In the first Wikileaks article, we see that although modern journalism has taken a turn toward a more independent route, there is still a dependency on old-fashioned media outlets. This dependency is mostly for credibility but also for building public trust in new outlets. When you hear of a new online source or a person blogging, many aren’t always inclined to believe the information that the person has provided. But since credible news sources verified the information that Wikileaks made available, people developed more confidence in it. Also, since the creators of Wikileaks have nothing to lose from publishing the information, they have no bias or outward pressure to publish facts in any certain light.
Along with the benefits of Wikileaks come possible repercussions of having such an open view into the government and the military. The second Wikileaks article discusses the reactions of various governments to the site and its creators, most of which have been accusatory and some downright violent. However, such an outstanding reaction from such a variety of people around the world can only be inspired by something that threatens to drastically change the ways of communication. The effects of Wikileaks have spread throughout popular culture and many people see it as the all-exposing site that can put the higher-ups in their place and make them accountable for their actions. While many opposers to the site have focused on discrediting Julian Assange, word of mouth about the site has spread and given the site a great deal of publicity.
Although Wikileaks is undoubtedly innovative, it is not the first of its type to attempt to increase transparency between the media and the government. Jack Anderson, who was instrumental in exposing details of Nixon’s political regime, was a predecessor to Wikileaks and he faced similar backlash from those in positions of power.