Secrets, lies and the internet

WikiLeaks continues to dominate the headlines as the US seeks to punish Julian Assange and "hacktivists" seek to punish those companies who stopped services to WikiLeaks. The battle between online activists and governments trying to protect their secrets heats up.

Liars and lawyers

The US government should not bend the law to punish WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. It is a government of laws and not of men, writes the Financial Times.

... If Mr Assange’s activities in disclosing documents amount to a crime under US law, he should of course stand trial. But it is far from clear whether he has committed any crime. ...

Free spirits

In a cyber-attack known as Operation Payback, a group of online activists called Anonymous targeted the websites of companies such as Visa, MasterCard, PayPal and Amazon, which had cut services to WikiLeaks. Welcome to the world of the chaotic good, writes The Guardian.

... These companies all considered that their association with WikiLeaks damaged their brand image, a reflection prompted in some cases by a helpful call from the US state department. In essence they are trying to have it both ways: pretending in their marketing that they are free spirits and enablers of the cyber world, but only living up to that image as long as they don't upset anyone really important. At Amazon there is real confusion between the two roles: it refused to host WikiLeaks but continued to sell an eBook of the leaked cables online.

The hacktivists of Anonymous may be accused of many things — such as immaturity or being run by a herd instinct. But theirs is the cyber equivalent of non-violent action or civil disobedience. It disrupts rather than damages. In challenging the credit card companies and the web hosts in this way, they are reminding these businesses that their brand reputation relies not only on how the state department sees them, but also on how they maintain their independence in the eyes of their users. ...