy accepting stolen property and releasing it via the internet, after all no organisation intentionally leaks thousands of confidential internal documents they must have been stolen. Is releasing this information really for the public good or is it just a part of Wikileaks publicity machine handing out information on parties they don’t like.

Snowden is known as the NSA whistleblower because this is where his information came from but does it do more good then harm to release top secret information like this? The point of Wikileaks is to act as the ultimate watchdog of governments everywhere taking this position up to expose wrongdoing and secret governmental information.

One such example is the hundred of thousands of documents they have released pertaining to the Iraq war giving the public the chance to have a greater understanding of the war and loss of life involved as well as secret files relating to prisoners detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. In doing this they live up to their slogan “We open governments”

However some people see releasing the raw documents as irresponsible as they have not been analysed and have no context. They do not provide more information and therefor leave the documents open to misinterpretation by the public, which can be seen as reckless on their part. I however think that this adds to their credibility, giving the public the opportunity to come to their own opinions, with no room for bias within a story.

As a believer in the fourth state I see Wikileaks as a great step forward for journalism and freedom of expression, despite the many authority led criticisms of their work. For me exposing governments is a part of journalistic responsibility, even when doing so may result in facing punishment like that of Snowden’s plight.

By giving the public access to classified documents it means that the public do not need to rely on authorities for the official version of the truth. It gives the public a way of checking the official story and completing their own investigations which empowers the public. Empowering the public leads to a more democratic media and indeed society also.