It becomes quickly evident to anyone who starts to follow the Wikileaks story, especially over the course of the last year, that there are some rather pernicious falsehoods in circulation.
The established media is not immune to promulgating these. In fact, the established media in many cases appears to be their primary vector. The result is a general public misinformed at even the most basic level on the purpose and impact of Wikileaks and its efforts. The phenomenon is illustrative to anyone who cares to remain informed. It paints a telling picture of the state of modern journalism.
Falsehoods are rarely entirely novel. They are often introduced as speculation, or by interested parties, and then passed on lazily, or embellished by successive journalists.
Analysis as to the reasons for the general inability/reluctance of the established press to stick to the facts on this story is a matter for elsewhere on this site and others. It suffices to note that the press genuinely seems unable or reluctant to stick to the facts on Wikileaks. Wikileaks is a matter on which the press is clearly either drastically negligent or pointedly mendacious. At a point in history when its services are most crucially needed, the journalistic profession has (with some exceptions) failed in its duty to the world’s people.
This page is an attempt to serve the historical record more faithfully.
The aim is
We aim to show the means by which we have arrived at our conclusions, through methods of citizen journalism and investigative reading. This section will be revised over time. The situation develops daily, and our task is to work back through the press record to document what has already happened, while also covering new developments.