Topic 2: WIKILEAKS
1.What do you think of actions by Wikileaks? Good ? Bad? Useful? Irresponsible?
I am all for Wikileaks and think that it is all good. The reason is that those in power are often funded covertly by special interest groups that need to come to the light of mainstream society. I think it is very useful for keeping the governing powers in check and giving the power back to the people.
2. EXPLAIN why you feel that way.
I feel that way because I worked for many years as an undercover special investigator for ICS. During my work, I learned many things that the public is not privy to. Ever since cameras have been used on cell phones, people now get to see what many law enforcement officers do or have done because no one was/is watching. I believe in transparency, especially when it concerns government of all branches from the local level up to high GS levels. I think that the more information is leaked, the more the private sector will learn about who is doing what such as the insurance companies who made insurance laws. The people have the illusion of freedom but not true freedom. I feel that Wikileaks are great because they are not exposing sensitive personal information such as medical records or information that would jeopardize peoples safety and security. I think many people have been subject to the results of the rich which include about 7 or 8 corporations that run the entire planet, yet most are unaware of what is really going on. Transparency International is great but even greater are those who have no agenda other than informing the people. Freedom will only be a possibility if transparency is put first.
3. Give an EXAMPLE to support your point of view.
The example in the Ted talk interview with Julian Assange included an Apache Helicopter that was ordered to fire on unarmed people. The more information we have as people, the more people can truly unite rather than being separated. I think of Edward Bernays who used media to sell cigarettes to large tobacco companies. If people understand the psychology of conformity and how they have been led to believe things then real change is possible as people unite with a common interest- freedom.
4. How do you feel about the current state of free speech, access to information/internet or freedom of expression /creativity? Be specific in you stance (e.g. I'm fine because....or note why you are concerned by government transparency or restrictive copyright rules...or proposed new FCC rules on net neutrality...)
I am fine with the current state of free speech except on one issue I think people are largely unaware of (see below). One thing that I am not fine with is this: There is no one single place where people can go to access simplified law which is understandable in laymen's terms. The current laws on the books can be accessed however, it would take many years to sift through, let alone understand, the complicated legal jargon. There are many shades of gray when it comes to freedom of expression/creativity. The gray areas are often ambiguous and could be interpreted by different legal representatives in several different ways. I think that federal law and state law are often at odds and in some cases opposite such as the laws on the use of medicinal plants. As things change as did the world with the internet- law is very difficult to establish and implement which concerns me because it will require a shut down and require years to write.
5. Give an EXAMPLE to illustrate your point.
People are aware that they do have protection under the law for free speech however, what I think they are not aware of is that people are not free to say anything they want. Many things said can land people in jail or broke from imposed fines. There needs to be a "site specific" type of law such as "internet law" that covers usage, copyright, libel, privacy, and so on. Otherwise, I predict people will lose every said "right" they have been granted under the constitution. Consolidation of ownership of media companies for example, puts the power in a few which are actually responsible for making laws that serve the wealthy, or very small percentage of the population. In a way, George Orwell was on to something. I am not sure what the solution/s are but I do think that people are waking up- thanks to Wikileaks and such.
I am all for Wikileaks and think that it is all good. The reason is that those in power are often funded covertly by special interest groups that need to come to the light of mainstream society. I think it is very useful for keeping the governing powers in check and giving the power back to the people.
2. EXPLAIN why you feel that way.
I feel that way because I worked for many years as an undercover special investigator for ICS. During my work, I learned many things that the public is not privy to. Ever since cameras have been used on cell phones, people now get to see what many law enforcement officers do or have done because no one was/is watching. I believe in transparency, especially when it concerns government of all branches from the local level up to high GS levels. I think that the more information is leaked, the more the private sector will learn about who is doing what such as the insurance companies who made insurance laws. The people have the illusion of freedom but not true freedom. I feel that Wikileaks are great because they are not exposing sensitive personal information such as medical records or information that would jeopardize peoples safety and security. I think many people have been subject to the results of the rich which include about 7 or 8 corporations that run the entire planet, yet most are unaware of what is really going on. Transparency International is great but even greater are those who have no agenda other than informing the people. Freedom will only be a possibility if transparency is put first.
3. Give an EXAMPLE to support your point of view.
The example in the Ted talk interview with Julian Assange included an Apache Helicopter that was ordered to fire on unarmed people. The more information we have as people, the more people can truly unite rather than being separated. I think of Edward Bernays who used media to sell cigarettes to large tobacco companies. If people understand the psychology of conformity and how they have been led to believe things then real change is possible as people unite with a common interest- freedom.
4. How do you feel about the current state of free speech, access to information/internet or freedom of expression /creativity? Be specific in you stance (e.g. I'm fine because....or note why you are concerned by government transparency or restrictive copyright rules...or proposed new FCC rules on net neutrality...)
I am fine with the current state of free speech except on one issue I think people are largely unaware of (see below). One thing that I am not fine with is this: There is no one single place where people can go to access simplified law which is understandable in laymen's terms. The current laws on the books can be accessed however, it would take many years to sift through, let alone understand, the complicated legal jargon. There are many shades of gray when it comes to freedom of expression/creativity. The gray areas are often ambiguous and could be interpreted by different legal representatives in several different ways. I think that federal law and state law are often at odds and in some cases opposite such as the laws on the use of medicinal plants. As things change as did the world with the internet- law is very difficult to establish and implement which concerns me because it will require a shut down and require years to write.
5. Give an EXAMPLE to illustrate your point.
People are aware that they do have protection under the law for free speech however, what I think they are not aware of is that people are not free to say anything they want. Many things said can land people in jail or broke from imposed fines. There needs to be a "site specific" type of law such as "internet law" that covers usage, copyright, libel, privacy, and so on. Otherwise, I predict people will lose every said "right" they have been granted under the constitution. Consolidation of ownership of media companies for example, puts the power in a few which are actually responsible for making laws that serve the wealthy, or very small percentage of the population. In a way, George Orwell was on to something. I am not sure what the solution/s are but I do think that people are waking up- thanks to Wikileaks and such.
Comments
Post a Comment