It has come to our attention that members of the mainstream media are both misquoting this site and misunderstanding what this site represents.
In a piece published 17 March 2012 at Adelaide Now, Samantha Maiden states the following.
An article posted on the WikiLeaks website predicted that, if successful, "ASIO would have a collective heart attack".
This is simply irresponsible journalism. The article in question was not published at the WikiLeaks website. It was published here.
Author Peter Kemp is speculating into how well an Assange seat in Canberra would go over, what with the different mindsets of the WikiLeaks generation and the older generation in the Australian capital. He writes:
I anticipate seismic shifts, interesting and amusing scenarios/battles if Julian Assange is elected. Day one for example: "No, you not are allowed to connect a Tor relay server to the Parliamentary internet system. ASIO would have a collective heart attack."
It's patently obvious what Peter was getting at. It's also embarrassingly obvious that Samantha Maiden completely missed the point, and for no good reason.
Not to be outdone by the Herald Sun organisation, the Murdocrats tried the same thing.
The organisation released a document on Twitter they claimed held the answer that would allow him to run while under house arrest.
And the article leads back to the same article at this site.
Not to be outdone by Maiden and the Murdocrats, Sydney Morning Herald's Misha Schubert joins in the 'fun'.
WikiLeaks is also flirting with the idea of establishing its own political party, declaring it ''not only feasible but likely given the support levels in Australia''.
No, Misha. WikiLeaks might be flirting with the idea, but they haven't declared anything. You're taking a quote from this site out of context and appropriating it to WikiLeaks, and that is incorrect.
But let the yanks get in the picture! Here's 'commentary staff writer' Joel Gehrke of the Washington Examiner with the 'Assange for the senate' story - and Gehrke does the same inexcusable thing.
The Wikileaks website WL Central floated the idea of a "Wikileaks Party" for Assange's candidacy in January.
It might be a bit much to ask those journalists who remain with the 'old media' to do their own fact-checking. It might seem a bit much to presume they don't just copy and paste from other articles online. But we at WL Central remain optimistic.
WL Central is an independent WikiLeaks news resource. Writers at WL Central are very protective of their journalistic integrity. But it seems at times that such a concept is lost on the 'old media'.