Does it worry you that people believe wikileaks without a second thought?

[Imperial]

We have this publisher that is suppose to "leak" highly "classified" information and not a single source is listed to back up these documents? These documents are just text files that could be made up from anyone. I understand that they don't want to give out names because of the sort of information is being leaked, but shouldn't there be some kind of validation? Furthermore, wikileaks releases all these documents 200,000 at a time so there is no way the government can even verify all of it in a timely manner. It's bad enough that the media never facts check their own reporting, now with wikileaks, they have the world at their finger tips.

Though, however, the documents aren't that damaging which makes me believe they have some truth behind them. But should wikileaks be put into a situation where they have that much power? It's unbelieved that people take what they say without a second thought.

[The Dude]

Well people believe Fox News without a second thought too, so I'm sort of worried about people's gullibility in general.

[Azog 150]

Well people believe Fox News without a second thought too, so I'm sort of worried about people's gullibility in general.

Precisely this.

Media outlets routinely overhype or sometimes outright lie and people swallow it without a second thought. I'd say that is even more dangerous then wikileaks.

[Imperial]

Tbh, noone accused of something in Wikileaks has denied it, so why shouldn't we believe them?

Actually, Saudi Arabia has already denounced that it told the US to attack Iran. Also, these documents are released in huge volumes which involves more then just one person. The amount of fact checking required would take a long time.

But I'm not saying they have lied, however, the ability to play with the power they now have is a potential risk.

Media outlets routinely overhype or sometimes outright lie and people swallow it without a second thought. I'd say that is even more dangerous then wikileaks.

The difference is everyone knows the media sensationalizes its stories. Also, the media never claimed to spy on government cables. Wikileaks is now a step above the media.

[Hrobatos]

of it would be nothing, you would never hear for them, people are talking about world conspiracies all the time, have you ever wondered why no one listenes those?
and why people do listen to Wikileaks?

its simple, Wikilieaks has real thing

[removeduser_4536284751384]

the reaction by governments involved prooves them to be genuine. Would the US give someone 58 years for spying if they were invented?

although I don't see what the fuss is about. It's just diplomats expressing views we could guess they already held.

[boofhead]

Besides, the US govt has never claimed they were not genuine. They are just silent on it a lot.

[Imperial]

Well people believe Fox News without a second thought too, so I'm sort of worried about people's gullibility in general.

Yes, but FOX also has people within their company that one can blame for giving them false information. wikileaks is a bunch of anonymous users that have no repercussions for what they say or do. Therefore they can act with impunity and not be responsible for whatever consequence they cause.

FYI: I also slammed the media for not fact checking either.

Besides, the US govt has never claimed they were not genuine. They are just silent on it a lot.

I never said they are lying, I'm saying they have the potential to distort or even leave out information. Now that they have gotten widespread fame, everyone and their grandparents will be submitting "classified" information to them. Who does the fact checking of these so called "classified" info?

[boofhead]

I never said they are lying, I'm saying they have the potential to distort or even leave out information. Now that they have gotten widespread fame, everyone and their grandparents will be submitting "classified" information to them. Who does the fact checking of these so called "classified" info?

Nobody can fact check them, because they are on secret databases. The fact that the USG doesn't deny them says everything. They can't afford to lie and be caught out by yet another turncoat.

And I've been following wikileaks for some years. They don't just expose US documents, they've leaked documents from many nations - I'm sure they've received thousands of documents they haven't published. It would depend whether they were newsworthy or not. I suppose this factor may lead to accusations of potential distortion by omission, but they have stated they will release all 250,000 cables so I don't really see them leaving out much. A lot of the already leaked ones are very boring.

[Imperial]

Nobody can fact check them, because they are on secret databases. The fact that the USG doesn't deny them says everything.

I'm talking about giving wikileaks the power to lie, meaning future releases, not present tense.

I'm not just talking about the US government, and other governments around the world have denied what wikileaks has release

They can't afford to lie and be caught out by yet another turncoat.

Money speaks volumes, especially with all the "donations" they get. The risk is there.

[Yosemite]

im more worried about people calling them terrorists without a second though

[C-Rob]

im more worried about people calling them terrorists without a second though

"THIS"

and ThIS

" It's just diplomats expressing views we could guess they already held."

so real but oh so pointless.

[Exarch]

i regard some allegations in wikileaks as plausible,

others i think not so much

remember that most of the cables are just US diplomats and spies opining their own thoughts about xyz

i wouldn't be surprised if other spy agencies had cables discussing xyz political leader has herpes or cancer or etc etc etc

[Imperial]

If I posted on this forum that 9/11 was an inside job, I would get laughed at and my thread closed by a mod for not posting any source. But if wikileaks were to say that 9/11 was an inside job without any references, everyone would believe them just because its from wikileaks. That is how much power they have and it is unsettling.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

If I posted on this forum that 9/11 was an inside job, I would get laughed at and my thread closed by a mod for not posting any source. But if wikileaks were to say that 9/11 was an inside job without any references, everyone would believe them just because its from wikileaks. That is how much power they have and it is unsettling.

This is just utter bollocks.

[Imperial]

This is just utter bollocks.

O RLY?

care to explain to me why? So you are telling me that people will dismiss wikileaks claim even after all they have done so far? I find that hard to believe.

[chilon]

care to explain to me why? So you are telling me that people will dismiss wikileaks claim even after all they have done so far? I find that hard to believe.

You must believe the entire population is just extremely ignorant and believes anything that any source with some subjective credibility supports. As if people have no ability to double check information on their own.

The form of your argument is just invalid though.

Here we can just play switcheroo to see how silly:

"If I posted on this forum that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by Obama, I would get laughed at and my thread closed by a mod for not posting any source. But if Fox News were to say that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by Obama without any references, everyone would believe them just because its from Fox News. That is how much power they have and it is unsettling."

[Imperial]

You must believe the entire population is just extremely ignorant and believes anything .

Yes. Don't you?

As if people have no ability to double check information on their own.

And how would they even check these documents? Wiki is the one publishing them, but they get their info from anonymous users. If there is no source to the documents they get, then how could people check them on their own?

The form of your argument is just invalid though.

Here we can just play switcheroo to see how silly:

"If I posted on this forum that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by Obama, I would get laughed at and my thread closed by a mod for not posting any source. But if Fox News were to say that 9/11 was an inside job perpetrated by Obama without any references, everyone would believe them just because its from Fox News. That is how much power they have and it is unsettling."

It was used as an example, calm down bro.

[Exarch]

i do think it's dangerous that governments may be able to strategically 'leak' info, the way Petreaus and his pro war party 'leaked' info on surging afghanistan in order to influence obama's decision;

a leak is not necessarily fair dinkum, it could well be misinformation or counterintelligence

[Angrychris]

You will be subjugated under the wikileaks. Resistance is optional.