The WikiLeaks site latest revelations have put the international community, diplomacy, the United States government and journalism itself in a state of discussion, alerts and dismay. It is still impossible to predict what the effects of current actions (past and future) of the enigmatic organization, led by the enigmatic "journalist? Provoking? Activity? "Hacker? Australian Julian Assange. On one side of the spectrum of opinion are located hopeful that make these actions as a step towards transparency in the maneuvers and actions of governments around the world. At the other extreme are those who accuse Assange to be almost an accomplice of international terrorism, someone who, far from fulfilling a journalistic ideal, is putting at risk the lives of people. Between the two visions
open a huge debate for which convenes Digital Ñ intellectuals and thinkers from different fields. This is the turn of Noam Chomsky, linguist twentieth century's most important and one of the most prolific and fierce critics of the government of his own country, the United States. From his office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, forceful Chomsky offered some of his impressions Initial on this topic that occupies the tops of all the world's newspapers these days.
Do you think that what you are doing WikiLeaks is a legitimate and ethical journalism? And what are the consequences of these revelations to the short and long term?
is worth remembering that government secrecy is, in essence, defense of government against its own population. And in a democratic society people should know what their government is doing to monitor it and, in fact, determine what the government does. Now, there are exceptions, with which all agree, but in general If so. I have not read all the cables, of course, but from what I've seen I think it illustrates the significance of this point: there are things in the cables that governments do not want their own people know.
I think it is a legitimate form of journalism, but I think it will take strong measures to block it.
Are you surprised the work you are doing WikiLeaks?
is not entirely new. There have been many leaks before-the Pentagon Papers, for example, in which I participated, it was very important and more substantial than the latter. I'm not surprised. I think that while the accessibility of information will increase with modalidades electrónicas habrá más casos similares a este.
Qué WikiLeaks eligiera a medios tradicionales para editar y emitir las filtraciones en un primer instante, ¿es contradictorio con su postura filosófica de apertura?
Creo que no. Supongo que lo podrían haber subido directamente a Internet. Pero de esa manera circularía solamente dentro de la cultura de Internet y no entre un público general.
¿Cómo están manejando la información los medios estadounidenses?
Antes que nada tenemos que tener en cuenta que desde el principio hay un mecanismo de filtros muy severo. Entonces, los cables diplomáticos mismos proveen the government what diplomats want to know and what we assume that the government itself wants to hear. Then you are very edited input from the beginning.
For example, one of the most incendiary cables coming out so far: the Saudi king calling for the bombing of Iran. Well. That was selected. We do not know the context. We have only the phrases they chose the diplomats.
After a form of censorship is much more severe than are the titles of the papers that say that Arab states are terrified by Iran and the U.S. want to do something about it. Well, there's a very significant hidden in this issue: there are opinion polls the Arab West. The most recent was published by the Brookings Institute last month, a very careful survey, which showed that in the Arab world, 10 percent of the population sees Iran as a threat, while 80 percent see the United States and Israel as a threat. This is not revealed here [in the news]. First of all, the diplomats do not care, people do not care, just care about dictators. The State Department does not care for the same reasons, and apparently the media does not care, because this is public information ... and all this shows utter contempt for democracy. And not just in government, also intellectual culture and media. This is another type of selection, selection severe. And if you look at the published documents see many similar cases.
Do these cables show that the Obama administration is, in many ways a continuation of Bush?
Yes, but we already knew.
Do you have a message of hope for the future?
Well, my latest book called Hope and perspectives that emerged first in Castilian, because its origin was in talks I gave in South America ... The party of hope is mostly about America. I think things have been going great Hope there in the last decade. We can not predict human history. But if you look back you can find a moment when it seemed impossible to leave slavery, or to allow rights to women ... Things change. But if people change change. No change alone and do not change due to political leaders. Kaosenlared
Source: http://www.kaosenlared.net/noticia/audio-noam-chomsky-publicado-wikileaks-ponen-evidencia-profundo-odio-d
0 comments:
Post a Comment