Examine individual changes

'{{Short description|News leak publishing organisation}} {{Pp-vandalism|small=yes}} {{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}} {{EngvarB|date=January 2021}} {{Infobox website | logo = Wikileaks logo.svg | logo_alt = 1Graphic of hourglass, coloured in blue and grey; a circular map of the eastern hemisphere of the world drips from the top to bottom chamber of the hourglass. | logocaption = The logo of WikiLeaks, an [[hourglass]] with a [[globe]] leaking from top to bottom | logo_size = 125px | screenshot = WikiLeaks homepage screenshot.png | collapsible = yes | caption = Screenshot of WikiLeaks' [[Home page|main page]] as of 27 June 2011 | website = {{URL|https://wikileaks.org/}} | commercial = No<ref name="about">{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/About.html |title=About |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=11 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120919192928/http://wikileaks.org/About.html |archive-date=19 September 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | type = [[Archive|Document archive]] and [[Whistleblowing|disclosure]] | registration = None | language = English, but the source documents are in their original language | num_users = | owner = Sunshine Press | author = [[Julian Assange]] | key_people = Julian Assange ([[Director (business)|director]])<br />[[Kristinn Hrafnsson]] ([[editor-in-chief]]) | name = WikiLeaks | content_license = | launch_date = {{Start date and age|df=yes|2006|10|04}}<ref name=whois/> | current_status = Online, submissions offline }} '''WikiLeaks''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|w|ɪ|k|i|l|iː|k|s}}) is an international [[Nonprofit organization|non-profit]] organisation<!--This article uses British English, do not change "organisation" to "organization"—you will be reverted.--> that publishes [[news leak]]s<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifla.org/publications/what-is-the-effect-of-wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information |title=What is the effect of WikiLeaks for Freedom of Information? |last=Karhula |first=Päivikki |date=5 October 2012 |publisher=International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions |access-date=11 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120630172755/http://www.ifla.org/publications/what-is-the-effect-of-wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information |archive-date=30 June 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> and classified media provided by anonymous [[Source (journalism)|sources]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/wikileaks/ |title=WikiLeaks |work=The New York Times |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160130094619/http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/wikileaks/index.html |archive-date=30 January 2016}}</ref> Its website, initiated in 2006 in [[Iceland]] by the organisation Sunshine Press,<ref>{{cite web |last=Chatriwala |first=Omar |title=WikiLeaks vs the Pentagon |url=http://blogs.aljazeera.com/blog/americas/wikileaks-vs-pentagon |publisher=Al Jazeera |date=5 April 2010 |access-date=27 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209163305/http://blogs.aljazeera.com/blog/americas/wikileaks-vs-pentagon |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> stated in 2015 that it had released online 10 million documents in its first 10 years.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/What-is-WikiLeaks.html |title=What is Wikileaks |website=WikiLeaks |access-date=14 April 2020}}</ref> [[Julian Assange]], an Australian [[Internet activism|Internet activist]], is generally described as its founder and director.<ref name="McGreal">{{cite news |last=McGreal |first=Chris |title=Wikileaks reveals video showing US air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack |access-date=15 December 2010 |work=The Guardian |date=5 April 2010 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110626230310/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack |archive-date=26 June 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> Since September 2018, [[Kristinn Hrafnsson]] has served as its editor-in-chief.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.apnews.com/df4b97d353c34ce4baa02f671dd6321b|title=WikiLeaks names one-time spokesman as editor-in-chief|work=Associated Press|access-date=26 September 2018|language=en-US}}</ref><ref name="Bridge">{{cite news|last=Bridge|first=Mark|url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/loss-of-internet-forces-assange-to-step-down-from-wikileaks-editor-role-q8ndg5jkc|title=Loss of internet forces Assange to step down from Wikileaks editor role|work=The Times|date=27 September 2018|access-date=11 April 2019|url-access=subscription}}</ref> WikiLeaks has variously described itself as an organization of journalists, political activists,<ref name=":502">{{Cite magazine |title=Exposed: Wikileaks' secrets |language=en-GB |magazine=Wired UK |url=https://www.wired.co.uk/article/exposed-wikileaks-secrets |access-date=13 March 2022 |issn=1357-0978}}</ref> mathematicians, and start-up company technologists,<ref name="aboutwikileaks2">{{cite web |date=28 February 2012 |title=About WikiLeaks |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140410065353/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks%3AAbout/ |archive-date=10 April 2014 |access-date=5 December 2012 |publisher=WikiLeaks}}</ref> an intermediary between sources and journalists,<ref>{{Cite news |date=2010-12-07 |title=What is Wikileaks? |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-10757263 |access-date=2022-05-01}}</ref> an advocacy group for sources,<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> and a public intelligence agency.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-11-14 |title=Assange a bigger fish for Manning prosecutors |url=https://www.theage.com.au/national/assange-a-bigger-fish-for-manning-prosecutors-20130726-2qq1h.html |access-date=2022-05-01 |website= |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181114163442/https://www.theage.com.au/national/assange-a-bigger-fish-for-manning-prosecutors-20130726-2qq1h.html |archive-date=14 November 2018 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks:About - WikiLeaks |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=www.wikileaks.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - WikiLeaks responds to espionage act indictment against Assange: Unprecedented attack on free press |url=https://wikileaks.org/WikiLeaks-response-espionage-act.html |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2019-04-15 |title=WikiLeaks and the Lost Promise of the Internet |url=https://www.lawfareblog.com/wikileaks-and-lost-promise-internet |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=Lawfare |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Fisher |first1=Rogene |last2=Cohen |first2=Noam |date=2010-04-05 |title=Group Releases Classified Video of 2007 Baghdad Attack |url=https://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/group-releases-classified-video-of-2007-baghdad-attack/ |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=At War Blog |language=en-US}}</ref> The group has released a number of prominent document caches that exposed serious violations of human rights and civil liberties to the US and international public.<ref name=":47">{{Cite web |title=Reporters Sans Frontières - Open letter to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange: ''A bad precedent for the Internet's future'' |url=http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open-letter-to-wikileaks-founder-12-08-2010,38130.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100815072941/http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open-letter-to-wikileaks-founder-12-08-2010,38130.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=2010-08-15 |access-date=2022-05-01 }}</ref> Early releases included documentation of equipment expenditures and holdings in the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan war]],<ref>{{cite news |last=Joseph |first=Channing |title=Wikileaks Releases Secret Report on Military Equipment |url=http://www.nysun.com/foreign/wikileaks-releases-secret-report-on-military/62236/ |work=The New York Sun |date=9 September 2007 |access-date=28 February 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140221133936/http://www.nysun.com/foreign/wikileaks-releases-secret-report-on-military/62236/ |archive-date=21 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> a report about a corruption investigation in Kenya,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://qz.com/africa/1594656/the-kenyan-roots-of-julian-assanges-wikileaks/ | title=It all started in Nairobi: How Kenya gave Julian Assange's WikiLeaks its first major global scoop | first=Abdi Latif | last=Dahir | date=13 April 2019 | access-date=20 April 2019 | publisher=Quartz Africa}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/aug/31/kenya.topstories3 | title=The looting of Kenya | first=Xan | last=Rice | date=31 August 2007 | access-date=20 April 2019 | work=The Guardian}}</ref> and [[Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures|an operating procedures manual]] for [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp|the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba]].<ref name=Wired20071114> {{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo#|title=Sensitive Guantánamo Bay Manual Leaked Through Wiki Site|magazine=[[Wired magazine]]|author=Ryan Singel|date= 14 November 2007|access-date=14 November 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140210123003/http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo|archive-date=10 February 2014|author-link=Ryan Singel}}</ref><ref name=AssociatedPressWikileaksDeltaSOP20071114> {{cite news |url= http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMWigm_hQ2FTGealn3uipPxbD2PAD8STS7JG2|title= US: Leaked Gitmo Manual Out of Date|publisher=[[Associated Press]]|date = 14 November 2007|access-date = 14 November 2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071118160838/http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hMWigm_hQ2FTGealn3uipPxbD2PAD8STS7JG2 |archive-date = 18 November 2007 }}</ref> In April 2010, WikiLeaks released the ''[[Collateral Murder#Leaked video footage|Collateral Murder]]'' footage from the [[12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike]] in which Iraqi [[Reuters]] journalists were among several civilians killed. Other releases in 2010 included the [[Afghan War Diary]] and the "[[Iraq War Logs]]". The latter release allowed the mapping of 109,032 deaths in "significant" attacks by insurgents in Iraq that had been reported to [[Multi-National Force – Iraq]], including about 15,000 that had not been [[Iraq Body Count project|previously published]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/oct/23/wikileaks-iraq-data-journalism |title=Wikileaks Iraq: data journalism maps every death |work=The Guardian |place=London |date=23 October 2010 |access-date=26 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110107113804/http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/23/wikileaks-iraq-data-journalism |archive-date=7 January 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/oct/25/wikileaks-iraq-data |title=Wikileaks Iraq: what's wrong with the data? |work=The Guardian |place=London |date=25 October 2010 |access-date=26 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130609222435/http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/oct/25/wikileaks-iraq-data |archive-date=9 June 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> In 2010, WikiLeaks also released [[United States diplomatic cables leak|classified diplomatic cables]] that had been sent to the US State Department. In April 2011, WikiLeaks began publishing [[Guantanamo Bay files leak|779 secret files]] relating to prisoners detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-files-lift-lid-prison |title=Guantánamo files lift lid on world's most controversial prison |author1=Leigh, David |author2=Ball, James |author3=Burke, Jason |work=The Guardian |place=London |date=25 April 2011 |access-date=25 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110626230514/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-files-lift-lid-prison |archive-date=26 June 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In 2012, WikiLeaks released the "Syria Files," over two million emails sent by Syrian politicians, corporations and government ministries.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18724328 | title=Syria files: Wikileaks releases 2m 'embarrassing' emails | publisher=BBC | date=5 July 2012 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/07/05/wikileaks-announces-its-largest-release-yet-in-the-syria-files-2-4-million-emails-from-syrian-officials-and-companies/#752b7eae5081 | magazine=Forbes | title=WikiLeaks Announces Massive Release With The 'Syria Files': 2.4 Million Emails From Syrian Officials And Companies | first=Andy | last=Greenberg | date=5 July 2012 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> In 2015, WikiLeaks published Saudi Arabian diplomatic cables,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/world/middleeast/cables-released-by-wikileaks-reveal-saudis-checkbook-diplomacy.html | work=New York Times | title=Cables Released by WikiLeaks Reveal Saudis' Checkbook Diplomacy | first=Ben | last=Hubbard | date=20 June 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://time.com/3928584/wikileaks-saudi-arabia-cables/ | title=WikiLeaks Begins Releasing Leaked Saudi Arabia Cables | first=Julia | last=Zorthian | magazine=Time Magazine | date=19 June 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> documents detailing spying by the U.S. [[National Security Agency]] on successive French presidents,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-wikileaks/nsa-spied-on-french-presidents-wikileaks-idUSKBN0P32EM20150623 | title=NSA spied on French presidents: WikiLeaks | work=Reuters | first1=James | last1=Regan | first2=Mark | last2=John | date=23 June 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/world/europe/wikileaks-us-spying-france.html | title=Hollande Condemns Spying by U.S., but Not Too Harshly | work=New York Times | first1=Alyssa J. | last1=Rubin | first2=Scott | last2=Shane | date=24 June 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> and the intellectual property chapter of the [[Trans-Pacific Partnership]], a controversial international trade agreement which had been negotiated in secret.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/09/wikileaks-releases-tpp-intellectual-property-rights-chapter | title=Wikileaks release of TPP deal text stokes 'freedom of expression' fears | first=Sam | last=Thielman | work=The Guardian | date=9 October 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/tpp-leaked-wikileaks-releases-intellectual-property-chapter-of-controversial-internet-and-medicine-a6688226.html | title=TPP leaked: Wikileaks releases intellectual property chapter of controversial internet and medicine-regulating trade agreement | first=Doug | last=Bolton | work=The Independent | date=9 October 2015 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> During the [[2016 United States presidential election|2016 U.S. presidential election campaign]], WikiLeaks [[2016 Democratic National Committee email leak|released emails and other documents]] from the [[Democratic National Committee]] and from [[Hillary Clinton]]'s campaign manager, [[John Podesta]], showing that the party's [[Democratic National Committee|national committee]] favoured Clinton over her rival [[Bernie Sanders]] in the [[2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries|primaries]], leading to the resignation of DNC chairwoman [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]] and an apology to Sanders from the DNC.<ref name=":20">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/11/01/why-its-entirely-predictable-that-hillary-clintons-emails-are-back-in-the-news/ |title=Why it's entirely predictable that Hillary Clinton's emails are back in the news |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=12 November 2016}}</ref> These releases caused significant harm to the Clinton campaign, and have been cited as a potential contributing factor to her loss in the general election against [[Donald Trump]].<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wikileaks-hillary-clinton/ |title=How Much Did WikiLeaks Hurt Hillary Clinton? |date=23 December 2016 |work=FiveThirtyEight|access-date=15 February 2018|language=en-US |quote=The evidence suggests WikiLeaks is among the factors that might have contributed to her loss, but we really can't say much more than that.}}</ref> The U.S. intelligence community expressed "high confidence" that the leaked emails [[2016 United States election interference by Russia|had been hacked by Russia]] and supplied to WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks said that the source of the documents was not Russia or any other state.<ref name=":4">{{Cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-intel-community-confident-russia-directed-hacks-to-influence-election/ |title=U.S. intel community 'confident' Russia directed hacks to influence election |last=Shabad |first=Rebecca |date=7 October 2016|access-date=23 October 2016}}</ref> During the campaign, WikiLeaks promoted conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton and the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]].<ref name=":23">{{Cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11/04/no-john-podesta-didnt-drink-bodily-fluids-at-a-secret-satanist-dinner/ |title=No, John Podesta didn't drink bodily fluids at a secret Satanist dinner |last=Ohlheiser |first=Abby |date=4 November 2016 |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=8 November 2016 |issn=0190-8286}}</ref><ref name=":24">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/wikileaks-fuels-conspiracy-theories-about-dnc-staffer-s-death-n627401 |title=WikiLeaks Fuels Conspiracy Theories About DNC Staffer's Death |publisher=NBC News|access-date=8 November 2016 |quote=WikiLeaks ... is fueling Internet conspiracy theories by offering a $20,000 reward for information on a Democratic National Committee staffer who was killed last month ... in what police say was robbery gone wrong ... Assange implied this week in an interview that Rich was the source of the leak and even offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of his murderer. Meanwhile, the Russian government funded propaganda outlet RT had already been covering Rich's murder two weeks prior. RT and other Russian government propaganda outlets have also been working hard to deny the Russian government was the source of the leak, including by interviewing Assange about the Rich murder. ... The original conspiracy theory can be traced back to a notoriously unreliable conspiracy website}}</ref><ref name="bloomberg">{{cite web |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-11/how-julian-assange-turned-wikileaks-into-trump-s-best-friend |title=How Julian Assange turned WikiLeaks into Trump's best friend |first1=Max |last1=Chafkin |first2=Vernon |last2=Silver |date=10 October 2016 |website=Bloomberg website |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161109132018/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-11/how-julian-assange-turned-wikileaks-into-trump-s-best-friend |archive-date=9 November 2016}}</ref> In 2016, WikiLeaks released nearly 300,000 emails it described as coming from Turkey's ruling [[Justice and Development Party (Turkey)|Justice and Development Party]],<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/wikileaks-turkey-erdogan-emails-government-coup-a7145891.html | title=President Erdogan emails: What is in the Wikileaks release about Turkey's government? | work=The Independent | first=Peter | last=Yeung | date=20 July 2016 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> later found to be taken from public mailing archives,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://boingboing.net/2016/07/29/wikileaks-dump-of-erdogan.html | title=Wikileaks' dump of "Erdogan emails" turn out to be public mailing list archives | first=Cory | last=Doctorow | date=29 July 2016 | publisher=BoingBoing | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> and rereleased over 50,000 emails from the [[Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources (Turkey)|Turkish Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]].<ref name="fp071216">{{cite magazine |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/07/latest-wikileaks-dump-sheds-light-erdogan-turkey-berat-albayrak-redhack-hackers-oil/ | title=Latest Wikileaks Dump Sheds New Light on Erdogan's Power In Turkey | first=Robbie | last=Gramer | date=7 December 2016 | magazine=Foreign Policy | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> In 2017, WikiLeaks published internal [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]] documents describing tools used by the agency to hack devices including mobile phones and routers.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-defense-idUSKBN17013U | title=A scramble at Cisco exposes uncomfortable truths about U.S. cyber defense | first=Joseph | last=Menn | work=Reuters | date=29 March 2017 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/europe/wikileaks-cia-hacking.html | first1=Scott | last1=Shane | first2=Matthew | last2=Rosenberg | first3=Andrew W. | last3=Lehren | work=New York Times | title=WikiLeaks Releases Trove of Alleged C.I.A. Hacking Documents | date=7 March 2017 | access-date=20 April 2019}}</ref> In 2019, WikiLeaks published over 30,000 files as part of the [[Fishrot Files]], exposing corruption at [[Samherji]], a multinational fishing company based in Iceland.<ref>{{Cite web |last=PPLAAF |date=7 March 2022 |title=The Fishrot scandal |url=https://pplaaf.org/cases/fishrot.html |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=pplaaf.org |language=en}}</ref> In October 2021, WikiLeaks' secure chat stopped working and in February 2022 their submission system and email server went offline.<ref name=":53">{{Cite web |last=Thalen |first=Mikael |date=2022-02-28 |title=Submitting docs to WikiLeaks is seemingly impossible amid uptick in hacktivism against Russia |url=https://www.dailydot.com/debug/submitting-wikileaks-docs-russia-ukraine/ |access-date=2022-07-22 |website=The Daily Dot |language=en-US}}</ref> According to the ''Daily Dot'', in July 2022 WikiLeaks launched a version of the submissions portal that told sources to use expired [[Pretty Good Privacy|PGP keys]] and did not function properly, and the submission site went offline without explanation later the same month.<ref name=":51">{{Cite web |last=Thalen |first=Mikael |date=2022-07-13 |title=WikiLeaks finally launched a new submissions portal—it doesn't work |url=https://www.dailydot.com/debug/wikileaks-new-submission-portal-broken/ |access-date=2022-07-13 |website=The Daily Dot |language=en-US}}</ref> The organisation has been criticised for inadequately curating its content and violating the personal privacy of individuals. WikiLeaks has, for instance, revealed [[Social Security number]]s, medical information, credit card numbers and details of suicide attempts.<ref name=":31">{{Cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-29/why-wikileaks-is-losing-its-friends |title=Why Wikileaks Is Losing Its Friends |first=Joshua |last=Brustein |date=29 July 2016 |publisher=Bloomberg News}}</ref><ref name=":12">{{Cite news |url=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b70da83fd111496dbdf015acbb7987fb/private-lives-are-exposed-wikileaks-spills-its-secrets |title=Private lives are exposed as WikiLeaks spills its secrets |author1=Raphael Satter |author2=Maggie Michael |date=23 August 2016 |agency=Associated Press |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":8">{{Cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/07/28/a-twitter-spat-breaks-out-between-snowden-and-wikileaks/ |title=Snowden and WikiLeaks clash over leaked Democratic Party emails |first=Andrea |last=Peterson |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=28 July 2016}}</ref>{{TOC limit|3}} ==History== ===Staff, name and founding=== [[File:Julian Assange August 2014.jpg|thumb|upright=.75|[[Julian Assange]] is a founding member of the WikiLeaks staff.]] The inspiration for WikiLeaks was [[Daniel Ellsberg]]'s release of the [[Pentagon Papers]] in 1971. Assange built WikiLeaks to shorten the time between a leak and its coverage by the media. WikiLeaks was established in Australia but its servers were soon moved to Sweden and other countries that provided more legal protection for the media.<ref name="yahoo041021" /> The ''wikileaks.org'' domain name was registered on 4 October 2006.<ref name="whois">{{cite web |title=Whois Search Results: wikileaks.org |url=http://whois.domaintools.com/wikileaks.org |publisher=Domaintools.com|access-date=8 December 2016}}</ref> The website was established and published its first document in December 2006.<ref name="TIME">{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks' War on Secrecy: Truth's Consequences |date=2 December 2010 |last=Calabresi |first=Massimo |url=http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2034276-3,00.html |magazine=Time |quote=Reportedly spurred by the leak of the Pentagon papers, Assange unveiled WikiLeaks in December 2006. |access-date=19 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130520104123/http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0%2C8599%2C2034276-3%2C00.html |archive-date=20 May 2013 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Khatchdourian">{{cite news |first=Raffi |last=Khatchadourian |date=7 June 2010 |url=https://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?printable=true |title=No Secrets: Julian Assange's Mission for total transparency |magazine=The New Yorker |access-date=8 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827012725/http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?printable=true |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> Before his arrest, WikiLeaks was usually represented in public by Julian Assange, who has been described as "the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organiser, financier, and all the rest".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html |work=The New York Times |title=WikiLeaks Founder on the Run, Trailed by Notoriety |date=23 October 2010 |last1=Burns |first1=John F. |last2=Somaiya |first2=Ravi |access-date=19 December 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/rudd-government-blacklist-hacker-monitors-police/story-e6frg8yx-1225718288350 |title=Rudd Government blacklist hacker monitors police |work=The Australian |place=Sydney |last=Guilliatt |first=Richard |date=30 May 2009 |access-date=17 June 2010}}</ref> Assange formed an advisory board in the early days of WikiLeaks, filling it with journalists, political activists and computer specialists.<ref name=":502"/> [[Daniel Domscheit-Berg]], [[Sarah Harrison (journalist)|Sarah Harrison]], Kristinn Hrafnsson and Joseph Farrell are other notable associates of Assange who have been involved in the project.<ref>{{cite news |last=Mostrous |first=Alexi |date=4 August 2011 |url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article3114254.ece |title=He came for a week and stayed a year |place=London |work=The Times |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209164635/http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/life/article3114254.ece |archive-date=9 February 2014}}</ref><ref name="wikileaksrevolt" /> Harrison is also a member of Sunshine Press Productions along with Assange and Ingi Ragnar Ingason.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.techeye.net/internet/wikileaks-sets-up-shop-in-iceland |title=Wikileaks sets up shop in Iceland – Heated pavements far nicer than Gitmo TechEye |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140210200145/http://news.techeye.net/internet/wikileaks-sets-up-shop-in-iceland |archive-date=10 February 2014 |url-status=dead }}. News.techeye.net (15 November 2010). Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/11/13/wikileaks-starts-company-in-icelandic-apartment/ |title=Wikileaks starts company in Icelandic apartment |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101122222226/http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/11/13/wikileaks-starts-company-in-icelandic-apartment/ |archive-date=22 November 2010 |website=Icenews.is |date=13 November 2010 |access-date=22 November 2011}}</ref> [[Gavin MacFadyen]] was acknowledged by Assange as a ″beloved director of WikiLeaks″ shortly after his death in 2016.<ref>{{cite news |title=Gavin MacFadyen, 76, Mentor and Defender of WikiLeaks Founder, Dies |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/business/media/gavin-macfadyen-dies-wikileaks.html |website=The New York Times |access-date=1 August 2018}}</ref> The initial tranche of WikiLeaks' documents came from a WikiLeaks' activist who owned a server that was a node in the [[Tor network]]. After they noticed that Chinese hackers used the network to gather information from foreign governments, the activist began recording the information. This let Assange show potential contributors that WikiLeaks was viable and say they had "received over one million documents from thirteen countries".<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> WikiLeaks originally used a "[[wiki]]" communal publication method, which ended by May 2010.<ref name="wikigone">{{cite news |url=http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/wikileaks-assange-returns |title=WikiLeaks Gets A Facelift |last=Gilson |first=Dave |date=19 May 2010 |work=Mother Jones|access-date=17 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140429130452/http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/wikileaks-assange-returns |archive-date=29 April 2014 |url-status=live |place=San Francisco}}</ref> Its founders and early volunteers were once described as a mixture of Asian dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, [[Taiwan]], Europe, Australia, and South Africa.<ref name="aboutwikileaks">{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks:About |title=About WikiLeaks |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=28 February 2012 |access-date=5 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140410065353/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/WikiLeaks%3AAbout/ |archive-date=10 April 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> {{As of|2009|6}}, the website had more than 1,200 registered volunteers.<ref name="aboutwikileaks" /><ref name="ab">{{cite news |last=Rintoul |first=Stuart |title=WikiLeaks advisory board 'pretty clearly window-dressing' |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/wikileaks-advisory-board-pretty-clearly-window-dressing/story-e6frg6nf-1225967895242 |work=The Australian |place=Sydney |date=9 December 2010 |access-date=18 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140308001123/http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/wikileaks-advisory-board-pretty-clearly-window-dressing/story-e6frg6nf-1225967895242 |archive-date=8 March 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=2 |title=Inside WikiLeaks' Leak Factory |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140429104335/http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=2 |archive-date=29 April 2014 |url-status=live}}. Mother Jones (6 April 2010). Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref> Despite some public confusion, related to the fact both sites use the "wiki" name and website design template, WikiLeaks and Wikipedia are not affiliated.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wiki-giants-on-a-collision-course-over-shared-name-2065561.html |title=Wiki giants on a collision course over shared name |last1=Rawlinson |first1=Kevin |first2=Tom |last2=Peck |date=30 August 2010 |work=The Independent |place=London |access-date=1 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100912225910/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/wiki-giants-on-a-collision-course-over-shared-name-2065561.html |archive-date=12 September 2010 |url-status=dead}}</ref> [[Wikia]], a [[for-profit corporation]] affiliated loosely with the [[Wikimedia Foundation]], purchased several WikiLeaks-related domain names as a "protective brand measure" in 2007.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wikia.com/Press:Wikia_Does_Not_Own_Wikileaks_Domain_Names |title=Press:Wikia Does Not Own Wikileaks Domain Names |website=[[Wikia]] |publisher=[[Wikia]] |access-date=13 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140510121146/http://www.wikia.com/Press%3AWikia_Does_Not_Own_Wikileaks_Domain_Names |archive-date=10 May 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 26 September 2018, it was announced that Julian Assange had appointed [[Kristinn Hrafnsson]] as editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks with Assange continuing as its publisher. His access to the internet was cut off by [[Ecuador]] in March 2018 after he tweeted that Britain was about to conduct a propaganda war against Russia relating to the [[Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal]]. Ecuador said he had broken a commitment "not to issue messages that might interfere with other states" and Assange said he was "exercising his right to free speech".<ref name="Bridge" /><ref>{{cite news |title=Julian Assange has stepped down as the editor of WikiLeaks |newspaper=News.com.au — Australia's Leading News Site |url=https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/julian-assange-has-stepped-down-as-the-editor-of-wikileaks/news-story/5f616b419f7fd8154779fefe69c4c1b6 |access-date=6 December 2018|date=27 September 2018 |last1=London |first1=Domanii Cameron in }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=With his internet cut off, Julian Assange steps down as editor of WikiLeaks |date=27 September 2018 |url=https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/27/julian-assange-wikileaks-new-editor-in-chief/ |access-date=6 December 2018}}</ref> ===Purpose=== According to WikiLeaks, the goal of the organisation is "to bring important news and information to the public … One of our most important activities is to publish original source material alongside our news stories so readers and historians alike can see evidence of the truth." It also seeks to ensure that journalists and [[whistleblower]]s are not prosecuted for emailing sensitive or classified documents. The online "drop box" is described by the WikiLeaks website as "an innovative, secure and anonymous way for sources to leak information to [WikiLeaks] journalists".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://epic.org/foia/epic_v_doj_fbi_wikileaks.html |publisher=[[Electronic Privacy Information Center]] |title=EPIC v. DOJ, FBI: Wikileaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140214023818/http://epic.org/foia/epic_v_doj_fbi_wikileaks.html |archive-date=14 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> In a 2013 resolution, the [[International Federation of Journalists]], a trade union of journalists, called WikiLeaks a "new breed of media organisation" that "offers important opportunities for media organisations".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alliance.org.au/global-journalists-union-supports-wikileaks |title=Global journalists' union supports Wikileaks |publisher=Alliance.org.au |date=16 July 2013 |access-date=2 March 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131231025031/http://www.alliance.org.au/global-journalists-union-supports-wikileaks |archive-date=31 December 2013 |url-status=dead }}</ref> [[Harvard University|Harvard]] professor [[Yochai Benkler]] praised WikiLeaks as a new form of journalistic enterprise,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2013/07/10/harvard-prof-is-star-witness-at-wikileaks-trial |title=Harvard prof is star witness at WikiLeaks trial |first=David |last=Dishneau |date=10 July 2013 |website=U.S. News |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> testifying at the court-martial of [[Chelsea Manning]] that "WikiLeaks did serve a particular journalistic function," and that the "range of the journalist's privilege" is "a hard line to draw".<ref>{{cite web |first=Rainey |last=Reitman |url=https://freedom.press/blog/2016/04/transcript-yochai-benkler-testifies-bradley-manning-trial |title=Transcript: Yochai Benkler Testifies at Bradley Manning Trial |website=Freedom of the Press Foundation |date=10 July 2013 |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> Others do not consider WikiLeaks to be journalistic in nature. Media ethicist [[Kelly McBride]] of the [[Poynter Institute for Media Studies]] wrote in 2011: "WikiLeaks might grow into a journalist endeavor. But it's not there yet."<ref name="KMcBride">Kelly McBride, "What Is WikiLeaks? That's the Wrong Question" in ''Page One: Inside the New York Times and the Future of Journalism'' (documentary film, ed. [[David Folkenflik]]: PublicAffairs, 2011).</ref> [[Bill Keller]] of ''The New York Times'' considers WikiLeaks to be a "complicated source" rather than a journalistic partner.<ref name="KMcBride" /> Prominent [[First Amendment]] lawyer [[Floyd Abrams]] writes that WikiLeaks is not a journalistic group, but instead "an organization of political activists; … a source for journalists; and … a conduit of leaked information to the press and the public".<ref name="Abrams">[[Floyd Abrams]], ''Friend of the Court: On the Front Lines with the First Amendment'' (Yale University Press, 2013), p. 390.</ref> In support of his opinion, referring to Assange's statements that WikiLeaks reads only a small fraction of information before deciding to publish it, Abrams wrote: "No journalistic entity I have ever heard of—none—simply releases to the world an elephantine amount of material it has not read."<ref name="Abrams" /> ==Administration== According to a January 2010 interview, the WikiLeaks team then consisted of five people working full-time and about 800 people who worked occasionally, none of whom were compensated.<ref name="leakonomy"/> WikiLeaks does not have any official headquarters. WikiLeaks describes itself as "an uncensorable system for untraceable mass document leaking".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/jul/14/julian-assange-whistleblower-wikileaks |title=Julian Assange: the whistleblower |work=The Guardian |place=London |last=Moss |first=Stephen |date=14 July 2010|access-date=7 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110626230605/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jul/14/julian-assange-whistleblower-wikileaks |archive-date=26 June 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In 2010, the website was available on multiple servers, different [[domain name]]s and had an official [[dark web]] version (available on the [[Tor Browser|Tor Network]]) as a result of a number of [[denial-of-service attack]]s and its elimination from different [[Domain Name System]] (DNS) providers.<ref name="satter">{{cite news |first=Raphael G. |last=Satter |author2=Peter Svensson |title=WikiLeaks fights to stay online amid attacks |date=3 December 2010 |work=Bloomberg BusinessWeek |publisher=[[Bloomberg Businessweek]] |url=http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9JSHKUG0.htm | access-date =14 March 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101204043730/http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9JSHKUG0.htm |archive-date=4 December 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/wikileaks-hit-by-new-online-onslaught-2151570.html |title=WikiLeaks hit by new online onslaught |last1=Randall |first1=David |last2=Cooper |first2=Charlie |date=5 December 2010 |work=The Independent |access-date=4 December 2010 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140419020654/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/wikileaks-hit-by-new-online-onslaught-2151570.html |archive-date=19 April 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Until August 2010, WikiLeaks was hosted by [[PRQ]], a company based in Sweden providing "highly secure, no-questions-asked hosting services". PRQ was reported by ''[[The Register]]'' website to have "almost no information about its clientele and maintains few if any of its own [[server log|logs]]".<ref name="goodwin">{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/21/wikileaks_bulletproof_hosting/ |title=Wikileaks<!-- sic! --> judge gets Pirate Bay treatment |author=Goodwin, Dan |work=The Register |place=London |date=21 February 2008 |access-date=7 December 2010}}</ref> Later, WikiLeaks was hosted mainly by the Swedish Internet service provider [[Bahnhof]] in the [[Pionen]] facility, a former nuclear bunker in Sweden.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10018210 |title=Pentagon-papirer sikret i atom-bunker |work=[[VG Nett]] |place=Oslo |language=no |date=27 August 2010 |access-date=6 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100922042634/http://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10018210 |archive-date=22 September 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/08/30/wikileaks-servers-move-to-underground-nuclear-bunker/?boxes=businesschanneltopstories |title=Wikileaks<!-- sic! --> Servers Move To Underground Nuclear Bunker |work=Forbes (blog) |date=30 August 2010 |access-date=6 December 2010 |first=Andy |last=Greenberg}}</ref> Other servers are spread around the world with the main server located in Sweden.<ref name="DN1">{{cite news |title=Jagad och hatad&nbsp;– men han vägrar vika sig |language=sv |trans-title=Chased and hated&nbsp;– but he refuses to give way |author=Fredén, Jonas |work=[[Dagens Nyheter]] |place=Stockholm |url=http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/jagad-och-hatad-men-han-vagrar-vika-sig-1.1153725 |date=14 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100818113905/http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/jagad-och-hatad-men-han-vagrar-vika-sig-1.1153725 |archive-date=18 August 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Julian Assange has said that the servers are located in Sweden and the other countries "specifically because those nations offer legal protection to the disclosures made on the site". He talks about the [[Constitution of Sweden|Swedish constitution]], which gives the information–providers total legal protection.<ref name="DN1" /> It is forbidden, according to Swedish law, for any administrative authority to make inquiries about the sources of any type of newspaper.<ref>{{cite news |title=Därför blir Julian Assange kolumnist i Aftonbladet |language=sv |author=Helin, Jan |work=[[Aftonbladet]] (blog) |place=Stockholm |date=14 August 2010 |url=http://blogg.aftonbladet.se/janhelin/2010/08/darfor-blir-julian-assange-kolumnist-i-aftonbladet |access-date=15 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120820032744/http://blogg.aftonbladet.se/janhelin/2010/08/darfor-blir-julian-assange-kolumnist-i-aftonbladet |archive-date=20 August 2012 |url-status=live}}</ref> These laws, and the hosting by PRQ, make it difficult for any authority to eliminate WikiLeaks; they place a [[Burden of proof (law)|burden of proof]] upon any complainant whose suit would circumscribe WikiLeaks' liberty. Furthermore, "WikiLeaks maintains its own servers at undisclosed locations, keeps no logs and uses military-grade [[encryption]] to protect sources and other confidential information." Such arrangements have been called "[[bulletproof hosting]]".<ref name="goodwin"/> After the site became the target of a [[denial-of-service attack]] on its old servers, WikiLeaks moved its website to [[Amazon.com|Amazon]]'s servers.<ref name="amazon">{{cite news |last=Gross |first=Doug |title=WikiLeaks cut off from Amazon servers |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/01/wikileaks.amazon/index.html?eref=edition |publisher=CNN |access-date=2 December 2010 |date=2 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131029192138/http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/01/wikileaks.amazon/index.html?eref=edition |archive-date=29 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> Amazon later removed the website from its servers.<ref name="amazon" /> In a public statement, Amazon said that WikiLeaks was not following its terms of service. The company stated: "There were several parts they were violating. For example, our terms of service state that 'you represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content ... that use of the content you supply does not violate this policy and will not cause injury to any person or entity.' It's clear that WikiLeaks doesn't own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content."<ref name="Hennigan">{{cite news |url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/12/amazon-wikileaks-servers.html |title=Amazon says it dumped WikiLeaks because it put innocent people in jeopardy |last=Hennigan |first=W.J. |date=2 December 2010 |work=Technology blog, Los Angeles Times |access-date=23 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131001220315/http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/12/amazon-wikileaks-servers.html |archive-date=1 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks was then moved to servers at [[OVH]], a private web-hosting service in France.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.lepoint.fr/high-tech-internet/expulse-d-amazon-wikileaks-s-installe-en-france-02-12-2010-1270137_47.php |title=Expulsé d'Amazon, WikiLeaks trouve refuge en France |date=3 December 2010 |work=[[Le Point]] |place=Paris |author=Poncet, Guerric |language=fr}}</ref> After criticism from the French government, a judge ruled that there was no need for OVH to cease hosting WikiLeaks.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iojKm00N9vMvjVGwO2ZNko9rVpBw?docId=CNG.3c86e1065eee2cfd740284f4a84f3555.121|title=French web host need not shut down WikiLeaks site: judge|date=6 December 2010|website=[[Agence France-Presse|Agence France-Presse (AFP)]]|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130103041304/http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iojKm00N9vMvjVGwO2ZNko9rVpBw?docId=CNG.3c86e1065eee2cfd740284f4a84f3555.121|archive-date=3 January 2013|access-date=7 September 2019}}</ref> WikiLeaks used [[EveryDNS]], but was dropped by the company after distributed denial-of-service ([[DDoS]]) attacks against WikiLeaks hurt the quality of service for its other customers. Supporters of WikiLeaks waged verbal and DDoS attacks on EveryDNS. Because of a typographical error in blogs mistaking EveryDNS for competitor ''[[EasyDNS]]'', the sizeable Internet backlash hit EasyDNS. Despite that, EasyDNS began providing WikiLeaks with DNS service on "two 'battle hardened' servers" to protect the quality of service for its other customers.<ref>{{cite news |title=Canadian firm caught up in Wiki wars |first=Steve |last=Ladurantaye |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/canadian-firm-caught-up-in-wiki-wars/article1830732/ |work=The Globe and Mail |place=Toronto |date=8 December 2010 |access-date=9 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727052959/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/canadian-firm-caught-up-in-wiki-wars/article1830732/ |archive-date=27 July 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks restructured its process for contributions after its first document leaks did not gain much attention. Assange stated this was part of an attempt to take the voluntary effort typically seen in [[Wiki]] projects and "redirect it to ... material that has real potential for change".<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yGgurMv2Y_EC&q=why+no+longer+contribute+to+wikileaks&pg=PT393 |title=A Companion to New Media Dynamics |last1=Hartley |first1=John |last2=Burgess |first2=Jean |last3=Bruns |first3=Axel |date=9 January 2013 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=9781118321638 |language=en}}</ref> The "about" page originally read:<ref name="whatis">{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_WikiLeaks.3F_How_does_WikiLeaks_operate.3F |title=What is WikiLeaks? How does WikiLeaks operate? |year=2008 |website=WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080216000537/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks%3AAbout |archive-date=16 February 2008 |url-status=dead|access-date=28 February 2008 }}</ref> {{bq|text=To the user, WikiLeaks will look very much like Wikipedia. Anybody can post to it, anybody can edit it. No technical knowledge is required. Leakers can post documents anonymously and untraceably. Users can publicly discuss documents and analyse their credibility and veracity. Users can discuss interpretations and context and collaboratively formulate collective publications. Users can read and write explanatory articles on leaks along with background material and context. The political relevance of documents and their verisimilitude will be revealed by a cast of thousands.}} WikiLeaks established an editorial policy that accepted only documents that were "of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical interest" (and excluded "material that is already publicly available").<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:Submissions |title=WikiLeaks' submissions page |publisher=WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080419013425/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks%3ASubmissions |archive-date=19 April 2008 |url-status=dead|access-date=17 June 2010 }}</ref> This coincided with early criticism that having no editorial policy would drive out good material with spam and promote "automated or indiscriminate publication of confidential records".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2007/01/wikileaks_and_untraceable_docu/ |title=Wikileaks and untraceable document disclosure |author=Aftergood, Steven |date=3 January 2007 |work=Secrecy News|access-date=21 August 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130311214041/https://fas.org/blog/secrecy/2007/01/wikileaks_and_untraceable_docu.html |archive-date=11 March 2013 |url-status=live |publisher=Federation of American Scientists}}</ref> The original FAQ is no longer in effect, and no one can post or edit documents on WikiLeaks. Now, submissions to WikiLeaks are reviewed by anonymous WikiLeaks reviewers, and documents that do not meet the editorial criteria are rejected. By 2008, the revised FAQ stated: "Anybody can post comments to it. [ ... ] Users can publicly discuss documents and analyse their credibility and veracity."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks:About#What_is_Wikileaks.3F_How_does_Wikileaks_operate.3F |title=What is Wikileaks? How does Wikileaks operate? |year=2008 |website=WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080504122032/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks%3AAbout |archive-date=4 May 2008 |url-status=dead }}</ref> After the 2010 reorganisation, posting new comments on leaks was no longer possible.<ref name="wikigone" /> In 2010 Assange said WikiLeaks received some submissions through the postal mail.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is WikiLeaks? |url=https://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/25/what-is-wikileaks/ |access-date=2022-10-01 |language=en}}</ref> During the 2010 reorganisation, the site's submission system went offline.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Greenberg |first=Andy |date=2012-09-27 |title=How Two Bulgarian Journalists Created a WikiLeaks Copycat That Actually Worked |url=https://slate.com/technology/2012/09/this-machine-kills-secrets-excerpt-how-two-bulgarian-journalists-created-a-copycat-site-that-actually-worked.html |access-date=2022-07-22 |website=Slate Magazine |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2015-05-02 |title=WikiLeaks' Anonymous Leak Submission Website Relaunched after 6 years |url=https://www.hackread.com/wikileaks-anonymous-leak-submission-website-relaunched/ |access-date=2022-07-22 |language=en-US}}</ref> While it was offline, WikiLeaks announced they were building a state-of-the-art secure submission system. The launch of the new system was delayed by security concerns in 2011.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Constantin |first=Lucian |date=2011-11-29 |title=WikiLeaks: Security worries impede new submission system |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2499524/wikileaks--security-worries-impede-new-submission-system.html |access-date=2022-07-22 |website=Computerworld |language=en}}</ref> The new submission system did not launch until four and a half years later, in May 2015.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Greenberg |first=Andy |title=WikiLeaks Finally Brings Back Its Submission System for Your Secrets |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2015/05/wikileaks-finally-brings-back-submission-system-secrets/ |access-date=2022-07-22 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - Some notes on the new WikiLeaks next-generation submission system beta |url=https://wikileaks.org/Some-notes-on-the-new-WikiLeaks.html |access-date=2022-07-22 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> According to ''The Washington Post'', [[Andy Müller-Maguhn]] and a colleague administered the submission server in 2016, though Müller-Maguhn denies this.<ref>{{Cite news |title=A German hacker offers a rare look inside the secretive world of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks |language=en-US |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/a-german-hacker-offers-a-rare-look-inside-the-secretive-world-of-julian-assange-and-wikileaks/2018/01/17/e6211180-f311-11e7-b390-a36dc3fa2842_story.html |access-date=2022-07-22 |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> By October 2021, WikiLeaks' secure chat stopped working and by February 2022, WikiLeaks' submission system and email server were offline.<ref name=":53" /> In July 2022, a broken version of the submission system briefly relaunched with expired PGP keys and went offline after it was reported on by ''The Daily Dot''.<ref name=":51" /> ==Legal status== The legal status of WikiLeaks is complex. In 2010, WikiLeaks set up a private limited company in Iceland for administrative purposes, according to a long-time spokesman and later editor-in-chief.<ref name=":11">{{Cite web |date=11 December 2010 |title=WikiLeaks sets up limited company in Iceland - Forbes.com |url=https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/11/13/general-eu-iceland-wikileaks_8102918.html |access-date=13 March 2022 |website= [[Forbes]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101211185043/https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/11/13/general-eu-iceland-wikileaks_8102918.html |archive-date=11 December 2010 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The organisation was also creating legal entities in France and Sweden, and operated in Australia.<ref name=":11" /> Assange considers WikiLeaks a protection intermediary. Rather than leaking directly to the press, and fearing exposure and retribution, [[whistleblower]]s can leak to WikiLeaks, which then leaks to the press for them.<ref>{{cite news |last=Light |first=Gilead |work=The Great Debate (blog) |agency=Reuters |title=The WikiLeaks story and criminal liability under the espionage laws |date=26 August 2010 |url=http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/08/26/the-wikileaks-story-and-criminal-liability-under-the-espionage-laws/ |access-date=6 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927175719/http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/08/26/the-wikileaks-story-and-criminal-liability-under-the-espionage-laws/ |archive-date=27 September 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> ===Criminal investigations=== {{See also|Julian Assange#US criminal investigation}} The [[United States Department of Justice|US Justice Department]] began a criminal investigation of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange soon after the [[United States diplomatic cables leak|leak of diplomatic cables in 2010]] began.<ref name="Savage20101201">{{cite news |last=Savage |first=Charlie |title=U.S. Weighs Prosecution of WikiLeaks Founder, but Legal Scholars Warn of Steep Hurdles |date=1 December 2010 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/world/02legal.html |work=The New York Times |access-date=5 December 2010}}</ref> ''The Washington Post'' reported that the department was considering charges under the [[Espionage Act of 1917]], an action which former prosecutors characterised as "difficult" because of [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] protections for the press.<ref name=Savage20101201 /><ref name="nakashima">{{cite news |last=Nakashima |first=Ellen |author2=Markon, Jerry |title=WikiLeaks founder could be charged under Espionage Act |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112905973.html |access-date=5 December 2010 |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=30 November 2010}}</ref> Several Supreme Court cases (e.g. ''[[Bartnicki v. Vopper]]'') have established previously that the American [[United States Constitution|Constitution]] protects the re-publication of illegally gained information provided the publishers did not themselves violate any laws in acquiring it.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/26/pentagon-papers-ii-on-wikileaks-and-the-first-amendment/ |access-date =6 December 2010 |date=26 July 2010 |title=Pentagon Papers II? On WikiLeaks and the First Amendment |work=The Wall Street Journal (blog) |author=Jones, Ashby |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130511022459/https://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/26/pentagon-papers-ii-on-wikileaks-and-the-first-amendment/ |archive-date=11 May 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> Regarding legal threats against WikiLeaks and Assange, legal expert [[Ben Saul]] said that Assange is the target of a global smear campaign to demonise him as a criminal or as a terrorist, without any legal basis.<ref>{{harvnb|Lauder|2010}}: statement by Dr [[Ben Saul]], director of the Centre for International Law at the [[University of Sydney]].</ref><ref name="lauderABC">{{cite web |url=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s3086781.htm |publisher=ABC News |title=Law experts say WikiLeaks in the clear |date=7 December 2010 |author=Lauder |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120802042857/http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s3086781.htm |archive-date=2 August 2012}}</ref> The US [[Center for Constitutional Rights]] issued a statement expressing alarm at the "multiple examples of legal overreach and irregularities" in his arrest.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-statement-arrest-of-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange |title=Statement on Arrest of WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange |publisher=[[Center for Constitutional Rights]] |location=New York |date=7 December 2010 |access-date=21 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140228040337/http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-statement-arrest-of-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange |archive-date=28 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> In 2011, Google was served with search warrants for the contents of two WikiLeaks volunteers' email accounts.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Knight |first=Sam |date=21 June 2013 |title=Court Documents Reveal Extent of Federal Investigation Into WikiLeaks |journal=The Nation |language=en-US |url=https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/court-documents-reveal-extent-federal-investigation-wikileaks/ |access-date=14 March 2022 |issn=0027-8378}}</ref> In 2015, it was revealed that Google had been served with search warrants for the contents of three WikiLeaks staff members' email accounts as part of a criminal investigation with alleged offenses including [[Espionage Act of 1917|espionage]], conspiracy to commit espionage, the theft or conversion of property belonging to the United States government, violation of the [[Computer Fraud and Abuse Act]], and [[Conspiracy (criminal)|criminal conspiracy]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Google hands data to US Government in WikiLeaks espionage case |url=https://wikileaks.org/google-warrant/press.html |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Bohn |first=Dieter |date=22 June 2013 |title=Secret warrant used to access WikiLeaks volunteer's Gmail account |url=https://www.theverge.com/2013/6/22/4453722/secret-warrant-used-to-access-wikileaks-volunteers-gmail-account |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=The Verge |language=en}}</ref> In April 2017, CIA director [[Mike Pompeo]] called WikiLeaks "a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia". The official designation of Wikileaks and [[Julian Assange]] as a non-state hostile intelligence service was discussed in mid-2017 during preparation of the [[Intelligence Authorization Act|Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018]]. It was eventually incorporated into the [[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020]] that became law in December 2019. The Act says "It is the sense of Congress that WikiLeaks and the senior leadership of WikiLeaks resemble a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors and should be treated as such a service by the United States." In the opinion of some sources, the effect of the designation was to allow the [[CIA]] to launch and plan operations that did not require presidential approval or congressional notice.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Grim |first1=Ryan |last2=Sirota |first2=Sara |title=Julian Assange Kidnapping Plot Casts New Light on 2018 Senate Intelligence Maneuver |url=https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/assange-kidnapping-wikileaks-cia-senate/ |website=The Intercept |access-date=25 December 2021 |date=28 September 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Gibbons |first1=Chip |title=The US Considered Kidnapping and Even Assassinating Julian Assange |url=https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/09/united-states-kidnap-assassinate-julian-assange-wikileaks-cia-yahoo-news |website=jacobinmag.com |access-date=25 December 2021 |date=30 September 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=The Plot to Kill Julian Assange: Report Reveals CIA's Plan to Kidnap, Assassinate WikiLeaks Founder |url=https://www.democracynow.org/2021/9/28/cia_julian_assange_assassination_plot |website=Democracy Now! |access-date=25 December 2021 |language=en |date=28 September 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Dorfman |first1=Zach |last2=Naylo |first2=Sean D. |last3=Isikoff |first3=Michael |title=Kidnapping, assassination and a London shoot-out: Inside the CIA's secret war plans against WikiLeaks |url=https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london-shoot-out-inside-the-ci-as-secret-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html |website=news.yahoo.com |access-date=25 December 2021 |date=26 September 2021}}</ref> In November 2018, an accidental filing with Assange's name was seen to indicate there were undisclosed charges against him.<ref name="apnews.com">{{Cite web |date=26 April 2021 |title=Charges undermine Assange denials about hacked email origins |url=https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-john-podesta-indictments-julian-assange-69b28dd8fc034cb0a2528048638d7893 |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=AP NEWS |language=en}}</ref> On 11 April 2019, Assange was charged in a computer hacking conspiracy.<ref>{{Cite web |date=11 April 2019 |title=WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy |url=https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=www.justice.gov |language=en}}</ref> On 23 May, a superseding indictment was filed with charges of Conspiracy to Receive National Defense Information, Obtaining National Defense Information, Disclosure of National Defense Information, and Conspiracy to Commit Computer Intrusion.<ref>{{Cite web |date=23 May 2019 |title=WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Charged in 18-Count Superseding Indictment |url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-charged-18-count-superseding-indictment |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=www.justice.gov |language=en}}</ref> On 24 June 2020, another superseding indictment was filed which added to the allegations but not the charges.<ref>{{Cite web |date=24 June 2020 |title=WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Superseding Indictment |url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-superseding-indictment |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=www.justice.gov |language=en}}</ref> ===Use of leaked documents in court=== In April 2011, the US Department of Justice warned military lawyers acting for Guantanamo Bay detainees against clicking of links on sites such as ''[[The New York Times]]'' that might lead to classified files published by WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sorkin |first1=Amy Davidson |title=WikiLeaks: The Secrets that Aren't |url=https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/wikileaks-the-secrets-that-arent |access-date=8 May 2021 |magazine=The New Yorker |date=28 April 2011}}</ref> In June 2011, the US Department of Justice ruled that attorneys acting for Guantanamo Bay detainees could cite documents published by WikiLeaks. The use of the documents was subject to restrictions.<ref>{{cite web |title=DOJ Details Access, Use of WikiLeaks Documents in Gitmo Cases |url=https://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/06/doj-details-access-use-of-wikileaks-documents-in-gitmo-cases.html |website=The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times |access-date=8 May 2021 |date=13 June 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Judge Gives DOJ Reprieve In WikiLeaks Document Dispute |url=https://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/06/doj-crafting-guidance-over-wikileaks-documents.html |website=The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times |access-date=8 May 2021 |date=6 June 2011}}</ref> On 8 February 2018, the [[Supreme Court of the United Kingdom|UK Supreme Court]] unanimously allowed a document that had been leaked through WikiLeaks to be admitted as evidence. The cable had been excluded from use in an earlier part of the case before the Administrative Court based on the fact that it was a diplomatic communication, which enjoy "inviolable" protections that prevent them from being used in court outside of exceptional circumstances.<ref name="brickcourt.co.uk" /><ref>{{cite web|accessdate=22 April 2021|title=Chagossians suffer blow in fight to go home as court rejects WikiLeaks cable|url=http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/18/chagos-islanders-court-rejects-wikileaks-cable|date=18 April 2013|website=the Guardian}}</ref> The Supreme Court ruled that since the document had already been widely disseminated, it had lost any protections it might have had.<ref name="brickcourt.co.uk" /> The hearing was considered an important test of the [[Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961|Vienna Convention]] in relation to WikiLeaks documents.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2018/3.html|title=R (on the application of Bancoult No 3) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Respondent)|publisher=United Kingdom Supreme Court|date=8 February 2018|access-date=11 September 2018}}</ref><ref name="brickcourt.co.uk">{{cite web|url=http://www.brickcourt.co.uk/news/detail/supreme-court-considers-important-test-of-vienna-convention-in-relation-to-wikileaks-documents|title=Supreme Court considers important test of the Vienna Convention in relation to Wikileaks documents|publisher=Brick Court Chambers|date=12 February 2018|access-date=11 September 2018}}</ref><ref name="Ejil210218">{{cite web |last1=McCorquodale |first1=Robert |title=Wikileaks Documents are Admissible in a Domestic Court |url=https://www.ejiltalk.org/wikileaks-documents-are-admissible-in-a-domestic-court/ |website=EJIL: Talk! |access-date=28 November 2020 |language=en |date=21 February 2018}}</ref> === Lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee === {{Main|Democratic National Committee v. Russian Federation}} On 20 April 2018, the Democratic National Committee filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit in [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York|federal district court in Manhattan]] against Russia, the Trump campaign, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, alleging a conspiracy to disrupt the [[2016 United States presidential election]] in Trump's favour.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Hamburger|first1=Tom|last2=Helderman|first2=Rosalind S.|last3=Nakashima|first3=Ellen|date=20 April 2018|title=Democratic Party sues Russia, Trump campaign and WikiLeaks alleging 2016 campaign conspiracy|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-party-files-lawsuit-alleging-russia-the-trump-campaign-and-wikileaks-conspired-to-disrupt-the-2016-campaign/2018/04/20/befe8364-4418-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=20 April 2018 }}</ref> The suit was dismissed [[with prejudice]] on 30 July 2019. In his judgement, Judge [[John Koeltl]] said that WikiLeaks "did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place" and therefore was within the law in publishing the information.<ref>{{cite news |last1=David O'Brien |first1=Rebecca |title=Judge Dismisses Democrats' Suit Against Russia, Trump Campaign |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/judge-dismisses-democrats-suit-against-russia-trump-campaign-11564539167 |work =[[Wall Street Journal]]|location=New York|publisher=[[News Corp]]|access-date=31 July 2019 |date=30 July 2019}}</ref> The federal judge also wrote "The DNC's interest in keeping 'donor lists' and 'fundraising strategies' secret is dwarfed by the newsworthiness of the documents as a whole...If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC's political financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them 'secret' and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet".<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/30/dnc-lawsuit-trump-campaign-russia-email-hack-1441166 |title = Judge dismisses DNC suit against Trump campaign, Russia over email hack|website = [[Politico]]}}</ref> ==Financing== WikiLeaks is a self-described [[not-for-profit organisation]], funded largely by volunteers, and is dependent on public donations. Its main financing methods include conventional [[Wire transfer|bank transfers]] and [[E-commerce payment system|online payment systems]]. According to Assange, WikiLeaks' lawyers often work [[pro bono]]. Assange has said that in some cases legal aid has been donated by media organisations such as the [[Associated Press]], the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', and the [[National Newspaper Publishers Association]].<ref name="leakonomy" /> Assange said in 2010 that WikiLeaks' only revenue consists of donations, but it has considered other options including auctioning early access to documents.<ref name="leakonomy" /> During September 2011, WikiLeaks began auctioning items on [[eBay]] to raise funds.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Hayes|first=Isabel|date=30 September 2011|title=Wikileaks is a leaking boat: Assange|url=https://www.smh.com.au/national/wikileaks-is-a-leaking-boat-assange-20111001-1l1yd.html|access-date=13 May 2021|website=The Sydney Morning Herald|language=en}}</ref> The [[Wau Holland Foundation]] helps to process donations to WikiLeaks. An article in [[TechEye]] wrote that "as a charity accountable under German law, donations for Wikileaks can be made to the foundation. Funds are held in escrow and are given to Wikileaks after the whistleblower website files an application containing a statement with proof of payment."<ref name="techeye">{{cite news |author=Daly, John W. |date=13 July 2010 |title=Wau Holland Foundation sheds light on WikiLeaks donations&nbsp;– Hardware, ISP, travelling costs |publisher=TechEye.net |url=http://www.techeye.net/internet/wau-holland-foundation-sheds-light-on-wikileaks-donations |url-status=dead |access-date=1 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727011201/http://www.techeye.net/internet/wau-holland-foundation-sheds-light-on-wikileaks-donations#ixzz0td0dXhBx |archive-date=27 July 2011}}</ref> In 2010, Assange said the organisation was registered as a library in Australia, a foundation in France, and a newspaper in Sweden, and that it also used two United States-based non-profit [[501c3]] organisations for funding purposes.<ref>{{cite news |date=23 August 2015 |title=How WikiLeaks Keeps Its Funding Secret |newspaper=Wall Street Journal |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704554104575436231926853198 |access-date=3 February 2015}}</ref> In January 2010, WikiLeaks temporarily shut down its website while management appealed for donations.<ref name="digdeep"/> Previously published material was no longer available, although some could still be accessed on unofficial [[mirror website]]s.<ref>{{cite web |title=WikiLeaks&nbsp;– Mirrors |url=http://wikileaks.ch/Mirrors.html |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=18 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207060201/http://www.wikileaks.ch/mirrors.html |archive-date=7 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> WikiLeaks stated that it would resume full operation once the operational costs were paid.<ref name="digdeep">{{cite news |last=Butselaar |first=Emily |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/29/wikileaks-shut-down |title=Dig deep for WikiLeaks |work=The Guardian |date=29 January 2010 |access-date =30 January 2010 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827012108/http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/29/wikileaks-shut-down |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks saw this as a kind of work stoppage "to ensure that everyone who is involved stops normal work and actually spends time raising revenue".<ref name="leakonomy">{{cite news |title=Leak-o-nomy: The Economy of Wikileaks (Interview with Julian Assange) |author=Mey, Stefan |url=http://stefanmey.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/leak-o-nomy-the-economy-of-wikileaks/ |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=Medien-Ökonomie-Blog |date=4 January 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101213110334/http://stefanmey.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/leak-o-nomy-the-economy-of-wikileaks/ |archive-date=13 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> While the organisation initially planned for funds to be secured by 6 January 2010,<!-- WP:RS needed; removed link to WP:SPS (Twitter, FB, WP)--> it was not until 3 February 2010 that WikiLeaks announced that its minimum fundraising goal had been achieved.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Facchinetti|first=Roberta|title="Transparency" from Pentagon Papers to Wikileaks: a linguistic revolution|url=https://termcoord.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/MA-thesis-Transparency.pdf}}</ref><!-- WP:RS needed; removed link to WP:SPS (Twitter, FB, WP)--> In December 2010, the [[Wau Holland Foundation]] stated that four permanent employees, including Julian Assange, had begun to receive salaries.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://m.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20101223-31975.html |work=The Local |place=Berlin |title=Wikileaks donations still flowing, but not to Assange legal fund |access-date=23 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131002143644/http://m.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20101223-31975.html |archive-date=2 October 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[Wau Holland Foundation]], one of the WikiLeaks' main funding channels, stated that they received more than €900,000 in public donations between October 2009 and December 2010, of which €370,000 has been passed on to WikiLeaks. Hendrik Fulda, vice-president of the Wau Holland Foundation, said that every new WikiLeaks publication brought "a wave of support", and that donations were strongest in the weeks after WikiLeaks started publishing leaked diplomatic cables.<ref name="spiegel131210">{{cite news |title=Donations Were Never as Strong as Now |work=Spiegel International |place=Hamburg |date=13 December 2010 |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,734318,00.html |access-date=15 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110715205752/http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0%2C1518%2C734318%2C00.html |archive-date=15 July 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Financing WikiLeaks |first=Scott |last=Horton |work=Harper's Magazine |place=New York |date=6 August 2010 |url=http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/08/hbc-90007485 |access-date=15 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121019211817/http://harpers.org/archive/2010/08/hbc-90007485 |archive-date=19 October 2012 |url-status=live}}</ref> During 2010, WikiLeaks received over $1.9 million in donations. About $930,000 came through PayPal donations, with the rest coming through bank transfers.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Zetter |first=Kim |title=WikiLeaks Donations Topped $1.9 Million in 2010 |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2011/04/wau-holland-report/ |access-date=2022-09-23 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> In 2011, donations dropped sharply and WikiLeaks received only around $180,000 in donations, while their expenses increased from $519,000 to $850,000.<ref name=":9">{{Cite magazine |last=Zetter |first=Kim |title=WikiLeaks Donations Down to a Trickle |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2013/05/wikileaks-donations-down/ |access-date=2022-09-23 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> In 2012, WikiLeaks raised only $68,000 through the Wau Holland Foundation and had expenses more than $507,000.<ref name=":9" /> Between January and May 2013, Wau Holland Foundation was only able to cover $47,000 in essential infrastructure for WikiLeaks, but not an additional $400,000 that was submitted "to cover publishing campaigns and logistics in 2012".<ref name=":9" /> By October 2017, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said the group had made a 50,000% return on [[Bitcoin]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kharpal |first=Arjun |date=16 October 2017 |title=WikiLeaks founder Assange claims he made 50,000% return on bitcoin thanks to the US government |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/16/wikileaks-julian-assange-bitcoin-50000-percent-return-thanks-to-us-government.html |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=CNBC |language=en}}</ref> By that December, they had raised at least $25 million in Bitcoin.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cox |first=Joseph |date=28 December 2017 |title=Where Did WikiLeaks' $25 Million Bitcoin Fortune Go? |language=en |work=The Daily Beast |url=https://www.thedailybeast.com/where-did-wikileaks-dollar25-million-bitcoin-fortune-go |access-date=13 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=":111">{{Cite news |title=A German hacker offers a rare look inside the secretive world of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks |language=en-US |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/a-german-hacker-offers-a-rare-look-inside-the-secretive-world-of-julian-assange-and-wikileaks/2018/01/17/e6211180-f311-11e7-b390-a36dc3fa2842_story.html |access-date=21 March 2022 |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> The total value later reached $46 million.<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 July 2019 |title=WikiLeaks Has Received More Than $46 Million in Bitcoin {{!}} Bitcoinist.com |url=https://bitcoinist.com/wikileaks-has-received-more-than-46-million-in-bitcoin/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |language=en-US}}</ref> ===Financial blockade of WikiLeaks=== On 22 January 2010, the Internet payment intermediary [[PayPal]] suspended WikiLeaks' donation account and froze its assets. WikiLeaks said that this had happened before, and was done for "no obvious reason".<ref name="WillRegJan10">{{cite news |last1=Williams |first1=Christopher |title=Wikileaks pledge drive hobbled by PayPal suspension |url=https://www.theregister.com/2010/01/25/wikileaks_paypal/ |access-date=24 November 2019 |work=[[The Register]] |publisher=Situation Publishing |date=25 January 2010 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=8101847372 |date=23 January 2010 |title=Paypal has again locked our donation account for no obvious reason. We need an alternative to this arbitrary freezing of assets. |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220220030322/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/8101847372 |archive-date=20 February 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> In December 2010, PayPal suspended WikiLeaks' account, thereby stopping donations through PayPal. PayPal said it had taken action after the [[US State Department]] sent a letter to Wikileaks stating that Wikileaks' activities were illegal in the US.<ref name="bbc081210">{{cite news |title=PayPal says it stopped Wikileaks payments on US letter |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-11945875 |access-date=22 June 2021 |work=BBC News |date=8 December 2010}}</ref> Hendrik Fulda, vice-president of the Wau Holland Foundation, said that the Foundation had been receiving twice as many donations through PayPal as through normal banks before PayPal's decision to suspend WikiLeaks' account.<ref name="spiegel131210"/> [[Mastercard]] and [[Visa Inc.#Visa Europe|Visa Europe]] also decided to stop accepting payments to WikiLeaks. [[Bank of America]], [[Amazon (company)|Amazon]] and Swiss bank [[PostFinance]] had previously stopped dealing with WikiLeaks. Datacell, the IT company that enabled WikiLeaks to accept credit and debit card donations, threatened Mastercard and Visa with legal action to enforce the resumption of payments to WikiLeaks. Datacell said Visa's action was the result of political pressure.<ref name="bbc081210"/><ref name="wired071212">{{cite news |last=Zetter |first=Kim |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/wikileaks-visa-blockade/ |title=WikiLeaks Wins Icelandic Court Battle Against Visa for Blocking Donations &#124; Threat Level |magazine=Wired |date=12 July 2012 |access-date=19 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130702005703/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/wikileaks-visa-blockade/ |archive-date=2 July 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref> Assange noted that the financial blockade by Bank of America, Visa, MasterCard, PayPal and [[Western Union]], had cost WikiLeaks ninety-five percent of its revenue.<ref name="reuters241011">{{cite news |last1=Holden |first1=Michael |date=24 October 2011 |title=WikiLeaks says "blockade" threatens its existence |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-wikileaks/wikileaks-says-blockade-threatens-its-existence-idUSTRE79N46K20111024 |access-date=22 June 2021}}</ref> In July 2011, WikiLeaks filed a complaint against Visa and MasterCard with the [[European Commission]].<ref name="reuters241011" /> In 2012, an Icelandic district court ruled that [[Valitor]], the Icelandic partner of [[Visa Inc.|Visa]] and [[MasterCard]], was violating the law when it stopped accepting credit card donations to WikiLeaks. The court ruled that donations to WikiLeaks must resume within 14 days or Valitor would be fined US$6,000 a day.<ref name="wired071212" /> ==Publications== {{Main|Information published by WikiLeaks}} ===2006–2008=== * WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate Somali government officials signed by rebel leader Sheikh [[Hassan Dahir Aweys]].<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> Assange and WikiLeaks were uncertain of its authenticity, and the document’s authenticity was never determined.<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> * In August 2007, the UK newspaper ''[[The Guardian]]'' published a story about corruption by the family of the former Kenyan leader [[Daniel arap Moi]] based on information provided via WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |title=The looting of Kenya |url=https://www.theguardian.com/kenya/story/0,,2159757,00.html |work=The Guardian |date=31 August 2007 |access-date=28 February 2008 |place=London |first=Xan |last=Rice |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080131213722/http://www.guardian.co.uk/kenya/story/0%2C%2C2159757%2C00.html |archive-date=31 January 2008 |url-status=live }}</ref> * In November 2007, a March 2003 copy of ''[[Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures|Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta]]'' detailing the protocol of the [[United States Army|US Army]] at the [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp]] was released.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo |title=Sensitive Guantánamo Bay Manual Leaked Through Wiki Site |magazine=Wired |place=New York |date=14 November 2007 |author=Singel, Ryan |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140210123003/http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/11/gitmo |archive-date=10 February 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{citation |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Camp_Delta_Standard_Operating_Procedure |title=Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedure |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160430004411/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Camp_Delta_Standard_Operating_Procedure |archive-date=30 April 2016 |access-date=15 May 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref> The document revealed that some prisoners were off-limits to the [[International Committee of the Red Cross]], something that the US military had in the past denied repeatedly.<ref name="Reuters 15 November 2007">{{cite news |title=Guantanamo operating manual posted on Internet |date=15 November 2007 |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1424207020071114?pageNumber=1 |work=Reuters |access-date =15 November 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081222055914/https://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1424207020071114?pageNumber=1 |archive-date=22 December 2008 |url-status=live}}</ref> The Guantánamo Bay Manual included procedures for transferring prisoners and methods of evading protocols of the [[Geneva convention]].<ref name="guardian230208">{{cite news |last1=Leigh |first1=David |last2=Franklin |first2=Jonathan |title=Whistle while you work |url=https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2008/feb/23/internet.usa |access-date=8 April 2021 |work=the Guardian |date=23 February 2008 |language=en}}</ref> * In February 2008, WikiLeaks released allegations of illegal activities at the [[Cayman Islands]] branch of the Swiss Bank [[Julius Baer]], which resulted in the bank [[Bank Julius Baer vs. WikiLeaks|suing WikiLeaks]] and obtaining an injunction which temporarily suspended the operation of wikileaks.org.<ref name="injunction">{{cite press release |title=Wikileaks.org under injunction |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080306005837/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction |archive-date=6 March 2008 |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=18 February 2008 |access-date=28 February 2008}}</ref> The California judge had the service provider of WikiLeaks block the site's domain (wikileaks.org) on 18 February 2008, although the bank only wanted the documents to be removed but WikiLeaks had failed to name a contact. The website was instantly mirrored by supporters, and later that month the judge overturned his previous decision citing [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] concerns and questions about legal [[jurisdiction]].<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite news |url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1039527/judge-rethinks-wikileaks |title=Judge reverses Wikileaks injunction |work=The Inquirer |place=London |date=2 March 2008 |author=Orion, Egan |access-date=23 September 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209125421/http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1039527/judge-rethinks-wikileaks |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=unfit}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |author=Gollner, Philipp |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2927431720080229 |title=Judge reverses ruling in Julius Baer leak case |date=29 February 2008 |access-date=1 March 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101210183558/https://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2927431720080229 |archive-date=10 December 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref> * In March 2008, WikiLeaks published what they referred to as "the collected secret 'bibles' of [[Scientology]]", and three days later received letters threatening to sue them for breach of copyright.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/08/church_of_scientology_contacts_wikileaks/ |title=Scientology threatens Wikileaks with injunction |work=The Register |place=London |date=8 April 2008 |access-date=7 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140215204305/https://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/08/church_of_scientology_contacts_wikileaks/ |archive-date=15 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> * In September 2008, during the [[2008 United States presidential election|2008 United States presidential election campaigns]], the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to [[Sarah Palin]] (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee [[John McCain]]) were [[Sarah Palin email hack|posted on WikiLeaks]] after being hacked by [[4chan]] user David Kernell.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/group-posts-e-m.html |magazine=Threat Level ([[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] blog) |author=Zetter, Kim |date=17 September 2008 |title=Group Posts E-Mail Hacked From Palin Account&nbsp;– Update |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090403071526/http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/group-posts-e-m.html |archive-date=3 April 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{citation |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin_Yahoo_account_2008 |title=Sarah Palin Yahoo account 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160329143446/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin_Yahoo_account_2008 |archive-date=29 March 2016 |access-date=15 May 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Sarah Palin E-mail Hacker Sentenced to 1 Year in Custody |url=https://www.wired.com/2010/11/palin-hacker-sentenced/ |magazine=Wired}}</ref> * In November 2008, the membership list of the far-right [[British National Party]] was posted to WikiLeaks, after appearing briefly on a weblog.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7956824.stm |title='BNP membership' officer sacked |work=BBC News |access-date=23 March 2009 |date=21 March 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090326060319/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/7956824.stm |archive-date=26 March 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref> A year later, in October 2009, another list of BNP members was leaked, said by the BNP’s leader, Nick Griffin, to be a ‘malicious forgery’.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/oct/20/bnp-membership-list-wikileaks |title=BNP membership list leaked |work=The Guardian |access-date=20 October 2009 |place=London |first=Robert |last=Booth |date=20 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130130044736/http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/20/bnp-membership-list-wikileaks |archive-date=30 January 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> ===2009=== * In January 2009, WikiLeaks released 86 telephone intercept recordings of Peruvian politicians and businessmen involved in the [[2008 Peru oil scandal]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.terra.com.pe/noticias/noticias/act1609692/aparecen-86-nuevos-petroaudios-romulo-leon.html |title=Aparecen 86 nuevos petroaudios de Rómulo León |work=Terra Peru |language=es |place=Lima |date=28 January 2009 |access-date=8 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131017060119/http://www.terra.com.pe/noticias/noticias/act1609692/aparecen-86-nuevos-petroaudios-romulo-leon.html |archive-date=17 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> * In February, WikiLeaks cracked the encryption to and published NATO's Master Narrative for Afghanistan and three other classified or restricted NATO documents on the Pentagon Central Command (CENTCOM) site.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Wikileaks cracks NATO's Master Narrative for Afghanistan - WikiLeaks |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks_cracks_NATO%27s_Master_Narrative_for_Afghanistan |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Kushner |first=David |title=Click and Dagger: Inside WikiLeaks' Leak Factory |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/06/click-and-dagger-wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video-updated/ |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=Mother Jones |language=en-US}}</ref> * During February, WikiLeaks released 6,780 [[Congressional Research Service]] reports<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/11/AR2009021101388.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110122022922/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/11/AR2009021101388.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=22 January 2011 |title=Thousands of Congressional Reports Now Available Online |author=Krebs, Brian |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=11 February 2009 |access-date=7 December 2010}}</ref> followed in March by a list of contributors to the [[Norm Coleman]] senatorial campaign<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10195434-83.html |title=Coleman Senate campaign in donor data leak mess |work=CNET News |author=Mills, Elinor |date=12 March 2009|access-date=7 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131016213753/http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10195434-83.html |archive-date=16 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/The_Big_Bad_Database_of_Senator_Norm_Coleman |title=The Big Bad Database of Senator Norm Coleman |publisher=Mirror.wikileaks.info |date=11 March 2009 |access-date=17 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140419221950/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/The_Big_Bad_Database_of_Senator_Norm_Coleman |archive-date=19 April 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> and a set of documents belonging to [[Barclays Bank]] that had been ordered removed from the website of ''The Guardian''.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/06/wikileaks-wikipedia-indiana-jones |title=Read all about it |work=The Guardian |place=London |author=Luft, Oliver |date=6 July 2009 |access-date=7 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827011115/http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jul/06/wikileaks-wikipedia-indiana-jones |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> * In July, it released a report relating to a serious nuclear accident that had occurred at the Iranian [[Nuclear facilities in Iran#Natanz|Natanz nuclear facility]] in 2009.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Serious_nuclear_accident_may_lay_behind_Iranian_nuke_chief%27s_mystery_resignation/ |title=Serious nuclear accident may lay behind Iranian nuke chief's mystery resignation |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=16 July 2009 |access-date=16 October 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101203160534/http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Serious_nuclear_accident_may_lay_behind_Iranian_nuke_chief's_mystery_resignation/ |archive-date=3 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Later media reports suggested that the accident was related to the [[Stuxnet]] [[computer worm]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/27/6_mysteries_about_stuxnet |title=6 mysteries about Stuxnet |author=Hounshell, Blake |website=Passport (blog) |publisher=Foreign Policy |location=Washington DC |date=27 September 2010 |access-date=28 September 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209181744/http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/27/6_mysteries_about_stuxnet |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Woodward, Paul |url=http://warincontext.org/2010/09/26/iran-confirms-stuxnet-found-at-bushehr-nuclear-power-plant/ |title=Iran confirms Stuxnet found at Bushehr nuclear power plant |publisher=Warincontext.org |date=22 February 1999 |access-date=28 September 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209162332/http://warincontext.org/2010/09/26/iran-confirms-stuxnet-found-at-bushehr-nuclear-power-plant/ |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> * In September, internal documents from [[Kaupthing Bank]] were leaked, from shortly before the collapse of Iceland's banking sector, which had caused the [[2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis]]. The document showed that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off.<ref>{{cite web |title=Miklar hreyfingar rétt fyrir hrun |trans-title= Large movements just before crash |url=http://www.ruv.is/frett/miklar-hreyfingar-rett-fyrir-hrun |date=31 July 2009 |website=[[RÚV|Ríkisútvarpið (RÚV)]] |location=Reykjavik |language=is |access-date=22 September 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110809051437/http://www.ruv.is/frett/miklar-hreyfingar-rett-fyrir-hrun |archive-date=9 August 2011 |url-status=dead}}</ref> * In October, [[Joint Services Protocol 440]], a British document advising the security services on how to avoid documents being leaked, was published by WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |first=Tom |last=Chivers |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6261756/MoD-how-to-stop-leaks-document-is-leaked.html |title=MoD 'how to stop leaks' document is leaked |work=The Daily Telegraph |location=London |date=5 October 2009 |access-date=6 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110107215301/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6261756/MoD-how-to-stop-leaks-document-is-leaked.html |archive-date=7 January 2011 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Later that month, it announced that a [[super-injunction]] was being used by the commodities company [[Trafigura]] to stop ''The Guardian'' (London) from reporting on a leaked internal document regarding a [[2006 Ivory Coast toxic waste dump|toxic dumping incident]] in [[Ivory Coast|Côte d'Ivoire]].<ref name="wikileaks">{{cite news |url=http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/10/a-gag-too-far/ |author=Margaronis, Maria |title=A gag too far |work=Index on Censorship |date=October 2009 |access-date=14 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209090937/http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/10/a-gag-too-far/ |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Minton report secret injunction gagging The Guardian on Trafigura |website=WikiLeaks |url=https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Minton_report_secret_injunction_gagging_The_Guardian_on_Trafigura,_11_Sep_2009 |access-date=15 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100830063054/http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Minton_report_secret_injunction_gagging_The_Guardian_on_Trafigura%2C_11_Sep_2009 |archive-date=30 August 2010 |url-status=dead }}<!-- see also http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Minton_report_secret_injunction_gagging_The_Guardian_on_Trafigura,_11_Sep_2009/ --></ref> * In November, it hosted copies of [[Climatic Research Unit email controversy|e-mail correspondence between climate scientists]], although they were not leaked originally to WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks.org aims to expose lies, topple governments |date=29 November 2009 |work=New York Post |url=http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/wikileaks_org_aims_to_expose_lies_flsLqNMO3B0LEtxL5bNaKL |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827011942/http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/wikileaks_org_aims_to_expose_lies_flsLqNMO3B0LEtxL5bNaKL |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=dead}}</ref> It also released 570,000 intercepts of pager messages sent on the day of the [[11 September attacks]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504383_162-5770280-504383.html?tag=mncol%3btxt/ |title=Egads! Confidential 9/11 Pager Messages Disclosed;November 2009 |publisher=CBS News |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110502094524/http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504383_162-5770280-504383.html |archive-date=2 May 2011 |date=25 November 2009 |access-date=15 May 2016 |first=Declan |last=McCullagh |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2009/nov/25/september-11-wikileaks-pager-messages |title=9/11 re-enacted: Wikileaks publishes September 11 pager messages |work=[[The Guardian]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130908081324/http://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2009/nov/25/september-11-wikileaks-pager-messages |archive-date=8 September 2013 |access-date=15 May 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{citation |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Egads!_Confidential_9/11_Pager_Messages_Disclosed |title=Egads! Confidential 9/11 Pager Messages Disclosed |publisher=WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091128081304/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Egads%21_Confidential_9/11_Pager_Messages_Disclosed |archive-date=28 November 2009 |access-date=15 May 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref> These included messages sent from the [[The Pentagon|Pentagon]], the [[FBI]], the [[Federal Emergency Management Agency]] and the [[NYPD]], in response to the disaster.<ref name="yahoo041021">{{cite web |last1=Middis |first1=Jessie |title=The most shocking revelations to come from WikiLeaks |url=https://au.news.yahoo.com/on-this-day-the-most-shocking-revelations-to-come-from-wiki-leaks-210023597.html |website=au.news.yahoo.com |access-date=4 October 2021 |language=en-AU |date=4 October 2021}}</ref> * During 2008 and 2009, WikiLeaks published lists of forbidden or illegal web addresses for Australia, Denmark and Thailand. These were originally created to prevent access to [[child pornography]] and terrorism, but the leaks revealed that other sites featuring unrelated subjects were also listed.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/aussie_firewall_wikileaks/ |title=Aussie firewall blocks Wikileaks |work=The Register |place=London |author=Oates, John |date=18 March 2009 |access-date=17 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131016213350/https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/aussie_firewall_wikileaks/ |archive-date=16 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/03/19/1237054961100.html |title=Leaked Australian blacklist reveals banned sites |author=Moses, Asher |access-date=19 March 2009 |date=19 March 2009 |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131008013359/http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/03/19/1237054961100.html |archive-date=8 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Internet_Censorship_in_Thailand |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080116070133/http://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/Internet_Censorship_in_Thailand |archive-date=16 January 2008 |title=Internet Censorship in Thailand |publisher=wikileaks.org |access-date=17 June 2010}}</ref> ===2010=== {{Main|Iraq War documents leak|Afghan War documents leak}} [[File:2007-07-12 sun measurement.png|thumb|Gun camera footage of the [[July 12, 2007, Baghdad airstrike|airstrike of 12 July 2007]] in Baghdad, showing the slaying of [[Namir Noor-Eldeen]] and a dozen other civilians by a US helicopter.]] In mid-February 2010, WikiLeaks received a leaked diplomatic cable from the United States Embassy in Reykjavik relating to the [[Icesave dispute|Icesave]] scandal, which they published on 18 February.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified_cable_from_US_Embassy_Reykjavik_on_Icesave,_13_Jan_2010 |title=Classified cable from US Embassy Reykjavik on Icesave, 13 Jan 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110708204401/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified_cable_from_US_Embassy_Reykjavik_on_Icesave%2C_13_Jan_2010 |archive-date=8 July 2011 |url-status=live }}. WikiLeaks. Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref> The cable, known as [[Reykjavik 13]], was the first of the classified documents WikiLeaks published among those allegedly provided to them by United States Army Private [[Chelsea Manning]]. In March 2010, WikiLeaks released a secret 32-page [[US Department of Defense]] Counterintelligence Analysis Report written in March 2008 discussing the leaking of material by WikiLeaks and how it could be deterred.<ref name="USarmyintel">{{cite web |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20000469-38.html |title=U.S. Army worried about Wikileaks in secret report |last=Mccullagh |first=Declan |website=[[CNET]] News |date=15 March 2010 |access-date =15 March 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131012034413/http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20000469-38.html |archive-date=12 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf |title=U.S. Intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120327022511/http://wikileaks.org/file/us-intel-wikileaks.pdf |archive-date=27 March 2012 |publisher=WikiLeaks |date=15 March 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>Stephanie Strom, {{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/us/18wiki.html |title=Pentagon Sees a Threat From Online Muckrakers |work=The New York Times |first=Stephanie |last=Strom |date=17 March 2010}}, [[New York Times]], 17 March 2010.</ref> In April, a classified video of the [[12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike]] was released, showing two [[Reuters]] employees being fired at, after the pilots mistakenly thought the men were carrying weapons, which were in fact cameras.<ref>{{cite news |title=Video Shows U.S. Killing of Reuters Employees |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/middleeast/06baghdad.html |date=6 April 2009 |work=The New York Times |author1=Bumiller, Elisabeth |author2=Stelter, Brian |access-date=7 April 2010}}</ref> After the men were killed, the video shows US forces firing on a family van that stopped to pick up the bodies.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.netflix.com/WiPlayer?movieid=80003063 |title=WikiLeaks: War, Lies, and Videotape (2011 movie) |place=France |date=12 September 2011 |agency=Production Co: Premières Lignes Télévision |archive-url=https://archive.today/20141213202151/http://www.netflix.com/WiPlayer?movieid=80003063 |archive-date=13 December 2014}}</ref> Press reports of the number killed in the attacks vary from 12 to "over 18".<ref name="nytimes20100726">{{cite news|title=In Disclosing Secret Documents, WikiLeaks Seeks 'Transparency' |first=Eric |last=Schmitt |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/26wiki.html |work=The New York Times |date=25 July 2010 |access-date=27 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101210182456/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/26wiki.html?_r=1 |archive-date=10 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="totalfatalities">{{cite news|author-link=Bill Keller|last=Keller|first=Bill|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.html|title=Dealing With Assange and the WikiLeaks Secrets|work=[[The New York Times]]|format=adapted from introduction to the book ''Open Secrets''|date=26 January 2011|access-date=18 June 2012|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120908/http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/magazine/30Wikileaks-t.html|archive-date=8 September 2012|url-status=live}}</ref> Among the dead were two journalists and two children were also wounded.<ref>{{cite news|title=Iraq war files: Apache Hellfire victims |url=http://www.channel4.com/news/iraq-war-files-the-apache-hellfire-victims |publisher=Channel 4 |date=22 October 2010 |access-date=27 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110212031306/http://www.channel4.com/news/iraq-war-files-the-apache-hellfire-victims |archive-date=12 February 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=US soldier on aftermath of WikiLeaks Apache attack |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/9136984.stm |publisher=BBC |date=28 October 2010 |access-date=27 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110209103443/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/9136984.stm |archive-date=9 February 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref> In June 2010, Manning was arrested after alleged chat logs were given to United States authorities by former hacker [[Adrian Lamo]], in whom she had confided. Manning reportedly told Lamo she had leaked the [[Collateral Murder video|"Collateral Murder" video]], in addition to a video of the [[Granai airstrike]] and about 260,000 diplomatic cables, to WikiLeaks.<ref name="wired">{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/ |author-link1=Kevin Poulsen |first1=Kevin |last1=Poulsen |author-link2=Kim Zetter |first2=Kim |last2=Zetter |title=U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe |magazine=Wired |place=New York |date=6 June 2010 |access-date=15 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131027125007/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/ |archive-date=27 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> In July, WikiLeaks released [[Afghan War documents leak|92,000 documents]] related to the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|war in Afghanistan]] between 2004 and the end of 2009 to the publications ''[[The Guardian]]'', ''[[The New York Times]]'' and ''[[Der Spiegel]]''. The documents detail individual incidents including "[[friendly fire]]" and civilian casualties.<ref name="guardian1">{{cite news |title=Afghanistan war logs: the unvarnished picture |work=The Guardian |date=26 July 2010 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-guardian-editorial?intcmp=239 |access-date=26 July 2010 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110728043710/http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-guardian-editorial?intcmp=239 |archive-date=28 July 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks asked the [[The Pentagon|Pentagon]] and human-rights groups to help remove names from the documents to reduce the potential harm caused by their release, but did not receive assistance.<ref>{{cite news |title=Pentagon Slams WikiLeaks' Plan to Post More War Logs |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704407804575425900461793766?mod=WSJ_article_LatestHeadlines#articleTabs%3Darticle |access-date=13 August 2010 |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=12 August 2010 |author=Barnes, Julian E. |author2=Whalen, Jeanne |place=New York |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131015111311/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704407804575425900461793766.html?mod=WSJ_article_LatestHeadlines |archive-date=15 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> After the [[Love Parade stampede]] in [[Duisburg]], Germany, on 24 July 2010, a local resident published internal documents of the city administration regarding the planning of Love Parade. The city government reacted by securing a [[court order]] on 16 August forcing the removal of the documents from the website on which it was hosted.<ref>{{cite news |first=Konrad |last=Lischka |url=http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,712408,00.html |title=Einstweilige Verfügung&nbsp;– Duisburg verbietet Blogger-Veröffentlichung zur Love Parade |language=de |work=Der Spiegel |date=18 August 2010 |place=Hamburg |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101224220127/http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0%2C1518%2C712408%2C00.html |archive-date=24 December 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 20 August 2010, WikiLeaks released a publication entitled ''Loveparade 2010 Duisburg planning documents, 2007–2010'', which consisted of 43 internal documents regarding the Love Parade 2010.<ref>{{cite web |title=Loveparade 2010 Duisburg planning documents, 2007–2010 |url=http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Loveparade_2010_Duisburg_planning_documents,_2007-2010/ |publisher=Mirror.wikileaks.info |date=20 August 2010 |access-date=17 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101217182117/http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Loveparade_2010_Duisburg_planning_documents%2C_2007-2010/ |archive-date=17 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.news.com.au/technology/wikileaks-releases-documents-on-love-parade-tragedy/story-e6frfrnr-1225908260011 |title=WikiLeaks releases documents on Love Parade tragedy |work=news.com.au Technology |date=21 August 2010 |agency=NewsCore |place=Sydney |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131012015126/http://www.news.com.au/technology/wikileaks-releases-documents-on-love-parade-tragedy/story-e6frfrnr-1225908260011 |archive-date=12 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> After the leak of information concerning the Afghan War, in October 2010, around [[Iraq War documents leak|400,000 documents]] relating to the [[Iraq War]] were released. The BBC quoted the [[United States Department of Defense|US Department of Defense]] referring to the Iraq War Logs as "the largest leak of classified documents in its history". Media coverage of the leaked documents emphasised claims that the US government had ignored reports of [[torture]] by the Iraqi authorities during the period after the [[2003 invasion of Iraq|2003 war]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Huge Wikileaks release shows US 'ignored Iraq torture' |work=BBC News |date=23 October 2010 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11611319 |access-date=23 October 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720082422/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11611319 |archive-date=20 July 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> On 29 July 2010 WikiLeaks added an "Insurance file" to the Afghan War Diary page. The file is [[Advanced Encryption Standard|AES]] encrypted.<ref name="wikileaks-insurance">{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary,_2004-2010 |title=Afghan War Diary, 2004–2010 |publisher=WikiLeaks |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723110642/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Afghan_War_Diary%2C_2004-2010 |archive-date=23 July 2011 |url-status=live|access-date=28 February 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|title=WikiLeaks Posts Mysterious 'Insurance' File|language=en-US|magazine=Wired|url=https://www.wired.com/2010/07/wikileaks-insurance-file/|access-date=13 May 2021|issn=1059-1028}}</ref><!-- WP:RS needed; removed link to WP:SPS (Twitter, FB, WP)--> There has been speculation that it was intended to serve as insurance in case the WikiLeaks website or its spokesman Julian Assange are incapacitated, upon which the [[passphrase]] could be published.<ref name="wired_insurance">{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks-insurance-file/ |title=WikiLeaks Posts Mysterious 'Insurance' File |last=Zetter |first=Kim |date=30 July 2010 |magazine=Wired|access-date=11 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121004083509/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/wikileaks-insurance-file/ |archive-date=4 October 2012 |url-status=live |place=New York }}</ref><ref name="telegraph_dns_insuranceaes">{{cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8178457/WikiLeaks-website-disconnected-as-US-company-withdraws-support.html |title=WikiLeaks website disconnected as US company withdraws support |last=Ward |first=Victoria |date=3 December 2010 |work=The Daily Telegraph|access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101204064107/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8178457/WikiLeaks-website-disconnected-as-US-company-withdraws-support.html |archive-date=4 December 2010 |url-status=live |place=London }}</ref> After the first few days' release of the [[United States diplomatic cables leak|US diplomatic cables]] starting 28 November 2010, the US television broadcasting company [[CBS]] predicted that "If anything happens to Assange or the website, a key will go out to unlock the files. There would then be no way to stop the information from spreading like wildfire because so many people already have copies."<ref name="cbsnews_diplomaticbomb">{{cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/02/eveningnews/main7111845.shtml |title=WikiLeaks Backup Plan Could Drop Diplomatic Bomb |last=Palmer |first=Elizabeth |date=2 December 2010 |work=[[CBS]] News|access-date=3 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101203205140/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/12/02/eveningnews/main7111845.shtml |archive-date=3 December 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref> CBS correspondent [[Declan McCullagh]] stated, "What most folks are speculating is that the insurance file contains unreleased information that would be especially embarrassing to the US government if it were released."<ref name="cbsnews_diplomaticbomb" /> ===Diplomatic cables release=== {{Main|United States diplomatic cables leak|Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak|l2=contents|Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak|l3=reactions}} On 28 November 2010, WikiLeaks and five major newspapers from Spain (''[[El País]]''), France (''[[Le Monde]]''), Germany (''[[Der Spiegel]]''), the United Kingdom (''[[The Guardian]]''), and the United States (''The New York Times'') started simultaneously to publish the first 220 of 251,287 leaked documents labelled confidential&nbsp;– but not top-secret&nbsp;– and dated from 28 December 1966 to 28 February 2010.<ref>{{cite news |last=Shane |first=Scott |title=Leaked Cables Offer Raw Look at U.S. Diplomacy |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html|access-date=19 December 2010 |work=The New York Times |date=28 November 2010 |author2=Lehren, Andrew W.}}</ref><ref name="manila">{{cite news |last=Suarez |first=Kris Danielle |url=http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/11/29/10/1796-memos-us-embassy-manila-wikileaks-cablegate |title=1,796 Memos from US Embassy in Manila in WikiLeaks 'Cablegate' |work=[[ABS-CBN News]] |date=30 November 2010 |access-date=19 December 2010 |place=Manila |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120927221008/http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/11/29/10/1796-memos-us-embassy-manila-wikileaks-cablegate |archive-date=27 September 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> [[File:Wikileaks protest Madrid 11th December 2.jpg|thumb|WikiLeaks supporters protest in front of the [[Embassy of the United Kingdom, Madrid|British Embassy]] in Madrid, 11 December 2010]] Assange wrote "What makes the revelations of secret communications potent is that we were not supposed to read them. Diplomatic cables are not produced in order to manipulate the public, but are aimed at elements of the rest of the US state apparatus, and are therefore relatively free from the distorting influence of public relations".<ref>{{cite web |title=Julian Assange's Introduction To The Wikileaks Files |url=https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/08/exclusive-read-julian-assanges-introduction-to-the-wikileaks-files/ |website=Gizmodo Australia |access-date=16 August 2021 |language=en-AU |date=27 August 2015}}</ref> The [[Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak|contents of the diplomatic cables]] include numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding: US diplomats gathering personal information about [[Ban Ki-moon]], Secretary-General of the United Nations, and other top UN officials; critiques and praises about the host countries of various United States embassies; political manoeuvring regarding [[climate change]]; discussion and resolutions towards ending ongoing tension in the Middle East; efforts and resistance towards [[nuclear disarmament]]; actions in the [[War on Terror]]; assessments of other threats around the world; dealings between various countries; United States [[Military intelligence|intelligence]] and [[counterintelligence]] efforts; and other diplomatic actions. [[Reactions to the United States diplomatic cables leak]] varied. On 14 December 2010 the [[United States Department of Justice]] issued a [[WikiLeaks-related Twitter subpoenas|subpoena directing Twitter]] to provide information for accounts registered to or associated with WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/07/twitter/subpoena.pdf |title=Twitter Subpoena |website=Salon |date=17 January 2009 |access-date=10 January 2011}}</ref> Twitter decided to notify its users.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jan/08/us-twitter-hand-icelandic-wikileaks-messages |title=Icelandic MP fights US demand for her Twitter account details |work=The Guardian |place=London |author=Rushe, Dominic |date=8 January 2011 |access-date=10 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725200602/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/08/us-twitter-hand-icelandic-wikileaks-messages |archive-date=25 July 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> The [[2010–2011 Tunisian protests|overthrow of the presidency in Tunisia]] of 2011 has been attributed partly to reaction against the corruption revealed by leaked cables.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jan/13/tunisia-youth-revolution |title=Tunisia's youth finally has revolution on its mind |work='Comment is Free' blog (The Guardian) |author=Sam |date=13 January 2011 |access-date=20 January 2011 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130126223120/http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/13/tunisia-youth-revolution |archive-date=26 January 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://wikileaks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/13/wikileaks_and_the_tunisia_protests?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4d2ffe4d9c2649d7,1 |title=The First WikiLeaks Revolution? |author=Dickinson, Elizabeth |date=13 January 2011 |work=Foreign Policy |place=Washington DC |access-date=20 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209174447/http://wikileaks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/13/wikileaks_and_the_tunisia_protests?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4d2ffe4d9c2649d7%2C1 |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> On 1 September 2011, it became public that an encrypted version of WikiLeaks' huge archive of un-redacted US State Department cables had been available via [[BitTorrent]] for months and that the [[Key (cryptography)|decryption key]] (similar to a password) was available to those who knew where to find it.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/01/wikileaks-prepares-unredacted-us-cables |title=WikiLeaks prepares to release unredacted US cables Media guardian.co.uk |location=London |work=The Guardian |first=James |last=Ball |date=1 September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130212090525/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/01/wikileaks-prepares-unredacted-us-cables |archive-date=12 February 2013 |url-status=live}}. Guardian. Retrieved 5 September 2011.</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,783778,00.html |title=Leak at WikiLeaks: A Dispatch Disaster in Six Acts – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International |newspaper=Der Spiegel |date=September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111104230036/http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,783778,00.html |archive-date=4 November 2011 |url-status=live |last1=Stöcker |first1=Christian }}. Spiegel.de. Retrieved 5 September 2011.</ref> ''Guardian'' newspaper editor [[David Leigh (journalist)|David Leigh]] and journalist [[Luke Harding]] published the decryption key in their book, ''[[WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's War on Secrecy]],'' so the files were now publicly available to anyone including intelligence services. WikiLeaks decided to publish the entire, unredacted archive in searchable form on its website on 2 September. According to Assange, Wikileaks did this so that possible targets could be informed and better defend themseles, and also to provide a reliable source for the leaks.<ref>{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks password 'leaked by journalists' - 9News |url=https://www.9news.com.au/world/us-pondered-poisoning-assange-court-told/919d931e-f6cf-4974-aa8c-6bcfcf9a51a8 |access-date=20 September 2020 |work=www.9news.com.au |agency=AAP |date=25 February 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Marks |first1=Paul |title=Assange: Why WikiLeaks was right to release raw cables |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20869-assange-why-wikileaks-was-right-to-release-raw-cables/?ignored=irrelevant |work=New Scientist |date=6 September 2011}}</ref> The website [[Cryptome]] published the unredacted cables on 1 September, a day before Wikileaks, and they remain on the Cryptome site. According to the website owner and operator they have never been asked by US authorities to remove them.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Quinn |first1=Ben |title=US has never asked WikiLeaks rival to remove leaked cables, court told |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange |work=the Guardian |date=24 September 2020 |language=en}}</ref> ===2011–2015=== {{Main|Guantanamo Bay files leak|Global Intelligence Files leak|Syria Files|2012–13 Stratfor email leak}} In late April 2011, files related to the Guantanamo prison were released.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/gitmo/ |title=The Guantanamo Files |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=2 December 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326090615/https://wikileaks.org/gitmo/ |archive-date=26 March 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> In December 2011, WikiLeaks started to release the ''Spy Files''.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html |title=The Spy Files |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=2 December 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140326090333/https://www.wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html |archive-date=26 March 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> On 27 February 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing more than five million emails from the Texas-headquartered "global intelligence" company [[Stratfor]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/the-gifiles.html |title=The Global Intelligence Files |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=28 February 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121110190753/http://wikileaks.org/the-gifiles.html |archive-date=10 November 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 5 July 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing the [[Syria Files]] (emails from Syrian political figures 2006–2012).<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/syria-files/ |title=Syria Files |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=5 July 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120705131002/http://wikileaks.org/syria-files/ |archive-date=5 July 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> On 25 October 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Detainee Policies, files covering the rules and procedures for detainees in US military custody.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/Press-Release-The-Detainee.html |title=Press Release: The Detainee Policies |publisher=Wikileaks.org |date=25 October 2012 |access-date=19 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407091518/https://wikileaks.org/Press-Release-The-Detainee.html |archive-date=7 April 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> In April 2013 WikiLeaks published more than 1.7&nbsp;million US diplomatic and intelligence documents from the 1970s, including the [[Kissinger cables]].<ref>{{cite news |title=WikiLeaks to release US diplomatic and intelligence documents from 1970s |url=http://www.news.com.au/world-news/wikileaks-to-release-us-diplomatic-and-intelligence-documents-from-1970s/story-fndir2ev-1226614842160 |work=news.com.au|access-date=8 April 2013 |date=8 April 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130408092632/http://www.news.com.au/world-news/wikileaks-to-release-us-diplomatic-and-intelligence-documents-from-1970s/story-fndir2ev-1226614842160 |archive-date=8 April 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> [[File:Secret Laws,placard in front of Ecuador embassy.jpg|thumb|Placard in front of [[Embassy of Ecuador, London|Embassy of Ecuador]], London, 22 August 2012]] In 2013, the organisation assisted [[Edward Snowden]] (who is responsible for the [[2013 mass surveillance disclosures]]) in leaving Hong Kong. [[Sarah Harrison (journalist)|Sarah Harrison]], a WikiLeaks activist, accompanied Snowden on the flight. Scott Shane of ''The New York Times'' stated that the WikiLeaks involvement "shows that despite its shoestring staff, limited fund-raising from a boycott by major financial firms, and defections prompted by Mr. Assange's personal troubles and abrasive style, it remains a force to be reckoned with on the global stage."<ref>{{cite news|last=Shane |first=Scott |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/world/offering-snowden-aid-wikileaks-gets-back-in-the-game.html?ref=asia |title=Offering Snowden Aid, WikiLeaks Gets Back in the Game |date=23 June 2013 |website=The New York Times |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130624143236/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/world/offering-snowden-aid-wikileaks-gets-back-in-the-game.html?ref=asia |archive-date=24 June 2013}}</ref> In September 2013, WikiLeaks published "[[Spy Files 3]]", 250 documents from more than 90 surveillance companies.<ref name="SpyFiles3">{{cite web |url=http://www.dn.no/forsiden/utenriks/article2676194.ece |title=Wikileaks overvåket 20 overvåkningssjefer |author=DN.no |publisher=Dn.no |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131010012941/http://www.dn.no/forsiden/utenriks/article2676194.ece |archive-date=10 October 2013 |url-status=live|access-date=2 March 2014}}</ref> On 13 November 2013, a draft of the [[Trans-Pacific Partnership]]'s Intellectual Property Rights chapter was published by WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/13/wikileaks-trans-pacific-partnership-chapter-secret |title=WikiLeaks publishes secret draft chapter of Trans-Pacific Partnership |first=Steven |last=Musil |publisher=The Guardian (UK) |date=12 November 2013 |access-date=15 November 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209164317/http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/nov/13/wikileaks-trans-pacific-partnership-chapter-secret |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/tpp/ |title=Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) |publisher=WikiLeaks |access-date=13 November 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131113130522/http://wikileaks.org/tpp/ |archive-date=13 November 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 10 June 2015, WikiLeaks published the draft on the [[Trans-Pacific Partnership]]'s Transparency for Healthcare Annex, along with each country's negotiating position.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.smh.com.au/national/medicines-to-cost-more-and-healthcare-will-suffer-according-to-wikileaks-documents-20150610-ghkxp0.html |website=The Sydney Morning Herald |title=Medicines to cost more and healthcare will suffer, according to Wikileaks documents |last=Dorling |first=Philip |date=10 June 2015 |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> On 19 June 2015 WikiLeaks began publishing The Saudi Cables: more than half a million cables and other documents from the Saudi Foreign Ministry that contain secret communications from various Saudi Embassies around the world.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://wikileaks.org/saudi-cables/press |title=The Saudi Cables |publisher=wikileaks.org}}</ref> On 23 June 2015, WikiLeaks published documents under the name of "Espionnage Élysée", which showed that [[National Security Agency|NSA]] spied on the French government, including but not limited to then President [[François Hollande|Francois Hollande]] and his predecessors [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] and [[Jacques Chirac]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.liberation.fr/monde/2015/06/23/chirac-sarkozy-et-hollande-trois-presidents-sur-ecoute_1335767 |title=WikiLeaks – Chirac, Sarkozy et Hollande : trois présidents sur écoute |last1=Guiton |first1=Amaelle |last2=Lechenet |first2=Alexandre |last3=Manach |first3=Jean-Marc |last4=Assange |first4=Avec Julian |language=French |date=23 June 2015 |website=Liberation Monde |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150624015443/http://www.liberation.fr/monde/2015/06/23/chirac-sarkozy-et-hollande-trois-presidents-sur-ecoute_1335767 |archive-date=24 June 2015}}</ref> On 29 June 2015, WikiLeaks published more NSA top secrets intercepts regarding France, detailing an economic espionage against French companies and associations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/wikileaks-enthuellung-nsa-soll-auch-franzoesische-wirtschaft-bespitzelt-haben-a-1041268.html |title=NSA soll auch französische Wirtschaft bespizelt haben |language=German |date=29 June 2015 |website=Spiegel Ausland |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> In July 2015, WikiLeaks published documents which showed that the NSA had tapped the telephones of many German federal ministries, including that of the Chancellor [[Angela Merkel]], for years since the 1990s.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/wikileaks-und-taeglich-gruesst-die-nsa/12034888.html |title=Wikileaks: Und täglich grüßt die NSA |author=kwi |date=9 July 2015 |publisher=handelsblatt.com}}</ref> On 4 July 2015, WikiLeaks published documents which showed that 29 Brazilian government numbers were selected for secret espionage by the NSA. Among the targets were then-President [[Dilma Rousseff]], many assistants and advisors, her presidential jet and other key figures in the Brazilian government.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/07/04/nsa-top-brazilian-political-and-financial-targets-wikileaks/ |website=The Intercept |title=NSA'S Top Brazilian Political and Financial Targets Revealed by Wikileaks Disclosure |last1=Greenwald |first1=Glenn |last2=Miranda |first2=David |date=4 July 2015 |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> [[File:Londres, Reunión con Julian Assange (9504697280).jpg|thumb|WikiLeaks supporters protest in front of the [[Embassy of Ecuador, London|Ecuadorian embassy]] in London]] On 29 July 2015, WikiLeaks published a top secret letter from the [[Trans-Pacific Partnership|Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement]] (TPP) Ministerial Meeting in December 2013 which illustrated the position of negotiating countries on "[[state-owned enterprise]]s" (SOEs).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wirtschaft/usa-vs-staatsbetriebe-kommerz-statt-sozialstaat-1.2586908 |website=Sueddeutsche Zeitung |title=Kommerz statt Sozialstaat |last1=Hageluken |first1=Alexander |last2=Goetz |first2=John |language=German |date=29 July 2015 |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> On 31 July 2015, WikiLeaks published secret intercepts and the related target list showing that the NSA spied on the Japanese government, including the Cabinet and Japanese companies such as [[Mitsubishi]] and [[Mitsui]]. The documents revealed that United States espionage against Japan concerned broad sections of communications about the US-Japan diplomatic relationship and Japan's position on climate change issues, other than an extensive monitoring of the Japanese economy.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2015/07/31/exclusive-us-bugs-japan-trade-and-climate/14383094602196 |website=The Saturday Paper |title=Exclusive: US bugs Japan on trade and climate |last=Dorling |first=Philip |date=31 July 2015 |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150804075641/https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2015/07/31/exclusive-us-bugs-japan-trade-and-climate/14383094602196 |archive-date=4 August 2015}}</ref> On 21 October 2015 WikiLeaks published some of [[John O. Brennan]]'s emails, including a draft security clearance application which contained personal information.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34597060 |title=Wikileaks claims release of CIA boss John Brennan's emails |work=BBC News |date=21 October 2015 | access-date=21 October 2015}}</ref> ===2016=== {{Main|Hillary Clinton email controversy|2016 Democratic National Committee email leak|Podesta emails}} During the 2016 [[United States Democratic Party|US Democratic Party]] presidential primaries, WikiLeaks hosted [[Hillary Clinton email controversy|emails]] sent or received by presidential candidate [[Hillary Clinton]] from her personal mail server while she was [[Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State|Secretary of State]]. The emails had been released by the [[United States Department of State|US State Department]] under a [[Freedom of information in the United States|Freedom of information]] request in February 2016.<ref name=Independent4Jul2016>{{cite news|last1= Carissimo| first1=Justin| title=WikiLeaks publishes more than 1,000 Hillary Clinton war emails|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/wikileaks-publishes-more-than-1000-hillary-clinton-war-emails-a7120011.html|access-date=5 July 2016|work=The Independent | location= UK |date=4 July 2016}}</ref> WikiLeaks also created a search engine to allow the public to search through Clinton's emails.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wikileaks-publishes-searchable-archive-of-clinton-emails |title=WikiLeaks publishes searchable archive of Clinton emails |newspaper=[[Washington Examiner]] |access-date=9 May 2016 }}</ref> The emails were selected in terms of their relevance to the [[Iraq War]] and were apparently timed to precede the release of the UK government's [[Iraq Inquiry]] report.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Devaney |first1=Tim |title=Wikileaks publishes Clinton war emails |url=http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/286444-wikileaks-publishes-clinton-war-emails|access-date=5 July 2016 |work=The Hill |date=4 July 2016}}</ref> The emails were a major point of discussion during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, requiring an FBI investigation which decided that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but recommended that no charges be filed against her.<ref name="time050716">{{cite news |last1=Calabresi |first1=Massimo |title=Why the FBI Let Hillary Clinton Off the Hook |url=https://time.com/4394178/hillary-clinton-email-fbi-investigation/ |access-date=13 September 2020 |magazine=Time |date=5 July 2016}}</ref> On 19 July 2016, in response to the [[2016–present purges in Turkey|Turkish government's purges]] that followed the coup attempt,<ref name="ThReut_WikiLeaks">{{cite news |first1=Can |last1=Sezer |first2=David |last2=Dolan |first3=Raissa |last3=Kasolowsky |title=Turkey blocks access to WikiLeaks after ruling party email dump |date=20 July 2016 |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-wikileaks-idUSKCN1000H1 |access-date=21 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160721002817/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-wikileaks-idUSKCN1000H1 |archive-date=21 July 2016 |url-status=live|newspaper=Reuters }}</ref> WikiLeaks released 294,548 emails from Turkey's ruling [[Justice and Development Party (Turkey)|Justice and Development party]] (AKP).<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/wikileaks-turkey-erdogan-emails-government-coup-a7145891.html |title=Here's what's in the Wikileaks emails that Erdogan tried to ban |last=Yeung |first=Peter |date=20 July 2016 |website=The Independent|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref> According to WikiLeaks, the material, which they claim to be the first batch from the "AKP Emails", was obtained a week before the [[2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt|attempted coup in the country]] and "is not connected, in any way, to the elements behind the attempted coup, or to a rival political party or state".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.wikileaks.org/akp-emails/| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160722220438/https://wikileaks.org/akp-emails/| archive-date=22 July 2016| url-status=live |title=WikiLeaks – Search the AKP email database |publisher=wikileaks.org|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref> After WikiLeaks announced that they would release the emails, the organisation was for over 24 hours under a "sustained attack".<ref>{{Cite web|last=Musil|first=Steven|title=WikiLeaks under 'sustained attack' after announcing release of Turkey docs|url=https://www.cnet.com/news/wikileaks-under-sustained-attack-after-announcing-release-of-turkey-docs/|access-date=13 May 2021|website=CNET|language=en}}</ref><!-- WP:RS needed; removed link to WP:SPS (Twitter, FB, WP)--> Following the leak, the Turkish government ordered the site to be blocked nationwide.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/20/turkey-blocks-access-to-wikileaks-after-erdogan-party-emails-go-online |title=Turkey blocks access to WikiLeaks after Erdoğan party emails go online |last=Shaheen |first=Kareem |date=20 July 2016 |website=The Guardian|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/wikileaks-emails-release-government-turkey-erdogan-block-a7145671.html |title=Turkey blocks access to WikiLeaks after release of 300,000 secret government emails |date=20 July 2016 |website=The Independent|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/07/20/world/europe/ap-eu-turkey-wikileaks.html |title=Access to Wikileaks Blocked in Turkey as It Releases Emails |agency=The Associated Press |date=20 July 2016 |work=The New York Times |issn=0362-4331|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-wikileaks-idUSKCN1000H1 |title=Turkey blocks access to WikiLeaks after ruling party email dump |date=20 July 2016 |work=Reuters|access-date=25 July 2016}}</ref> Fisher asked WikiLeaks not to publish the AKP emails as she was still access files on the AKP network. After WikiLeaks published the emails, the AKP shut down its internal network and Fisher lost access.<ref name=":110">{{Cite web|title=Vigilante Hacker 'Phineas Fisher' Denies Working for the Russian Government|url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/qv7y8m/vigilante-hacker-phineas-fisher-denies-working-for-the-russian-government|access-date=11 April 2021|website=www.vice.com|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Phineas Fisher|url=http://archive.org/details/phineasfisherstatement|title=Phineas Fisher AKP-WikiLeaks Statement}}</ref> Most experts and commentators agree that [[Phineas Fisher]] was behind the leak.<ref name=":210">{{Cite web |last=Catalin |first=Cimpanu |date=January 31, 2017 |title=Spanish Police Claim to Have Arrested Phineas Fisher – Hacking Team Hacker |url=https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/spanish-police-claim-to-have-arrested-phineas-fisher-hacking-team-hacker/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112001236/https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/spanish-police-claim-to-have-arrested-phineas-fisher-hacking-team-hacker/ |archive-date=November 12, 2020 |access-date=February 25, 2021 |website=BleepingComputer |language=en-us}}</ref><ref name=":310">{{Cite web |last=Uchill |first=Joe |date=2017-01-31 |title=Report that Spanish police arrest hacktivist Phineas Fisher disputed |url=https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/317092-spanish-police-capture-hacktivist-phineas-fisher/ |access-date=2022-04-26 |website=The Hill |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":43">{{Cite web |title=Notorious Hacker 'Phineas Fisher' Says He Hacked The Turkish Government |url=https://www.vice.com/en/article/yp3n55/phineas-fisher-turkish-government-hack |access-date=2022-04-23 |website=www.vice.com |language=en}}</ref> Fisher said WikiLeaks had told her that the emails were "all spam and crap."<ref name=":110" /> WikiLeaks had also tweeted a link to a database which contained sensitive information, such as the [[Turkish Identification Number]], of approximately 50&nbsp;million Turkish citizens, including nearly every female voter in Turkey.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Tufekci |first1=Zeynep |title=WikiLeaks put Women in Turkey in Danger, for No Reason |url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeynep-tufekci/wikileaks-erdogan-emails_b_11158792.html|access-date=3 December 2016 |work=The World Post |date=25 July 2016}}</ref> The information first appeared online in April of the same year and was not in the files uploaded by WikiLeaks,<ref>{{Cite news|last=Murdock|first=Jason|date=26 July 2016|title=WikiLeaks criticised for tweeting link to leaked database of millions of Turkish women|work=International Business Times UK|url=http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-criticised-tweeting-link-leaked-database-millions-turkish-women-1572667|access-date=12 March 2017}}</ref> but in files described by WikiLeaks as "the full data for the Turkey AKP emails and more" which was [[Internet Archive|archived]] by [[Emma Best (journalist)|Emma Best]], who then removed it when the personal data was discovered.<ref>{{cite web|last=Best|first=Emma|date=26 July 2016|title=The Who and How of the AKP Hack, Dump and WikiLeaks Release|url=https://glomardisclosure.com/2016/07/26/the-who-and-how-of-the-akp-hack-dump-and-wikileaks-release/|url-status=dead|archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20160901231854/https%3A//glomardisclosure.com/2016/07/26/the%2Dwho%2Dand%2Dhow%2Dof%2Dthe%2Dakp%2Dhack%2Ddump%2Dand%2Dwikileaks%2Drelease/|archive-date=1 September 2016|access-date=30 July 2016|website=Glomar Disclosure}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|date=28 July 2016|title=How 'Kind of Everything Went Wrong' With the Turkey Data Dump|url=https://motherboard.vice.com/read/what-went-wrong-with-the-turkey-data-dump|access-date=30 July 2016}}</ref> On 22 July 2016, WikiLeaks released approximately 20,000 emails and 8,000 files sent from or received by [[Democratic National Committee]] (DNC) personnel. Some of the emails contained personal information of donors, including home addresses and [[Social Security number]]s.<ref>{{cite news |last=McCarthy |first=Kieran |title=WikiLeaks fights The Man by, er, publishing ordinary people's personal information |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/22/wikileaks_keep_fighting_the_man_by_er_publishing_the_personal_details_of_ordinary_citizens/ |work=The Register|access-date=22 July 2016 |date=22 July 2016}}</ref> Other emails appeared to criticise [[Bernie Sanders]] or showed favouritism towards Clinton during the primaries.<ref>{{cite news |author=Theodore Schleifer and Eugene Scott |title=DNC treatment of Sanders at issue in emails leaked to Wikileaks |url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails/|access-date=24 July 2016 |publisher=CNN |date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Peters |first1=Maquita |title=Leaked Democratic Party Emails Show Members Tried To Undercut Sanders |url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/23/487179496/leaked-democratic-party-emails-show-members-tried-to-undercut-sanders|access-date=24 July 2016 |date=23 July 2016}}</ref> Emails showed that the DNC shared debate questions with Clinton in advance.<ref name="yahoo041021" /> In July 2016, [[Debbie Wasserman Schultz]] resigned as chairwoman of the [[Democratic National Committee]] (DNC) because the emails released by WikiLeaks showed that the DNC was "effectively an arm of Mrs. Clinton's campaign" and had conspired to sabotage Bernie Sanders's campaign.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Martin |first1=Jonathan |last2=Rappeport |first2=Alan |title=Debbie Wasserman Schultz to Resign D.N.C. Post |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-wikileaks-emails.html |access-date=19 April 2019 |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=24 July 2016}}</ref> On 7 October 2016, WikiLeaks started releasing series of emails and documents sent from or received by Hillary Clinton campaign manager, [[John Podesta]], including Hillary Clinton's paid speeches to banks, including [[Goldman Sachs]]. The BBC reported that the release "is unlikely to allay fears among liberal Democrats that she is too cosy with Wall Street".<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/300548-wikileaks-pumps-out-clinton-emails |title=WikiLeaks pumps out Clinton emails |last1=Bo Williams |first1=Katie |date=12 October 2016 |last2=Hattem |first2=Julian |work=[[The Hill (newspaper)|The Hill]]|access-date=16 October 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/10/wikileaks-podesta-email-release-reveals-massive-clinton-hits-file-on-sanders.html |title=Wikileaks' Podesta Email Release Reveals Massive Clinton 'Hits' File on Sanders |last=Derespina |first=Cody |date=10 October 2016 |publisher=[[Fox News Channel]]|access-date=16 October 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37680411 |title=WikiLeaks: Julian Assange's Internet access 'cut' |date=18 October 2016|access-date=25 October 2016 |publisher=BBC}}</ref> According to a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, "By dribbling these out every day WikiLeaks is proving they are nothing but a propaganda arm of the Kremlin with a political agenda doing [[Vladimir Putin]]'s dirty work to help elect Donald Trump."<ref name="Politico 80 pages">{{cite web |last=Cheney |first=Kyle |url=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/hillary-clinton-wall-street-speeches-podesta-emails-229689 |title=Hacked 80-page roundup of paid speeches shows Clinton 'praising Wall Street' |website=Politico |date=12 October 2016 |access-date=16 October 2016}}</ref> ''The New York Times'' reported that when asked, President Vladimir Putin replied that Russia was being falsely accused. "The hysteria is merely caused by the fact that somebody needs to divert the attention of the American people from the essence of what was exposed by the hackers."<ref name="Healy">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/us/politics/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-emails.html |title=Donald Trump Finds Improbable Ally in WikiLeaks |last1=Healy |first1=Patrick |date=12 October 2016 |last2=David E. |first2=Sanger |work=[[The New York Times]] |issn=0362-4331 |last3=Haberman |first3=Maggie|access-date=19 October 2016}}</ref><ref name="foxnews.com">{{Cite news |url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/15/cia-reportedly-preparing-major-cyber-assault-against-russia-in-wake-hack-attacks.html |title=Cia Reportedly Preparing Major Cyber Assault Against Russia in Wake of Hack Attacks |date=15 October 2016 |publisher=[[Fox News Channel]]|access-date=19 October 2016}}</ref> On 17 October 2016, WikiLeaks announced that a "state party" had severed the Internet connection of Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy. WikiLeaks blamed [[United States Secretary of State]] [[John Kerry]] of pressuring the Ecuadorian government in severing Assange's Internet, an accusation which the [[United States State Department]] denied.<ref name="Daily Dot Internet">{{cite web |last=Couts |first=Andrew |url=http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-podesta-emails-part-11-julian-assange-internet-cut/ |title=WikiLeaks publishes more Podesta emails after Ecuador cuts Assange's Internet |website=The Daily Dot |access-date=23 October 2016|date=18 October 2016 }}</ref> The Ecuadorian government stated that it had "temporarily" severed Assange's Internet connection because of WikiLeaks' release of documents "impacting on the U.S. election campaign," although it also stated that this was not meant to prevent WikiLeaks from operating.<ref>{{cite web |last=Bennett |first=Cory |url=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/ecuador-admits-restricting-internet-access-for-wikileaks-over-election-meddling-229963 |title=Ecuador admits restricting Internet access for WikiLeaks over election meddling |website=Politico |access-date=23 October 2016}}</ref> On 25 November 2016, WikiLeaks released emails and internal documents that provided details on the US military operations in [[Yemen]] from 2009 to March 2015.<ref>{{cite web |last=Murdock |first=Jason |url=https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-releases-500-files-allegedly-showing-us-arming-funding-yemeni-forces-1593474 |title=The Yemen Files: WikiLeaks 500 files allegedly show US 'arming and funding' Yemeni forces |work=International Business Times UK |date=25 November 2016 }}</ref><ref name="yemenconflict">{{cite news |last=Mujezinovic |first=Damir |title=WikiLeaks Drops New Information Relating To Arms Industry Corruption & War in Yemen |url=https://www.inquisitr.com/5092904/wikileaks-arms-industry-corruption-war-yemen/ |work=The Inquisitr |date=28 September 2018}}</ref> In a statement accompanying the release of the "Yemen Files", Assange said about the [[Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen#United States|US involvement in the Yemen war]]: "The war in Yemen has produced 3.15&nbsp;million internally displaced persons. Although the United States government has provided most of the bombs and is deeply involved in the conduct of the war itself reportage on the war in English is conspicuously rare".<ref name="yemenconflict"/> In December 2016, WikiLeaks published over 57,000 emails from Erdogan's son-in-law, [[Berat Albayrak]], who was Turkey's Minister of Energy and Natural Resources. The emails show the inner workings of the Turkish government.<ref name="fp071216" /> According to WikiLeaks, the emails had been first released by [[RedHack|Redhack]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - Berat's Box |url=https://wikileaks.org/berats-box/article |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> ===2017=== On 16 February 2017, WikiLeaks released a purported report on CIA espionage orders (marked as [[Law Enforcement Sensitive|NOFORN]]) for the [[2012 French presidential election]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.liberation.fr/planete/2017/02/16/comment-la-cia-a-espionne-la-presidentielle-francaise-de-2012_1548921 |title=Comment la CIA a espionné la présidentielle française de 2012 |language=fr |website=Libération |author=Jean-Marc Manach |date=16 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ibtimes.com/wikileaks-latest-documents-cia-spied-french-presidents-political-parties-2012-2493301 |title=WikiLeaks releases secret 'CIA spy orders' exposing surveillance of French election |author=Jason Murdock |website=[[International Business Times]] |date=16 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2017/02/16/la-cia-s-est-interessee-de-pres-a-la-campagne-presidentielle-francaise-de-2012_5080891_4408996.html |title=La CIA s'est intéressée de près à la campagne présidentielle française de 2012 |newspaper=Le Monde.fr |date=16 February 2016 |language=fr}}</ref> The order called for details of party funding, internal rivalries and future attitudes toward the United States. The Associated Press noted that "the orders seemed to represent standard intelligence-gathering."<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://apnews.com/8e5094a33ad84837a7faa31c426ca909/WikiLeaks:-CIA-ordered-spying-on-French-2012-election |title=WikiLeaks: CIA ordered spying on French 2012 election |work=AP News|access-date=17 February 2017 |language=en-US}}</ref> On 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks started publishing content code-named "[[Vault 7]]", describing it as containing CIA internal documentation of their "massive arsenal" of hacking tools including malware, viruses, weaponised "[[Zero-day (computing)|zero day]]" exploits and remote control systems.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikileaks-cia-documents-released-cyber-intelligence/ |title=WikiLeaks claims to release thousands of CIA documents |access-date=7 March 2017 |publisher=[[CBS News]] |language=en}}</ref><ref name="bbc-vault7">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39193008 |title=Wikileaks 'reveals CIA hacking tools' |last=Kelion |first=Leo |publisher=BBC|work=BBC News |date=7 March 2017 }}</ref><ref name="nytimes-vault7">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/europe/wikileaks-cia-hacking.html |title=WikiLeaks Releases Trove of Alleged C.I.A. Hacking Documents |website=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref> Leaked documents, dated from 2013 to 2016, detail the capabilities of the [[United States]] [[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA) to perform electronic surveillance and [[cyber warfare]], such as the ability to compromise [[Car hacking|cars]], [[smart TV]]s,<ref name="nytimes-vault7"/> [[web browser]]s (including [[Google Chrome]], [[Microsoft Edge]], [[Mozilla Firefox]], and [[Opera Software|Opera Software ASA]]),<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/2017/03/cia-can-hack-phone-pc-tv-says-wikileaks/ |title=How the CIA Can Hack Your Phone, PC, and TV (Says WikiLeaks) |last=Greenberg |first=Andy |date=7 March 2017 |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/vault-7-cia-hacking-tools-were-used-spy-ios-android-samsung-smart-tvs-1610263 |title=Vault 7: CIA hacking tools were used to spy on iOS, Android and Samsung smart TVs |last=Murdock |first=Jason |date=7 March 2017 |work=[[International Business Times UK]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikileaks-cia-documents-released-cyber-intelligence/ |title=WikiLeaks posts trove of CIA documents detailing mass hacking |date=7 March 2017 |work=[[CBS News]] |language=en}}</ref> and the operating systems of most [[smartphone]]s (including [[Apple Inc.|Apple]]'s [[iOS]] and [[Google]]'s [[Android (operating system)|Android]]), as well as other [[operating system]]s such as [[Microsoft Windows]], [[macOS]], and [[Linux]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/3006021/vault-7-wikileaks-reveals-details-of-cias-hacks-of-android-iphone-windows-linux-macos-and-even-samsung-tvs |title=Vault 7: Wikileaks reveals details of CIA's hacks of Android, iPhone Windows, Linux, MacOS, and even Samsung TVs |website=[[Computing (magazine)|Computing]] |date=7 March 2017}}</ref> In September 2021, [[Yahoo! News]] reported that in 2017 in the wake of the Vault&nbsp;7 leaks, the CIA planned to spy on associates of WikiLeaks, sow discord among its members, and steal their electronic devices. "[T]op intelligence officials lobbied the White House" to designate Wikileaks as an "information broker" to allow for more investigative tools against it, "potentially paving the way" for its prosecution. [[Laura Poitras]] described attempts to classify herself and Assange as "information brokers" rather than journalists as "bone-chilling and a threat to journalists worldwide".<ref name="Kidnapping">{{cite web|url=https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london-shoot-out-inside-the-ci-as-secret-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html |title=Kidnapping, assassination and a London shoot-out: Inside the CIA's secret war plans against WikiLeaks |publisher=[[Yahoo! News]] |date=26 September 2021 |accessdate=26 September 2021 |last1=Dorfman |first1=Zach |last2=Naylor |first2=Sean D. |last3=Isikoff |first3=Michael}}</ref> Former CIA Director [[Mike Pompeo]] stated that the US officials who had spoken to Yahoo should be prosecuted for exposing CIA activities.<ref>{{cite web |title=The US Considered Kidnapping and Even Assassinating Julian Assange |url=https://jacobinmag.com/2021/09/united-states-kidnap-assassinate-julian-assange-wikileaks-cia-yahoo-news? |publisher=Jacobin |access-date=1 October 2021}}</ref> On 5 May 2017, WikiLeaks posted links to [[2017 Macron e-mail leaks|e-mails purported to be from Emmanuel Macron's campaign]] in the [[2017 French presidential election|French 2017 presidential election]].<ref name=":35"/> The documents were first relayed on the [[4chan]] forum and by pro-Trump Twitter accounts, and then by WikiLeaks, who indicated they did not author the leaks.<ref name=":35">{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/06/emmanuel-macron-targeted-by-hackers-on-eve-of-french-election |title=Emmanuel Macron's campaign hacked on eve of French election |last1=Willsher |first1=Kim |date=6 May 2017 |work=The Guardian|access-date=6 May 2017 |last2=Henley |first2=Jon |issn=0261-3077}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/06/world/europe/emmanuel-macron-hack-french-election-marine-le-pen.html |title=U.S. Far-Right Activists Promote Hacking Attack Against Macron |last=Scott |first=Mark |date=6 May 2017 |work=The New York Times|access-date=6 May 2017 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> Some experts have said that the WikiLeaks Twitter account played a key role in publicising the leaks through the hashtag #MacronLeaks just some three-and-a-half hours after the first tweet with the hashtag appeared.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39827244 |title=French election: Emmanuel Macron condemns 'massive' hack attack |date=6 May 2017 |work=BBC News|access-date=6 May 2017 |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-cyber-idUKKBN1820QO |title=U.S. far-right activists, WikiLeaks and bots help amplify Macron leaks: researchers |last=Volz |first=Dustin |agency=Reuters UK|access-date=7 May 2017 |language=en-GB}}</ref> The campaign stated that false documents were mixed in with real ones, and that "the ambition of the authors of this leak is obviously to harm the movement En Marche! in the final hours before the second round of the French presidential election."<ref name=":35" /><ref name=":33">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/macrons-campaign-says-it-has-been-hit-by-massive-hack-of-emails-and-documents/2017/05/05/fc638f18-3020-11e7-a335-fa0ae1940305_story.html |title=France starts probing 'massive' hack of emails and documents reported by Macron campaign |newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=6 May 2017}}</ref> France's Electoral Commission described the action as a "massive and coordinated piracy action."<ref name=":35" /><ref name=":33" /> France's Electoral Commission urged journalists not to report on the contents of the leaks, but to heed "the sense of responsibility they must demonstrate, as at stake are the free expression of voters and the sincerity of the election."<ref name=":33" /> [[Cybersecurity]] experts initially believed that groups linked to Russia were involved in this attack. The [[Kremlin]] denied any involvement.<ref name=":36">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/world/europe/france-macron-hacking.html |title=Macron Campaign Says It Was Target of 'Massive' Hacking Attack |last1=Chan |first1=Aurelien Breeden, Sewell |date=5 May 2017 |work=The New York Times|access-date=6 May 2017 |last2=Perlroth |first2=Nicole |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref name=":37">{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-macron-leaks-idUSKBN1812AZ |title=French candidate Macron claims massive hack as emails leaked |date=6 May 2017 |work=Reuters|access-date=6 May 2017}}</ref><ref name=":38">{{Cite news |url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/06/527154146/french-candidate-emmanuel-macron-says-campaign-has-been-hacked-hours-before-elec |title=French Candidate Emmanuel Macron Says Campaign Has Been Hacked, Hours Before Election |publisher=NPR|access-date=6 May 2017 |language=en}}</ref> The head of the French cyber-security agency, [[Agence nationale de la sécurité des systèmes d'information|ANSSI]], later said that they did not have evidence connecting the hack with Russia, saying that the attack was so simple, that "we can imagine that it was a person who did this alone. They could be in any country."<ref name="Uchill">{{cite news |last=Uchill |first=Joe |url=http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/336034-no-evidence-of-russia-behind-marcon-leaks-report |title=No evidence of Russia behind Macron leaks: report |work=The Hill |date=1 June 2017 |language=en}}</ref> In September 2017, WikiLeaks released "Spy Files Russia," revealing "how a [[Saint Petersburg|St. Petersburg]]-based technology company called [[Peter-Service]] helped state entities gather detailed data on [[Mobile phone industry in Russia|Russian cellphone]] users, part of a national system of online surveillance called [[SORM|System for Operative Investigative Activities]] (SORM)."<ref>{{cite news |last=Taylor |first=Adam |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/09/19/wikileaks-releases-files-that-appear-to-offer-details-of-russian-surveillance-system/ |title=WikiLeaks releases files that appear to offer details of Russian surveillance system |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |date=19 September 2017 |access-date=21 October 2017}}</ref> Russian investigative journalist [[Andrei Soldatov]] said that "there is some data here that's worth publishing. Anything that gets people talking about [[Russia]]'s capabilities and actions in this area should be seen as a positive development."<ref>{{cite news |title=Is it the Kremlin's turn to get WikiLeaked? |url=https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2017/0921/Is-it-the-Kremlin-s-turn-to-get-WikiLeaked |work=[[The Christian Science Monitor]] |date=21 September 2017}}</ref> ===2019=== In November 2019, WikiLeaks released an email from an unnamed investigator from the [[Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons]] (OPCW) team investigating the 2018 [[Douma chemical attack|chemical attack in Douma (Syria)]]. The investigator accused the OPCW of covering up discrepancies.<ref name = cbs>{{cite web |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/opcw-chemical-weapons-watchdog-douma-chlorine-gas-wikileaks-russia-syria-claim-bias-today-2019-11-25/ |title=Chemical weapons watchdog OPCW defends Syria report as whistleblower claims bias |date=25 November 2019 |website=CBS News |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> [[Robert Fisk]] said that documents released by WikiLeaks indicated that the OPCW "suppressed or failed to publish, or simply preferred to ignore, the conclusions of up to 20 other members of its staff who became so upset at what they regarded as the misleading conclusions of the final report that they officially sought to have it changed in order to represent the truth".<ref name="independent020120">{{cite news |last1=Fisk |first1=Robert |title=The Syrian conflict is awash with propaganda – chemical warfare bodies should not be caught up in it |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-war-chemical-weapons-watchdog-opcw-assad-damascus-russia-a9262336.html |access-date=3 January 2020 |work=The Independent |date=2 January 2020}}</ref> The head of OPCW, Fernando Arias, described the leak as containing "subjective views" and stood by the original conclusions.<ref name = cbs/> On 12 November 2019, WikiLeaks began publishing what it called the [[Fishrot Files]] (''Icelandic: Samherjaskjölin''), a collection of thousands of documents and email communication by employees of one of Iceland's largest fish industry companies, [[Samherji]], that indicated that the company had paid hundreds of millions [[Icelandic króna]] to high ranking politicians and officials in [[Namibia]] with the objective of acquiring the country's coveted fishing quota.<ref>{{cite news |author1=Helgi Seljan |author2=Aðalsteinn Kjartansson |author3=Stefán Aðalsteinn Drengsson |title=What Samherji wanted hidden |url=https://www.ruv.is/kveikur/fishrot/ |access-date=13 November 2019 |work=[[RÚV]] |language=is}}</ref> ===2021=== In 2021, WikiLeaks released a database of 17,000 documents, which it called ''The Intolerance Network'', from the ultra-conservative Spanish Catholic organisation Hazte Oir and its international arm, [[CitizenGo]]. The documents reveal the internal workings of the organisations, their network of donors and their relationship with the [[Holy See|Vatican]]. The release also includes documents from the secret [[Roman Catholic|Catholic]] organisation [[El Yunque (organization)|El Yunque]]. The editor of WikiLeaks, [[Kristinn Hrafnsson]], said "As ultra right-wing political groups have gained strength in recent years, with increasing attacks on women's and LGBT rights, it is valuable to have access to documents from those who have lobbied for those changes on a global basis".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Stefania |first1=Maurizi |title=Exclusive: Wikileaks reveals the internal documents of the ultra-conservative catholic organizations Hazte Oir and CitizenGo |url=https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2021/08/06/exclusive-wikileaks-reveals-the-internal-documents-of-the-ultra-conservative-catholic-organizations-hazte-oir-and-citizengo/6284860/ |access-date=6 August 2021 |work=Il Fatto Quotidiano |date=6 August 2021 |language=it-IT}}</ref> According to WikiLeaks, the documents were first released in 2017.<ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - The Intolerance Network |url=https://wikileaks.org/intolerancenetwork/press-release |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> ===Claims of upcoming leaks=== In January 2011, [[Rudolf Elmer]], a former Swiss banker, passed data containing account details of 2,000 prominent people to Assange, who stated that the information would be vetted before being made publicly available at a later date.<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikileaks given data on Swiss bank accounts |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12205690 |work=BBC News |date=17 January 2011 |access-date=17 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110718233352/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12205690 |archive-date=18 July 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In May 2010, WikiLeaks said it had video footage of a massacre of civilians in Afghanistan by the US military which they were preparing to release.<ref name="campbell">{{cite news |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7094234.ece |title=Whistleblowers on US 'massacre' fear CIA stalkers |author=Campbell, Matthew |date=11 April 2010 |work=The Sunday Times|access-date=12 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110814061024/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7094234.ece |archive-date=14 August 2011 |url-status=live |place=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/19/AR2010051905333.html |title=WikiLeaks works to expose government secrets, but Web site's sources are a mystery |last=Warrick |first=Joby |date=19 May 2010 |newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=21 May 2010}}</ref> In an interview with [[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Chris Anderson]] on 19 July 2010, Assange showed a document WikiLeaks had on an Albanian oil-well blowout, and said they also had material from inside [[BP|British Petroleum]],<ref name="tedinterview">{{Cite AV media |url=http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html |title=Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks |date=July 2010 |people=[[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Anderson, Chris]] |publisher=[[TED (conference)|TED]] |time=11:28|access-date=2 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827013033/http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live |ref=Assange2010ted |quote=November last year ... well blowouts in Albania ... Have you had information from inside BP? Yeah, we have a lot ... |medium=Videotape}}</ref> and that they were "getting enormous quantity of [[whistleblower]] disclosures of a very high calibre" but added that they had not been able to verify and release the material because they did not have enough volunteer journalists.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/16/wikileaks.disclosures/ |title=WikiLeaks founder: Site getting tons of 'high caliber' disclosures |last=Galant |first=Richard |date=16 July 2010 |publisher=CNN|access-date=1 August 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022000633/http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/16/wikileaks.disclosures/ |archive-date=22 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> In December 2010, Assange's lawyer, [[Mark Stephens (solicitor)|Mark Stephens]], told ''[[The Andrew Marr Show]]'' on BBC Television that WikiLeaks had information it considered to be a "thermo-nuclear device" which it would release if the organisation needs to defend itself against the authorities.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11921080 |title=Wikileaks' Julian Assange to fight Swedish allegations |work=BBC News |date=5 December 2010 |access-date=5 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827135254/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11921080 |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In a 2009 interview with ''[[Computerworld]]'' magazine, Assange claimed to be in possession of "5GB from [[Bank of America]]". In 2010, he told ''[[Forbes]]'' magazine that WikiLeaks was planning another "megaleak" early in 2011, from the private sector, involving "a big U.S. bank" and revealing an "ecosystem of corruption". Bank of America's stock price decreased by 3%, apparently as a result of this announcement.<ref name="bankofamerica1">{{cite news |url=http://www.chinapost.com.tw/international/americas/2010/12/02/282108/p1/Bank-of.htm |title=Bank of America rumored to be in WikiLeaks' crosshairs |last=Rothacker |first=Rick |date=1 December 2010 |work=China Post|access-date=1 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209222243/http://www.chinapost.com.tw/international/americas/2010/12/02/282108/p1/Bank-of.htm |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live |agency=McClatchy Newspapers |place=Taipei}}</ref><ref name="bankofamerica2">{{cite news |url=https://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/01/131727190/bank-of-america-stock-steadies-after-wikileaks-related-drop |title=Bank of America Stock Steadies After WikiLeaks-Related Drop |last=Memmott |first=Mark |date=1 December 2010 |work=The Two-way (NPR news blog)|access-date=2 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209194105/http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/12/01/131727190/bank-of-america-stock-steadies-after-wikileaks-related-drop |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live |publisher=NPR |place=Washington DC}}</ref> Assange commented on the possible effect of the release that "it could take down a bank or two".<ref name="bankofamerica3">{{cite news |url=https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/wikileaks-next-target-bank-of-america/ |title=WikiLeaks' Next Target: Bank of America? |last=De La Merced |first=Michael J. |date=30 November 2010 |work=DealBook (New York Times blog)|access-date=2 December 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.cnbc.com/id/40471184/ |title=Bank of America's Risky WikiLeaks Strategy |last=Carney |first=John |date=2 December 2010 |publisher=CNBC|access-date=5 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140212153613/http://www.cnbc.com/id/40471184 |archive-date=12 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> In August 2011, [[Reuters]] reported that [[Daniel Domscheit-Berg]] had destroyed around 3,000 submissions related to Bank of America (most of them "random junk"), out of concern over WikiLeaks' inadequate protection of sources.<ref name=":5">{{cite news|date=22 August 2011|title=Some of WikiLeaks' Bank of America data destroyed|work=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bankofamerica-wikileaks-idUSTRE77L55P20110822|url-status=live|access-date=25 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111011150806/https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/22/us-bankofamerica-wikileaks-idUSTRE77L55P20110822|archive-date=11 October 2011}}</ref> The WikiLeaks Twitter account (believed to be controlled by Assange) stated "five gigabytes from the Bank of America" had been deleted, but Domscheit-Berg stated that he had only destroyed material received after Assange's ''Computerworld'' interview, and raised the possibility that Assange had lost access to the material because of technical deficiencies in WikiLeaks' submission system.<ref name=":5" /> In October 2010, Assange told a major Moscow newspaper that "The Kremlin had better brace itself for a coming wave of WikiLeaks disclosures about Russia".<ref>{{cite news |first=Fred |last=Weir |url=http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2010/1026/WikiLeaks-ready-to-drop-a-bombshell-on-Russia.-But-will-Russians-get-to-read-about-it |title=WikiLeaks ready to drop a bombshell on Russia. But will Russians get to read about it? |work=The Christian Science Monitor |date=26 October 2010 |access-date=29 November 2010 |place=Boston |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827142121/http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2010/1026/WikiLeaks-ready-to-drop-a-bombshell-on-Russia.-But-will-Russians-get-to-read-about-it |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> Assange later clarified: "[W]e have material on many businesses and governments, including in Russia. It's not right to say there's going to be a particular focus on Russia".<ref name="Forbes">{{cite news |title=An Interview With WikiLeaks' Julian Assange |first=Andy |last=Greenberg |work=Forbes |date=29 November 2010 |place=New York |url=https://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/2/ |access-date=1 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101202041304/http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/2/ |archive-date=2 December 2010 |url-status=dead }}</ref> ==Authenticity== According to Wired in 2009, a "whistleblower" submitted fabricated documents to WikiLeaks. The documents were published and flagged as potential fakes.<ref name=":502" /> WikiLeaks stated in 2010 that it has never released a misattributed document and that documents are assessed before release. In response to concerns about the possibility of misleading or fraudulent leaks, WikiLeaks has stated that misleading leaks "are already well-placed in the mainstream media. WikiLeaks is of no additional assistance."<ref>{{cite news |last=Trapido |first=Michael |date=1 December 2010 |title=Wikileaks: Is Julian Assange a hero, villain or simply dangerously naïve? |work=NewsTime |place=Johannesburg |url=http://www.newstime.co.za/WorldNews/Wikileaks_:_Is_Julian_Assange_a_hero_villain_or_simply_dangerously_na%C3%AFve/16065/ |url-status=dead |access-date=18 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110813024350/http://www.newstime.co.za/WorldNews/Wikileaks_%3A_Is_Julian_Assange_a_hero_villain_or_simply_dangerously_na%C3%AFve/16065/ |archive-date=13 August 2011}}</ref> The FAQ states that: "The simplest and most effective countermeasure is a worldwide community of informed users and editors who can scrutinise and discuss leaked documents."<ref>{{cite web |title=Frequently Asked Questions |url=https://wikileaks.org/faq-en |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070701115958/https://wikileaks.org/faq-en |archive-date=1 July 2007 |access-date=17 June 2010 |publisher=WikiLeaks}}</ref> According to statements by Assange in 2010, submitted documents were vetted by five reviewers with expertise in different topics such as language or [[Computer programming|programming]], who also investigated the leaker's identity if known.<ref name="motherjones3">{{cite news |author=Kushner, David |date=6 April 2010 |title=Inside WikiLeaks' Leak Factory |work=Mother Jones |place=San Francisco |url=http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=3 |url-status=live |access-date=30 April 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140429130626/http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/04/wikileaks-julian-assange-iraq-video?page=3 |archive-date=29 April 2014}}</ref> Assange had the final say in document assessment.<ref name="motherjones3" /> Columnist Eric Zorn wrote in 2016 "So far, it's possible, even likely, that every stolen email WikiLeaks has posted has been authentic," but cautioned against assuming that future releases would be equally authentic.<ref name="Zorn">{{cite web |last=Zorn |first=Eric |date=13 October 2016 |title=The inherent peril in trusting whatever WikiLeaks dumps on us |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-wikileaks-potential-hoax-zorn-perspec-1014-jm-20161013-column.html |access-date=17 April 2022 |website=Chicago Tribune}}</ref> Writer [[Glenn Greenwald]] stated in 2016 that WikiLeaks has a "perfect, long-standing record of only publishing authentic documents."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Greenwald |first1=Glenn |author-link=Glenn Greenwald |title=In the Democratic Echo Chamber, Inconvenient Truths Are Recast as Putin Plots |work=The Intercept |url=https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/in-the-democratic-echo-chamber-inconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/}}</ref> Cybersecurity experts have said that it would be easy for a person to fabricate an email or alter it, as by changing headers and metadata.<ref name="Zorn" /> Some of the releases, including many of the Podesta emails, contain [[DKIM]] headers. This allows them to be verified as genuine to some degree of certainty.<ref>{{cite news |date=24 October 2016 |title=Tech blogger finds proof DNC chief's emails weren't 'doctored' despite claims |publisher=Fox News |url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tech-blogger-finds-proof-dnc-chiefs-emails-werent-doctored-despite-claims |access-date=26 July 2019}}</ref> In July 2016, the [[Aspen Institute]]'s Homeland Security Group, a bipartisan counterterrorism organisation, warned that hackers who stole authentic data might "salt the files they release with plausible forgeries."<ref name="Zorn" /> According to Douglas Perry, Russian intelligence agencies have frequently used [[disinformation]] tactics. He wrote in 2016 that "carefully faked emails might be included in the WikiLeaks dumps. After all, the best way to make false information believable is to mix it in with true information."<ref>Douglas Perry, {{cite web |last=Perry |first=Douglas |date=18 October 2016 |title=How Russian disinformation could be driving the Hillary Clinton WikiLeaks email scandal |url=http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2016/10/how_a_russian_disinformation_c.html |access-date=17 April 2022 |website=The Oregonian}}</ref> ==Campaigns to discredit WikiLeaks== Writing for The Guardian in 2010, [[Nick Davies]] said there were low-level attempts to smear WikiLeaks, including online accusations against Assange. In 2010, Wikileaks published a US military document containing a plan to "destroy the center of gravity" of Wikileaks by attacking its trustworthiness. It suggests the identification and exposure of WikiLeaks' sources to "deter others from using WikiLeaks".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2010-07-25 |title=Afghanistan war logs: Story behind biggest leak in intelligence history |url=http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/25/wikileaks-war-logs-back-story |access-date=2022-05-01 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author1=Marc Chacksfield |date=2010-03-15 |title=WikiLeaks leaks US Government's WikiLeaks plans |url=https://www.techradar.com/news/internet/wikileaks-leaks-us-government-s-wikileaks-plans-676874 |access-date=2022-09-23 |website=TechRadar |language=en}}</ref> In 2010 the [[Bank of America]] employed the services of a collection of information security firms, known as Team Themis, when the bank became concerned about information that WikiLeaks held about it and was planning to release. Team Themis included private intelligence and security firms HBGary Federal, [[Palantir Technologies]] and Berico Technologies.<ref name="Greenberg">{{Cite news |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2011/02/11/palantir-apologizes-for-wikileaks-attack-proposal-cuts-ties-with-hbgary/ |title=Palantir Apologizes For WikiLeaks Attack Proposal, Cuts Ties With HBGary |last=Greenberg |first=Andy |date=11 February 2011 |work=[[Forbes]]|access-date=20 October 2016}}</ref><ref name="wired140211">{{cite magazine |last1=Anderson |first1=Nate |title=Spy Games: Inside the Convoluted Plot to Bring Down WikiLeaks |url=https://www.wired.com/2011/02/spy/ |access-date=26 October 2019 |magazine=Wired |date=14 February 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/15/anonymous-us-security-firms-wikileaks |title=Anonymous: US security firms 'planned to attack WikiLeaks' |last=Halliday |first=Josh |date=15 February 2011 |work=[[The Guardian]] |issn=0261-3077|access-date=20 October 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUS121866071120110217 |title=Palantir's third black eye: i2 lawsuit settled |last=Owen |first=Thomas |date=16 February 2011 |work=Reuters|access-date=20 October 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.salon.com/2011/02/15/palantir/ |title=More facts emerge about the leaked smear campaigns |last=Greenwald |first=Glenn |date=15 February 2011 |website=[[Salon (website)|Salon]]|access-date=20 October 2016}}</ref> In 2011 hacktivist group Anonymous released emails it had obtained from HBGary Federal. Among other things, the emails revealed that Team Themis had planned to sabotage and discredit WikiLeaks.<ref name="unlock">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/business/unlocking-secrets-if-not-its-own-value.html?nytmobile=0 |title=Unlocking Secrets, if Not Its Own Value |last=Hardy |first=Quentin |date=31 May 2014 |website=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=20 October 2016}}</ref> One plan was to attack WikiLeaks servers and obtain information about document submitters to "kill the project". Another was to submit fake documents to WikiLeaks and then call out the error. A further plan involved pressuring supporters of WikiLeaks such as journalist [[Glenn Greenwald]].<ref name="wired140211" /> The plans were not implemented and, after the emails were published, Palantir CEO [[Alex Karp]] issued a public apology for his company's role.<ref name="unlock"/> ==Promotion of conspiracy theories == ===Murder of Seth Rich=== {{Further|Murder of Seth Rich}} WikiLeaks promoted conspiracy theories about the murder of Seth Rich.<ref name=":52">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2016/08/12/trump-allies-wikileaks-and-russia-are-pushing-a-nonsensical-conspiracy-theory-about-the-dnc-hacks/|title=Trump allies, WikiLeaks and Russia are pushing a nonsensical conspiracy theory about the DNC hacks|last=Rogin|first=Josh|date=12 August 2016|newspaper=The Washington Post|quote=Trump campaign surrogates are fueling a conspiracy theory that a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer was connected to the hacking of the DNC, a theory being pushed by WikiLeaks and the Russian state-controlled press}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-seth-rich-conspiracy-20170523-htmlstory.html|title=How Seth Rich's death became an Internet conspiracy theory|work=Los Angeles Times|access-date=26 October 2017|issn=0458-3035}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/homicides-remain-steady-in-the-washington-region/2016/12/31/f30b7db4-cc51-11e6-a747-d03044780a02_story.html|title=Homicides remain steady in the Washington region|last=Bui|first=Lynh|date=31 December 2016|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=26 October 2017|issn=0190-8286}}</ref> Unfounded conspiracy theories, spread by some right-wing figures and media outlets, hold that Rich was the source of leaked emails and was killed for working with WikiLeaks.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks.html|title=How the Murder of a D.N.C. Staffer Fueled Conspiracy Theories|last=Bromwich|first=Jonah Engel|date=17 May 2017|work=The New York Times|access-date=17 May 2017|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> WikiLeaks fuelled such theories when it offered a $20,000 reward for information on Rich's killer and when Assange implied that Rich was the source of the DNC leaks,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40021373|title=Fox retracts Clinton murder conspiracy|date=23 May 2017|access-date=26 October 2017|work=BBC News|language=en-GB}}</ref> although no evidence supports that claim.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/wikileaks-fuels-conspiracy-theories-about-dnc-staffer-s-death-n627401|title=WikiLeaks Fuels Conspiracy Theories About DNC Staffer's Death|last=Seitz-Wald|first=Alex|date=10 August 2016|website=NBC News|language=en|access-date=14 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/08/09/wikileaks_is_fanning_a_conspiracy_theory_that_hillary_murdered_a_dnc_staffer.html |title=WikiLeaks Is Fanning a Conspiracy Theory That Hillary Murdered a DNC Staffer|last=Stahl|first=Jeremy|date=9 August 2016|work=Slate|issn=1091-2339|quote=Julian Assange and his WikiLeaks organization appear to be actively encouraging a conspiracy theory that a Democratic National Committee staffer was murdered for nefarious political purposes, perhaps by Hillary Clinton. ... . There is of course absolutely zero evidence for this and Snopes has issued a comprehensive debunking of the premise itself}}</ref> Special Counsel Robert Mueller's [[Mueller Report|report]] into Russian interference in the 2016 election said that Assange "implied falsely" that Rich was the source in order to obscure that Russia was the actual source.<ref>[https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf ''Mueller Report''], vol I. p. 48: Beginning in the summer of 2016, Assange and WikiLeaks made a number of statements about Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016. The statements about Rich implied falsely that he had been the source of the stolen DNC emails.</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/us/mueller-report-seth-rich-assange.html|title=Seth Rich Was Not Source of Leaked D.N.C. Emails, Mueller Report Confirms|last=Mervosh|first=Sarah|date=20 April 2019|work=The New York Times|access-date=24 April 2019|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/a-monster-not-a-journalist-mueller-report-shows-assange-lied-about-russian-hacking-20190420-p51frc.html|title='A monster not a journalist': Mueller report shows Assange lied about Russian hacking|last=Knott|first=Matthew|date=19 April 2019|website=The Sydney Morning Herald|language=en|access-date=24 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ajc.com/blog/jamie-dupree/mueller-wikileaks-used-dead-dnc-worker-bid-cover-russia-ties/SWSSsHGY7BJNc8pSrzZ9XJ/|title=Mueller: Wikileaks used dead DNC worker in bid to cover Russia ties|last=Jamie Dupree|first=Cox Washington Bureau|website=ajc|language=en|access-date=24 April 2019}}</ref> ===Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton=== WikiLeaks popularised conspiracy theories about the [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic Party]] and Hillary Clinton, such as tweeting articles which suggested Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta engaged in satanic rituals,<ref name=":23" /><ref name=":10">{{Cite news |url=https://www.vox.com/world/2016/11/8/13563750/wikileaks-2016-election-statement |title=WikiLeaks just tried to justify its behavior this year in a bizarre Election Day statement |last=Beauchamp |first=Zack |work=Vox|access-date=8 November 2016}}</ref><ref name=":22">{{Cite news |url=http://www.snopes.com/john-podesta-spirit-cooking/ |title=FALSE: Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta Involved in Satanic 'Spirit Cooking' |last=Evon |first=Dan |work=snopes|access-date=8 November 2016 |language=en-US}}</ref> implying that the Democratic Party had [[Murder of Seth Rich|Seth Rich]] killed,<ref name=":24" /> claiming that Hillary Clinton wanted to drone strike Assange,<ref name=":26">{{Cite news|url=http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/|title=To Silence Wikileaks, Hillary Clinton Proposed Drone Strike on Julian Assange?|last=LaCapria|first=Kim|work=snopes|access-date=8 November 2016|language=en-US}}</ref> suggesting that Clinton wore earpieces to debates and interviews,<ref name=":25">{{Cite news |url=http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/295116-wikileaks-piles-on-to-clinton-earpiece-conspiracy |title=WikiLeaks piles on to Clinton earpiece conspiracy |last=Firozi |first=Paulina |date=8 September 2016 |work=The Hill|access-date=8 November 2016}}</ref> promoting conspiracy theories about Clinton's health,<ref name="bloomberg" /><ref name=":27">{{cite news |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/25/wikileaks-plays-doctor-gives-hillary-clinton-fake-disease.html |title=WikiLeaks Plays Doctor, Gives Hillary Clinton Fake Disease |last=Collins |first=Ben |date=25 August 2016 |newspaper=The Daily Beast|access-date=29 December 2016}}</ref><ref name=":28">{{cite web |url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wikileaks-conspiracy-theory-hillary-clinton_us_57d6f4b2e4b00642712ebbd0 |title=WikiLeaks Feeds Conspiracy Theories That Hillary Clinton Has Parkinson's Or Head Injury Complications |first=Dana|last= Liebelson |date=12 September 2016 |website=HuffPost|access-date=29 December 2016}}</ref> and promoting a conspiracy theory from a Donald Trump-related Internet community tying the Clinton campaign to child kidnapper [[Laura Silsby]].<ref name=":29">{{cite news |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/03/wikileaks-latest-find-is-a-conspiracy-theory-from-trump-s-subreddit.html |title=WikiLeaks' Latest 'Find' Is a Conspiracy Theory From Trump's Subreddit |last=Collins |first=Ben |date=4 November 2016 |newspaper=The Daily Beast|access-date=10 November 2016}}</ref> === Promotion of false flag theories === On the day the [[Vault 7]] documents were first released, WikiLeaks described UMBRAGE as "a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation," and tweeted, "CIA steals other groups virus and malware facilitating [[false flag]] attacks."<ref name="Business Insider">{{cite web |last=Tani |first=Maxwell |date=9 March 2017 |title=Conservative media figures are embracing a wild WikiLeaks conspiracy theory that the CIA hacked the DNC, and then framed Russia |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-hannity-wikileaks-conspiracy-theory-cia-hacked-2017-3 |access-date=12 March 2017 |work=Business Insider}}</ref> A [[conspiracy theory]] soon emerged alleging that the CIA framed the [[Russian government]] for [[Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections|interfering in the 2016 U.S. elections]]. Conservative commentators such as [[Sean Hannity]] and [[Ann Coulter]] speculated about this possibility on Twitter, and [[Rush Limbaugh]] discussed it on his radio show.<ref name="WaPo conspiracy">{{cite news |last=Blake |first=Aaron |title=Analysis - The dangerous and irresistible GOP conspiracy theory that explains away Trump's Russia problem |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/10/the-dangerous-and-irresistible-gop-conspiracy-theory-that-explains-away-trumps-russia-problem/ |access-date=12 March 2017}}</ref> Russian foreign minister [[Sergey Lavrov]] said that Vault 7 showed that "the CIA could get access to such 'fingerprints' and then use them."<ref name="Business Insider" /> Cybersecurity writers, such as Ben Buchanan and [[Kevin Poulsen]], were skeptical of those theories.<ref name="Daily Beast">{{cite web |last=Poulsen |first=Kevin |date=8 March 2017 |title=Russia Turns WikiLeaks CIA Dump Into Disinformation |url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/03/08/who-s-behind-the-massive-cia-leak.html |access-date=12 March 2017 |work=The Daily Beast}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Buchanan |first1=Ben |date=9 March 2017 |title=WikiLeaks doesn't raise doubts about who hacked the DNC. We still know it was Russia. |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/russia-likely-hacked-the-dnc-and-new-wikileaks-revelations-strengthen-the-case/2017/03/09/e5fe55e8-04d6-11e7-b1e9-a05d3c21f7cf_story.html |access-date=12 March 2017}}</ref> Poulsen wrote, "The leaked catalog isn't organized by country of origin, and the specific malware used by the Russian DNC hackers is nowhere on the list."<ref name="Daily Beast" /> In April 2017, the WikiLeaks Twitter account suggested that the [[Khan Shaykhun chemical attack]], which international human rights organisations and governments of the United States, United Kingdom, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, France, and Israel attributed to the Syrian government, was a [[false flag]] attack.<ref name=":21">{{cite news |title=Analysis {{!}} Trump loves a conspiracy theory. Now his allies in the fringe media want him to fall for one in Syria |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/06/trump-loves-a-conspiracy-theory-now-his-allies-in-the-media-say-hes-falling-for-one-in-syria/ |access-date=5 May 2017}}</ref> WikiLeaks stated that "while western establishment media beat the drum for more war in Syria the matter is far from clear", and shared a video by a Syrian activist who claimed that Islamist extremists were probably behind the chemical attack, not the Syrian government.<ref name=":21" /> ==Reception == {{Main|Reception of WikiLeaks}} ===Awards and support=== WikiLeaks won a number of awards in its early years, including ''[[The Economist]]'s'' New Media Award in 2008 at the Index on Censorship Awards<ref>{{cite web |title=Winners of Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards Announced |url=http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2008/04/winners-of-index-on-censorship-freedom-of-expression-award-announced/ |publisher=Index on Censorship |access-date=15 December 2010 |date=22 April 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120723022557/http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2008/04/winners-of-index-on-censorship-freedom-of-expression-award-announced/ |archive-date=23 July 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> and [[Amnesty International]]'s UK Media Award in 2009.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Cry of Blood. Report on Extra-Judicial Killings and Disappearances |url=http://www.ediec.org/library/item/id/402/ |publisher=Kenya National Commission on Human Rights|access-date=15 December 2010 |year=2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209122323/http://www.ediec.org/library/item/id/402/ |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release |title=Amnesty announces Media Awards 2009 winners |url=http://amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18227 |publisher=Amnesty International UK |access-date=15 December 2010 |date=2 June 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022182928/http://amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18227 |archive-date=22 October 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> In 2010, the New York ''[[Daily News (New York)|Daily News]]'' listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news".<ref name="5sites">{{cite news |url=http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_5_pioneering_web_sites_that_could_totally_change_the_news.html |title=5 pioneering Web sites that could totally change the news |last=Reso |first=Paulina |date=20 May 2010 |work=Daily News |place=New York |access-date=8 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827012650/http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_5_pioneering_web_sites_that_could_totally_change_the_news.html |archive-date=27 August 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> Julian Assange received the 2010 [[Sam Adams Award]] for Integrity in Intelligence for releasing secret U.S. military reports on the Iraq and Afghan wars<ref>{{cite web |last=Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence |title=WikiLeaks and Assange Honored |url=http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/102410a.html |publisher=Consortium News |access-date=22 February 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140402104914/http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/102410a.html |archive-date=2 April 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> and was named the Readers' Choice for [[Time Person of the Year|''TIME's Person of the Year'']] in 2010.<ref>{{cite news |last=Friedman |first=Megan |title=Julian Assange: Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year 2010 |url=http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/12/13/julian-assange-readers-choice-for-times-person-of-the-year-2010/ |access-date=15 December 2010 |magazine=Time |place=New York |date=13 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131027124723/http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/12/13/julian-assange-readers-choice-for-times-person-of-the-year-2010/ |archive-date=27 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> The UK [[Information Commissioner's Office|Information Commissioner]] has stated that "WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen".<ref>{{cite news |author=Curtis, Polly |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/dec/30/wikileaks-freedom-information-ministers-government |title=Ministers must 'wise up not clam up' after WikiLeaks disclosures |work=The Guardian |place=London |date=30 December 2010 |access-date=1 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110327023338/http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/30/wikileaks-freedom-information-ministers-government |archive-date=27 March 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref> In 2010, an [[Internet petition]] in support of WikiLeaks attracted more than six hundred thousand signatures.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/media-says-governments-reaction-to-wikileaks-troubling-20101214-18vrb.html |title=Media says government's reaction to WikiLeaks 'troubling' |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |access-date=28 December 2010 |date=14 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209151331/http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/media-says-governments-reaction-to-wikileaks-troubling-20101214-18vrb.html |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> On 16 April 2019, [[Mairead Maguire]] accepted the 2019 [[European United Left–Nordic Green Left|GUE/NGL]] Award for Journalists, Whistleblowers & Defenders of the Right to Information on Julian Assange's behalf.<ref>{{cite news|author=Alan Jones|work=Canberra Times|title=Julian Assange wins EU journalism award|date=17 April 2019|access-date=20 April 2019|url=https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6065261/julian-assange-wins-eu-journalism-award/}}</ref> ===Improving government and corporate transparency=== During the early years of WikiLeaks, various members of the media and academia commended it for exposing state and corporate secrets, increasing transparency, assisting [[freedom of the press]], and enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions.<ref>{{cite news |author=Kampfner, John |title=Wikileaks shows up our media for their docility at the feet of authority |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/john-kampfner-wikileaks-shows-up-our-media-for-their-docility-at-the-feet-of-authority-2146211.html |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=The Independent |date=29 November 2010 |place=London |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120629145243/http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/john-kampfner-wikileaks-shows-up-our-media-for-their-docility-at-the-feet-of-authority-2146211.html |archive-date=29 June 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Shafer |first=Jack |title=Why I Love WikiLeaks |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2276312/ |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] |date=30 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113032713/http://www.slate.com/id/2276312 |archive-date=13 January 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Greenwald |first=Glenn |title=WikiLeaks reveals more than just government secrets |url=http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/30/wikileaks/index.html |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=[[Salon (website)|Salon]] |date=30 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113112018/http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/30/wikileaks/index.html |archive-date=13 January 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Gilmore |first=Dan |title=Defend WikiLeaks or lose free speech |url=http://www.salon.com/technology/dan_gillmor/2010/12/06/war_on_speech |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=[[Salon (website)|Salon]] |date=6 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110101093621/http://www.salon.com/technology/dan_gillmor/2010/12/06/war_on_speech |archive-date=1 January 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=First, They Came for WikiLeaks. Then ... |url=http://www.thenation.com/article/157017/first-they-came-wikileaks-then |access-date=19 May 2011 |work=[[The Nation]] |place=New York |date=27 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110627055730/http://www.thenation.com/article/157017/first-they-came-wikileaks-then |archive-date=27 June 2011 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Where's the democracy in hunting Wikileaks off the Net? |url=http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/medb-ruane/medb-ruane-wheres-the-democracy-in-hunting-wikileaks-off-the-net-2456960.html |access-date=19 December 2010 |work=Irish Independent |place=Dublin |date=11 December 2010 |author=Ruane, Medb}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.epw.in/commentary/wikileaks-new-information-cultures-and-digital-parrhesia.html |title=WikiLeaks, the New Information Cultures and Digital Parrhesia |work=[[Economic and Political Weekly]] |author=Nayar, Pramod K. |place=Mumbai |date=25 December 2010 |access-date=8 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512103617/http://www.epw.in/commentary/wikileaks-new-information-cultures-and-digital-parrhesia.html |archive-date=12 May 2013}}</ref> In 2010, the UN [[High Commissioner for Human Rights]] expressed concern over the "cyber war" being led at the time against WikiLeaks,<ref>{{cite press release |title=UN human rights chief voices concern at reported 'cyber war' against WikiLeaks |date=9 December 2010 |publisher=United Nations |url=https://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37009&Cr=leaked&Cr1|access-date=28 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140420125618/http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=37009&Cr=leaked&Cr1 |archive-date=20 April 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref> and in a joint statement with the [[Organization of American States]] the UN [[United Nations Special Rapporteur|Special Rapporteur]] called on states and other people to keep international legal principles in mind.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cidh.oas.org/relatoria/showarticle.asp?artID=829&lID=1 |title=Joint Statement on WikiLeaks |publisher=[[Organization of American States]] |access-date=28 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101227073006/http://www.cidh.oas.org/relatoria/showarticle.asp?artID=829&lID=1 |archive-date=27 December 2010 |url-status=dead |date=August 2009 }}</ref> === Allegations of anti-Clinton and pro-Trump bias === Assange wrote on WikiLeaks in February 2016: "I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgement and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. ... &nbsp;she certainly should not become president of the United States."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://observer.com/2016/06/why-julian-assange-doesnt-want-hillary-clinton-to-be-president/ |title=Why Julian Assange Doesn't Want Hillary Clinton to Be President |work=[[The Observer]] |date=24 June 2016}}</ref> In a 2017 interview by [[Amy Goodman]], Julian Assange said that choosing between [[Hillary Clinton]] and Donald Trump is like choosing between [[cholera]] or [[gonorrhea]]. "Personally, I would prefer neither."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/julian-assange-us-election-2016-226281 |title=Assange: 2016 election is like choosing between 'cholera or gonorrhea' |website=[[Politico]] |date=27 July 2016 |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> WikiLeaks editor [[Sarah Harrison (journalist)|Sarah Harrison]] stated that the site was not choosing which damaging publications to release, rather releasing information available to them.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-11/how-julian-assange-turned-wikileaks-into-trump-s-best-friend |title=How Julian Assange Turned WikiLeaks into Trump's Best Friend |work=Bloomberg.com|access-date=27 October 2016}}</ref> In conversations that were leaked in February 2018, Assange expressed a preference for a Republican victory in the 2016 election, saying that "Dems+Media+liberals would [sic] then form a block to reign [sic] in their worst qualities. With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities, dems+media+neoliberals will be mute."<ref name=":46">{{cite web |url=https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks-election-clinton-trump/ |title=In Leaked Chats, WikiLeaks Discusses Preference for GOP Over Clinton, Russia, Trolling, and Feminists They Don't Like |last1=Lee |first1=Micah |last2=Currier |first2=Cora |date=14 February 2018 |website=The Intercept |language=en-US|access-date=15 February 2018}}</ref> In further leaked correspondence with the [[Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign|Trump campaign]] on election day (8 November 2016), WikiLeaks encouraged the Trump campaign to contest the election results as being "rigged" should they lose.<ref name=":45" /> Having released information that exposed the inner workings of a broad range of organisations and politicians, WikiLeaks started by 2016 to focus almost exclusively on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.<ref name=":39">{{cite web |last=McLaughlin |first=Jenna |date=17 August 2017 |title=WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/ |access-date=17 August 2017 |website=[[Foreign Policy]]}}</ref> In the [[2016 United States presidential election|2016 U.S. presidential election]], WikiLeaks only exposed material damaging to the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton. WikiLeaks even rejected the opportunity to publish unrelated leaks, because it dedicated all its resources to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. According to ''The New York Times'', WikiLeaks timed one of its large leaks so that it would happen on the eve of the Democratic Convention.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/assange-timed-wikileaks-release-of-democratic-emails-to-harm-hillary-clinton.html |title=Assange, Avowed Foe of Clinton, Timed Email Release for Democratic Convention |last=Savage |first=Charlie |date=26 July 2016 |work=The New York Times|access-date=23 October 2017 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> The ''Washington Post'' noted that the leaks came at an important sensitive moment in the Clinton campaign, as she was preparing to announce her vice-presidential pick and unite the party behind her.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/22/on-eve-of-democratic-convention-wikileaks-releases-thousands-of-documents-about-clinton-the-campaign-and-internal-deliberations/ |title=WikiLeaks releases thousands of documents about Clinton and internal deliberations |last1=Hamburger |first1=Tom |date=22 July 2016 |newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=23 October 2017 |last2=Tumulty |first2=Karen |issn=0190-8286}}</ref> The [[Sunlight Foundation]], an organisation that advocates for [[open government]], said that such actions meant that WikiLeaks was no longer striving to be transparent but rather sought to achieve political goals.<ref name=":40">{{cite news |url=http://time.com/4450282/wikileaks-julian-assange-dnc-hack-criticism/ |title=WikiLeaks Is Getting Scarier Than the NSA |last=Vick |first=Karl |magazine=Time|access-date=23 October 2017}}</ref> WikiLeaks explained its actions in a 2017 statement to ''[[Foreign Policy]]'': "WikiLeaks schedules publications to maximize readership and reader engagement. During distracting media events such as the Olympics or a high profile election, unrelated publications are sometimes delayed until the distraction passes but never are rejected for this reason."<ref name=":39" /> On 7 October 2016, an hour after the media had begun to dedicate wall-to-wall coverage of the revelation that Trump had bragged on video about sexually harassing women, WikiLeaks began to release emails hacked from the personal account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.<ref name=":42">{{Cite news |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/07/politics/one-year-access-hollywood-russia-podesta-email/index.html |title=Access Hollywood and emails: One year later |last=Cohen |first=Marshall |publisher=CNN|access-date=24 October 2017}}</ref><ref name=":41">{{Cite news |url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/dec/18/john-podesta/its-true-wikileaks-dumped-podesta-emails-hour-afte/ |title=True: Wikileaks dumped Podesta emails hour after Trump video |work=@politifact|access-date=24 October 2017 |language=en}}</ref> Podesta suggested that the emails were timed to deflect attention from the Trump tapes.<ref name=":41" /> ==== Correspondence between WikiLeaks and Donald Trump Jr. ==== In November 2017, it was revealed that the WikiLeaks Twitter account corresponded with [[Donald Trump Jr.]] during the 2016 presidential election.<ref name=":45">{{Cite news|last=Ioffe |first=Julia|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/ |title=The Secret Correspondence Between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks |work=The Atlantic|access-date=13 November 2017 |language=en-US}}</ref> The correspondence shows how WikiLeaks actively solicited the co-operation of Trump Jr., a campaign surrogate and advisor in the campaign of his father. WikiLeaks urged the Trump campaign to reject the results of the 2016 presidential election at a time when it looked as if the Trump campaign would lose.<ref name=":45" /> WikiLeaks asked Trump Jr. to share a WikiLeaks tweet with the quote "Can’t we just drone this guy?" which ''True Pundit'' alleged Hillary Clinton made about Assange.<ref name=":45" /> WikiLeaks also shared a link to a site that would help people to search through WikiLeaks documents.<ref name=":45" /> Trump Jr. shared both. After the election, WikiLeaks also requested that the president-elect push Australia to appoint Assange as ambassador to the US. Trump Jr. provided this correspondence to congressional investigators looking into Russian interference in the 2016 election.<ref name=":45" /> === Allegations of association with Russian government === According to the [[Associated Press]], leaked documents from WikiLeaks include an unsigned letter from Julian Assange authorising [[Israel Shamir]] to seek a Russian visa on his behalf in 2010. WikiLeaks said Assange never applied for the visa or wrote the letter.<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 April 2021 |title=AP Exclusive: WikiLeaks files expose group's inner workings |url=https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-london-julian-assange-international-news-crime-af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=AP NEWS |language=en}}</ref> In 2012, as WikiLeaks was under a financial blockade, Assange began to host [[World Tomorrow]], a television show that was distributed by [[Journeyman Pictures]] and aired on [[RT (TV network)|RT]].<ref name=":16">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.html |title=How Russia Often Benefits When Julian Assange Reveals the West's Secrets |last1=Erlanger |first1=Jo Becker, Steven |date=31 August 2016 |work=The New York Times|access-date=6 January 2017 |last2=Schmitt |first2=Eric |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/apr/13/julian-assange-tv-chatshow | title=Julian Assange's TV chatshow to air on 17 April | first=Josh | last=Halliday | work=The Guardian | date=13 April 2012 | access-date=16 April 2019}}</ref> In 2013, the Russian national newspaper ''[[Izvestia]]'' reported that Russian intelligence officers had coordinated with WikiLeaks to get Edward Snowden to Russia.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Горковская |first=Андрей Гридасов, Игорь Являнский, Мария |date=23 June 2013 |title=WikiLeaks и спецслужбы провели в Москве операцию "Сноуден" |url=https://iz.ru/news/552478 |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=Известия |language=ru}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia? |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-did-wikileaks-become-associated-with-russia/ |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=www.cbsnews.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Wilentz |first=Sean |date=19 January 2014 |title=Would You Feel Differently About Snowden, Greenwald, and Assange If You Knew What They Really Thought? |magazine=The New Republic |url=https://newrepublic.com/article/116253/edward-snowden-glenn-greenwald-julian-assange-what-they-believe |access-date=14 March 2022 |issn=0028-6583}}</ref> In April 2016, WikiLeaks tweeted criticism of the [[Panama Papers]], which had among other things revealed Russian businesses and individuals linked with [[Offshore financial centre|offshore]] ties. Assange said that journalists had "cherry-picked" documents to maximise "Putin bashing, North Korea bashing, sanctions bashing, etc." while avoiding mention of Western figures.<ref name=":39" /> The WikiLeaks Twitter account tweeted, "#PanamaPapers Putin attack was produced by OCCRP which targets Russia & former USSR and was funded by USAID and [George] [[George Soros|Soros]]".<ref name=":15">{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses-panama-papers-as-an-attempt-to-destabilise-russia |title=Putin dismisses Panama Papers as an attempt to destabilise Russia |last=Harding |first=Alec Luhn Luke |date=7 April 2016 |work=The Guardian |location=London |issn=0261-3077 |access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref> Putin later dismissed the Panama Papers by citing WikiLeaks: "WikiLeaks has showed us that official people and official organs of the U.S. are behind this."<ref name=":15" /> According to ''The New York Times'' "there is no evidence suggesting that the United States government had a role in releasing the Panama Papers".<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/russian-hack-report.html |title=What Intelligence Agencies Concluded About the Russian Attack on the U.S. Election |last=Shane |first=Scott |date=6 January 2017 |work=The New York Times|access-date=7 January 2017 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> In August 2016, after WikiLeaks published thousands of DNC emails, DNC officials and a number of cybersecurity experts and cybersecurity firms claimed that Russian intelligence had hacked the e-mails and leaked them to WikiLeaks.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-07-25/cybersecurity-experts-say-russia-hacked-the-democrats |title=Cyber-Experts Say Russia Hacked the Democratic National Committee |last=Lake |first=Eli |date=25 July 2016 |work=Bloomberg View|access-date=23 October 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/2016/07/heres-know-russia-dnc-hack/ |title=Here's What We Know About Russia and the DNC Hack |last=Glaser |first=April |magazine=Wired|access-date=23 October 2016 |language=en-US}}</ref> Assange said that Russia was not the source of the documents and that the Clinton campaign was stoking "a [[McCarthyism|neo-McCarthy hysteria]]".<ref>{{cite news |title=Assange blasts media for 'politicization' of election campaign in Fox interviews |url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/assange-blasts-media-for-politicization-of-election-campaign-in-fox-interviews |work=Fox News |date=26 August 2016}}</ref> In October 2016, the US intelligence community said that it was "confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations".<ref name=":4" /> The US intelligence agencies said that the hacks were consistent with the methods of Russian-directed efforts, and that people high up within the Kremlin were likely involved.<ref name=":4" /> On 14 October 2016, [[CNN]] stated that "there is mounting evidence that the Russian government is supplying WikiLeaks with hacked emails pertaining to the [[2016 United States presidential election|U.S. presidential election]]."<ref name="ufge">{{cite web |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/13/politics/russia-us-election/ |title=US finds growing evidence Russia feeding emails to WikiLeaks |last1=Sciutto |first1=Jim |last2=Gaouette |first2=Nicole |last3=Browne |first3=Ryan |date=14 October 2016 |website=CNN |access-date=17 April 2022}}</ref> WikiLeaks said it had no connection with Russia.<ref name="ufge" /> When asked about [[Guccifer 2.0|Guccifer 2.0's]] leaks, WikiLeaks founder [[Julian Assange]] said "These look very much like they’re from the Russians. But in some ways, they look very amateur, and almost look too much like the Russians."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Uchill |first=Joe |date=2016-12-15 |title=Assange: Some leaks may have been Russian |url=https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/310654-assange-some-leaks-may-have-been-russian/ |access-date=2022-07-27 |website=The Hill |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2018-07-24 |title=What the Latest Mueller Indictment Reveals About WikiLeaks' Ties to Russia—and What It Doesn't |url=https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-the-latest-mueller-indictment-reveals-about-wikileaks-ties-to-russia-and-what-it-doesnt |access-date=2022-07-27 |magazine=The New Yorker |publisher=Condé Nast |language=en-US}}</ref> President Putin stated that there was no [[Russian involvement in the 2016 United States presidential election|Russian involvement in the election]].<ref name="Healy" /><ref name="foxnews.com" /> In August 2016, a ''New York Times'' story asked whether WikiLeaks had "become a laundering machine for compromising material gathered by Russian spies". It wrote that US officials believed it was unlikely there were direct ties between Wikileaks and Russian intelligence agencies.<ref name=":16" /> A report by the [[Central Intelligence Agency]] shared with senators in 2016 concluded that Russia intelligence operatives provided materials to WikiLeaks in an effort to help Donald Trump's election bid.<ref>{{cite news |date=9 December 2016 |title=Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html |access-date=10 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=10 December 2016 |title=CIA concludes Russia interfered to help Trump win election, say reports |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/10/cia-concludes-russia-interfered-to-help-trump-win-election-report |access-date=10 December 2016}}</ref> In September 2016, the [[The Daily Dot|Daily Dot]] wrote that according to leaked court documents and a chatlog, a WikiLeaks release excluded evidence of a €2 billion transaction between the Syrian government and a government-owned Russian bank.<ref name=":44">{{Cite web |date=9 September 2016 |title=WikiLeaks release excludes evidence of €2 billion transfer from Syria to Russia |url=https://www.dailydot.com/debug/wikileaks-syria-files-syria-russia-bank-2-billion/ |access-date=23 April 2022 |website=The Daily Dot |language=en-US}}</ref> Responding to the Daily Dot, WikiLeaks said that all the Syria files they had obtained had been published. Their spokesperson also stated, in reference to the Daily Dot's reporting of the story: "Go right ahead, but you can be sure we will return the favour one day."<ref name=":44" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Brandom |first=Russell |date=2016-09-09 |title=WikiLeaks threatens Daily Dot journalists over report on missing Syria emails |url=https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/9/12864328/wikileaks-threat-reporters-syria-russia-emails |access-date=2022-04-27 |website=The Verge |language=en}}</ref> In March 2017, [[The Moscow Times]] wrote that a former WikiLeaks collaborator said that "in recent years, WikiLeaks and the Russian state have effectively joined forces." The article reported that, since submissions to the Wikileaks portal are anonymous and encrypted, it was very difficult for Wikileaks to trace their source. [[Mark Galeotti]], a researcher at the Institute of International Relations Prague and an expert on the Russian security services, said he had suspicions "that things are sometimes fed in, and [WikiLeaks does] know where they came from." Galeotti said Assange would have to be "extraordinarily stupid and naive" not to conclude the DNC leaks came from Russia.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kupfer |first=Matthew |date=16 March 2017 |title=How Russia and WikiLeaks Became Allies Against the West |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2017/03/16/how-russia-and-wikileaks-became-allies-against-the-west-a57443 |access-date=23 April 2022 |website=The Moscow Times |language=en}}</ref> According to the Mueller indictment, WikiLeaks knew the source was the Russian [[Guccifer 2.0]] persona.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=LeeJuly 18, 2018 |first1=Micah LeeMicah |last2=P.m |first2=6:46 |title=What Mueller's Latest Indictment Reveals About Russian and U.S. Spycraft |url=https://theintercept.com/2018/07/18/mueller-indictment-russian-hackers/ |access-date=23 April 2022 |website=The Intercept |language=en}}</ref> In April 2017, CIA Director Mike Pompeo stated: "It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia." Pompeo said that the US Intelligence Community had concluded that Russia's "primary propaganda outlet," [[RT (TV network)|RT]] had "actively collaborated" with WikiLeaks.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-director-calls-wikileaks-a-non-state-hostile-intelligence-service/ |title=CIA director calls WikiLeaks Russia-aided "non-state hostile intelligence service" |author=Kathryn Watson |date=13 April 2017 |publisher=CBS News}}</ref> In August 2017, ''Foreign Policy'' wrote that WikiLeaks had in the summer of 2016 turned down a large cache of documents containing information damaging to the Russian government.<ref name=":39" /><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/347007-wikileaks-rejected-documents-on-russia-during-2016-election |title=WikiLeaks rejected documents on Russia during 2016 election: report |last=Uchill |first=Joe |date=17 August 2017 |work=The Hill|access-date=17 August 2017}}</ref> WikiLeaks stated that, "As far as we recall these are already public ... WikiLeaks rejects all information that it cannot verify.<ref name=":39" /> WikiLeaks rejects submissions that have already been published elsewhere".<ref name=":39" /> News outlets had reported on contents of the leaks in 2014, amounting to less than half of the data that was allegedly made available to WikiLeaks in the summer of 2016.<ref name=":39" /> In September 2018, The Guardian reported that Russian diplomats had secret talks with people close to Julian Assange in 2017 with plans to help him flee the U.K. Several possible destinations were suggested, including Russia. The Russian embassy denied the report.<ref>{{Cite web |date=21 September 2018 |title=Revealed: The secret Christmas plan to transfer Assange from the UK to Russia |url=http://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/21/julian-assange-russia-ecuador-embassy-london-secret-escape-plan |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=the Guardian |language=en}}</ref> It was also reported that Ecuador attempted to give Assange a diplomatic posting in Russia, but Britain refused to give him diplomatic immunity to leave the embassy.<ref>{{Cite news |date=21 September 2018 |title=Exclusive: Ecuador attempted to give Assange diplomat post in Russia - document |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange-exclusive-idUSKCN1M12R5 |access-date=13 March 2022}}</ref> ===Allegations of anti-semitism=== WikiLeaks has been accused of anti-semitism both in its Twitter activity and hiring decisions.<ref name=":0">{{cite news |url=http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/british-magazine-assange-says-jewish-conspiracy-trying-to-discredit-wikileaks-1.346686 |title=British magazine: Assange says Jewish conspiracy trying to discredit WikiLeaks |newspaper=Haaretz|access-date=23 October 2016|date=2 March 2011 |last1=Service |first1=Haaretz }}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite news |url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/25/what_wikileaks_might_have_meant_by_that_anti_semitic_tweet.html |title=Here's What WikiLeaks Might Have Meant by That Anti-Semitic Tweet It Deleted |last=Stahl |first=Jeremy |date=25 July 2016 |work=Slate|access-date=23 October 2016 |issn=1091-2339}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite news |url=http://forward.com/news/national/347546/why-does-wikileaks-have-a-reputation-for-anti-semitism/ |title=Why Does Wikileaks Have a Reputation for Anti-Semitism? |work=The Forward|access-date=23 October 2016}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-moral-high-ground/ |title=WikiLeaks Has Officially Lost the Moral High Ground |last=Ellis |first=Emma Grey |magazine=Wired|access-date=23 October 2016 |language=en-US}}</ref> According to [[Ian Hislop]], Assange claimed that a "Jewish conspiracy" was attempting to discredit the organisation. Assange denied making this remark, stating "'Jewish conspiracy' is completely false, in spirit and in word. It is serious and upsetting."<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/mar/01/julian-assange-jewish-conspiracy-comments |title=Julian Assange 'Jewish conspiracy' comments spark row |last=Quinn |first=Ben |date=1 March 2011 |work=The Guardian|access-date=23 October 2016 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> In the wake of the [[Charlie Hebdo shooting|''Charlie Hebdo'' shooting]] in January 2015, the WikiLeaks Twitter account wrote that "the Jewish pro-censorship lobby legitimized attacks", referring to the trial of [[Maurice Sinet]].<ref name=":2" /> In July 2016, the same account suggested that [[triple parentheses]], or (((echoes))) – a tool used by neo-Nazis to identify Jews on Twitter, appropriated by several Jews online out of solidarity – had been used as a way for "establishment climbers" to identify one another.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":3" /> In leaked internal conversations, the WikiLeaks Twitter account, thought{{by whom|date=February 2021}} to be controlled by Assange at the time, commented on [[Associated Press]] reporter Raphael Satter who had written an article critical of WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks tweeted that "[Satter]'s always ben(sic) a rat. But he's jewish and engaged with the ((()))) issue".<ref name=":46" /> ===Exaggerated and misleading descriptions of the contents of leaks=== WikiLeaks has been criticised for making misleading claims about the contents of its leaks.<ref name=":7">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/opinion/the-truth-about-the-wikileaks-cia-cache.html |title=The Truth About the WikiLeaks C.I.A. Cache |last=Tufekci |first=Zeynep |date=9 March 2017 |work=The New York Times|access-date=10 March 2017 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref name=":34">{{Cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/2017/03/wikileaks-cia-hack-signal-encrypted-chat-apps/ |title=The CIA Can't Crack Signal and WhatsApp Encryption, No Matter What You've Heard |last=Barrett |first=Brian |magazine=Wired|access-date=10 March 2017 |language=en-US}}</ref> Media outlets have also been criticised for uncritically repeating WikiLeaks' misleading claims about its leaks.<ref name=":7" /> According to [[University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|University of North Carolina]] Professor [[Zeynep Tufekci]], this is part of a pattern of behaviour.<ref name=":7" /> According to Tufekci, there are three steps to WikiLeaks' "disinformation campaigns": "The first step is to dump many documents at once — rather than allowing journalists to scrutinise them and absorb their significance before publication. The second step is to sensationalise the material with misleading news releases and tweets. The third step is to sit back and watch as the news media unwittingly promotes the WikiLeaks agenda under the auspices of independent reporting."<ref name=":7" /> Most experts and commentators agree that [[Phineas Fisher]] was behind the AKP email leak.<ref name=":210" /><ref name=":310" /><ref name=":43" /> Fisher said WikiLeaks had told her that the emails were "all spam and crap" but published them anyway despite being asked not to.<ref name=":110" /> === Buying and selling leaks === In 2008, WikiLeaks attempted to auction off the emails of an aide to Hugo Chavez,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Anderson |first=Nate |date=29 August 2008 |title=Wikileaks to auction Hugo Chavez aide's e-mail trove |url=https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/08/wikileaks-to-auction-hugo-chavez-aides-e-mail-trove/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=Ars Technica |language=en-us}}</ref> drawing criticism.<ref name=":48">{{Cite magazine |last=Singel |first=Ryan |title=Latest Wikileaks Prize for Sale to the Highest Bidder - Update |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2008/08/wikileaks-aucti/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref><ref name=":502"/> University of Minnesota media ethics professor Jane Kirtley asked, "Ethically speaking, why don't they just publish it?"<ref name=":48" /> WikiLeaks later posted the emails on their website.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Venezuelan ambassador Freddy Balzan emails 2005-2008 - WikiLeaks |url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Venezuelan_ambassador_Freddy_Balzan_emails_2005-2008 |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> In 2010, Assange considered a subscription service which would give high paying subscribers early access to leaks.<ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2010-05-31 |title=What Does Julian Assange Want? |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/06/07/no-secrets |access-date=2022-05-02 |magazine=The New Yorker |language=en-US}}</ref> In 2012, WikiLeaks put the [[2012–13 Stratfor email leak|Global Intelligence files]] behind a paywall, drawing intense criticism from supporters including [[Anonymous (hacker group)|Anonymous]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Greenberg |first=Andy |title=WikiLeaks Angers Supporters With Donation 'Paywall' For Leaked Material |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/10/10/wikileaks-angers-supporters-with-donation-paywall-for-leaked-material/ |access-date=2022-05-02 |website=Forbes |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks loses Anonymous allies over paywall dispute |url=http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/wikileaks-loses-anonymous-allies-over-paywall-dispute-flna1C6443490 |access-date=2022-05-02 |website=NBC News |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Osborne |first=Charlie |title=Anonymous declares war on Wikileaks |url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/anonymous-declares-war-on-wikileaks/ |access-date=2022-05-02 |website=ZDNet |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Kravets |first=David |title=WikiLeaks Goes Behind Paywall, Anonymous Cries Foul |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2012/10/wikileaks-paywall-anonymous/ |access-date=2022-05-02 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> In 2015, WikiLeaks began issuing "bounties" of up to $100,000 for leaks.<ref name="wikileaks.org">{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - WikiLeaks issues call for $100,000 bounty on monster trade treaty |url=https://wikileaks.org/WikiLeaks-issues-call-for-100-000.html |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> WikiLeaks has issued crowd-sourced rewards for the TTIP chapters, the TPP<ref name="wikileaks.org"/> and information on the Kunduz Massacre.<ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks' Most Wanted |url=https://wikileaks.org/pledge/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref><ref name=":49">{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=770358978203254784 |date=29 August 2016 |title=Our position on rewards for information: https://t.co/1IJl0tAXNW |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313165942/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/770358978203254784 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks has issued other bounties for leaks on Troika Crisis Planning,<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=617806659390435328 |date=5 July 2015 |title=Greek referendum result: Euro Crisis plan reward hits $10k after vote https://t.co/9fjN4jmNgu #Greece http://t.co/FyMpHAlx4x |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313170211/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/617806659390435328 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> LabourLeaks,<ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - WikiLeaks offers award for #LabourLeaks |url=https://wikileaks.org/WikiLeaks-offers-award-for-LabourLeaks.html |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> Trump-Comey tapes,<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=863088282686472192 |date=12 May 2017 |title=WikiLeaks offers US$100k for the Trump-Comey tapes. To increase the reward send Bitcoin to reward address: 1FfzC3KrbrJ3CRbz4hqHnxSqvYfy9M5CT https://t.co/CJInYx4fcw |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313165737/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/863088282686472192 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> evidence of Obama administration officials destroying information,<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=816746111520145408 |date=4 January 2017 |title=We increased the reward for the arrest or exposure of Obama admin officials destroying info to $30,000, thanks to a donor stepping forward. |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313170134/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/816746111520145408 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> 2016 U.S. Presidential election-related information,<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=769649948870705152 |date=27 August 2016 |title=We will soon issue a reward for additional US election related documents. Vote or reply with suggestions. |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313165840/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/769649948870705152 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> information to get a reporter at The Intercept fired over the [[Reality Winner|Reality Winner case]],<ref>{{Cite web |last=Uchill |first=Joe |date=6 June 2017 |title=WikiLeaks offers $10,000 to get Intercept reporter fired |url=https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/336518-wikileaks-offering-10000-to-get-intercept-reporter-fired |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=TheHill |language=en}}</ref> the U.S. Senate torture report,<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=856643079176146945 |date=24 April 2017 |title=WikiLeaks is aware of a US$100,000 reward for a copy of the full 6,700 page U.S. Senate report into CIA torture. https://t.co/cLRcuIiQXz |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313165942/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/856643079176146945 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> and documents and Sweden's vote on placing Saudi Arabia on the UN Women's Rights Commission.<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=857195834403954688 |date=26 April 2017 |title=Sweden is hiding docs about its vote: re placing Saudi on the UN Women's Rights Commission. We issue a €10k reward. https://t.co/cLRcuIiQXz |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313165836/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/857195834403954688 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> WikiLeaks had defended the practice with their vetting record, saying "police rewards produce results. So do journalistic rewards."<ref name=":49" /> In April 2018, WikiLeaks offered a $100,000 reward for confidential information about "the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria."<ref>{{cite tweet |author=WikiLeaks |author-link=WikiLeaks |user=wikileaks |number=983443098767364097 |date=9 April 2018 |title=WikiLeaks issues a US$100,000 reward for confidential official information (intercepts, reports) showing to who is responsible for the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria. Send information here: https://t.co/cLRcuIiQXz |language=en |access-date=19 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220313170202/https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/983443098767364097 |archive-date=13 March 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> In October, November and December 2019, WikiLeaks published the OPCW Douma Docs "regarding the investigating into the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria."<ref>{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks - OPCW Douma Docs |url=https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=wikileaks.org}}</ref> In a November 2020 interview with BBC, WikiLeaks' alleged source declined to say if he took money from the organisation.<ref>{{Cite web |title=BBC Radio 4 - Intrigue, Extra Episode: The Canister on the Bed |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08z33bp |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=BBC |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=14 May 2021 |title=Berlin Group 21, 'Ivan's' Emails and Chemical Weapons Conspiracy Theories |url=https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2021/05/14/berlin-group-21-ivans-emails-and-chemical-weapons-conspiracy-theories/ |access-date=13 March 2022 |website=bellingcat |language=en-GB}}</ref> === Inadequate curation and violations of personal privacy === WikiLeaks has drawn criticism for violating the personal privacy of individuals and inadequately curating its content. These critics include [[Transparency (behavior)|transparency]] advocates, such as [[Edward Snowden]], [[Glenn Greenwald]], [[Amnesty International]], [[Reporters Without Borders]], the [[Sunlight Foundation]] and the [[Federation of American Scientists]].<ref name=":31" /> In response to a question in 2010 about whether WikiLeaks would release information that he knew might get someone killed, Assange said that he had instituted a "harm-minimization policy." This policy meant that people named in some documents might be contacted before publication to warn them, but that there were also times were members of WikiLeaks might have "blood on our hands."<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> One member of WikiLeaks told [[The New Yorker]] they were initially uncomfortable with Assange's editorial policy, but changed her mind because she thought no one had been unjustly harmed.<ref name="Khatchdourian" /> When asked to join their initial advisory board, [[Steven Aftergood]] of the [[Federation of American Scientists]] declined and told TIME that "they have a very idealistic view of the nature of leaking and its impact. They seem to think that most leakers are crusading do-gooders who are single-handedly battling one evil empire or another."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Schmidt |first=Tracy Samantha |date=2007-01-22 |title=A Wiki for Whistle-Blowers |newspaper=Time |url=http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1581189,00.html |access-date=2016-04-13 |issn=0040-781X}}</ref> Aftergood has opined that WikiLeaks "does not respect the rule of law nor does it honor the rights of individuals." Aftergood went on to state that WikiLeaks engages in unrestrained disclosure of non-governmental secrets without compelling public policy reasons and that many anti-corruption activists were opposed to the site's activities.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Aftergood |first=Steven |author-link=Steven Aftergood |date=28 June 2010 |title=Wikileaks Fails "Due Diligence" Review |url=https://fas.org/blog/secrecy/2010/06/wikileaks_review.html |access-date=18 December 2010 |work=Secrecy News |publisher=[[Federation of American Scientists]]}}</ref> In 2010, [[Amnesty International]] joined several other human rights groups in strongly requesting that WikiLeaks redact the names of Afghan civilians working as U.S. military informants from files they had released, in order to protect them from repercussions. Julian Assange responded by offering Amnesty International the opportunity to assist in the tedious document vetting process. When Amnesty International appeared to express reservations in accepting the offer, Assange stated that he had "no time to deal with people who prefer to do nothing but cover their asses."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Whalen |first=Jeanne |date=9 August 2010 |title=Human Rights Groups Press WikiLeaks Over Data - WSJ.com |work=The Wall Street Journal |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703428604575419580947722558 |access-date=1 December 2010}}</ref> In an August 2010 open letter, the non-governmental organisation [[Reporters Without Borders]] praised WikiLeaks' past usefulness in exposing "serious violations of human rights and civil liberties" but criticised the group over a perceived absence of editorial control, stating "Journalistic work involves the selection of information. The argument with which you defend yourself, namely that WikiLeaks is not made up of journalists, is not convincing."<ref name=":50">{{Cite web |title=Reporters Sans Frontières – Open letter to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange: ''A bad precedent for the Internet's future'' |url=http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open-letter-to-wikileaks-founder-12-08-2010,38130.html |access-date=1 December 2010 |publisher=En.rsf.org |archive-date=28 March 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328200448/http://en.rsf.org/united-states-open-letter-to-wikileaks-founder-12-08-2010%2C38130.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> WikiLeaks has published individuals' [[Social Security number]]s, medical information, and credit card numbers.<ref name=":12" /> An analysis by the [[Associated Press]] found that WikiLeaks had in one of its mass-disclosures published "the personal information of hundreds of people – including sick children, rape victims and mental health patients".<ref name=":12" /> WikiLeaks has named teenage rape victims, and outed an individual arrested for homosexuality in Saudi Arabia.<ref name=":12" /> Some of WikiLeaks' cables "described patients with psychiatric conditions, seriously ill children or refugees".<ref name=":12" /> An analysis of WikiLeaks' Saudi cables "turned up more than 500 passport, identity, academic or employment files ... three dozen records pertaining to family issues in the cables – including messages about marriages, divorces, missing children, elopements and custody battles. Many are very personal, like the marital certificates that proclaims whether the bride was a virgin. Others deal with Saudis who are deeply in debt, including one man who says his wife stole his money. One divorce document details a male partner's infertility. Others identify the partners of women suffering from sexually transmitted diseases including HIV and Hepatitis C."<ref name=":12" /> Two individuals named in the DNC leaks were targeted by identity thieves following WikiLeaks' release of their Social Security and credit card information.<ref name=":12" /> In its leak of DNC e-mails, WikiLeaks revealed the details of an ordinary staffer's suicide attempt and brought attention to it through a tweet.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://fortune.com/2016/10/13/hacked-private-emails/ |title=Publishing Hacked Private Emails Can Be a Slippery Slope |website=Fortune|access-date=6 May 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.buzzfeed.com/zeyneptufekci/dear-france-you-just-got-hacked-dont-make-the-same-mistakes |title=Dear France: You Just Got Hacked. Don't Make The Same Mistakes We Did. |work=BuzzFeed|access-date=6 May 2017 |language=en}}</ref> WikiLeaks' publishing of Sony's hacked e-mails drew criticism for violating the privacy of Sony's employees and for failing to be in the public interest.<ref name=":13">{{Cite news |url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2015/04/24/wikileaks-and-media-shrinking-our-zone-privacy/6emuRl1zP4Iyl2frKo46uK/story.html |title=Wikileaks has done far more damage to privacy than the NSA |author=Michael A. Cohen |work=[[The Boston Globe]]|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref><ref name=":32">{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/03/wikileaks-privacy-julian-assange-celebrity-scandal |title=Civil liberties gurus happy to invade the privacy of others |date=2 May 2015 |work=The Guardian|access-date=6 January 2017 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> [[Michael A. Cohen]], a fellow at the [[The Century Foundation|Century Foundation]], argues that "data dumps like these represent a threat to our already shrinking zone of privacy."<ref name=":13" /> He noted that the willingness of WikiLeaks to publish information of this type encourages hacking and cyber theft: "With ready and willing amplifiers, what's to deter the next cyberthief from stealing a company's database of information and threatening to send it to Wikileaks if a list of demands aren't met?"<ref name=":13" /> The [[Sunlight Foundation]], a nonprofit that advocates for open government, has criticised WikiLeaks for inadequate curation of its content and for "weaponised transparency," writing that with the DNC leaks, "Wikileaks again failed the due diligence review we expect of putatively journalistic entities when it published the personal information of ordinary citizens, including passport and Social Security numbers contained in the hacked emails of Democratic National Committee staff. We are not alone in raising ethical questions about Wikileaks' shift from whistleblower to platform for weaponised transparency. Any organisation that 'doxxes' a public is harming privacy."<ref name=":14">{{cite web |url=https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/07/28/on-weaponized-transparency/ |title=On weaponized transparency |authors=Alex Howard & John Wonderlich |date=28 July 2016 |publisher=Sunlight Foundation}}</ref> The manner in which WikiLeaks publishes content can have the effect of censoring political enemies: "Wikileaks' indiscriminate disclosure in this case is perhaps the closest we've seen in reality to the bogeyman projected by enemies to reform — that transparency is just a Trojan Horse for chilling speech and silencing political enemies."<ref name=":14" /> In July 2016, [[Edward Snowden]] criticised WikiLeaks for insufficiently curating its content.<ref name=":8" /> When Snowden made data public, he did so by working with ''The Washington Post'', the ''Guardian'' and other news organisations, choosing only to make documents public which exposed National Security Agency surveillance programs.<ref name=":8" /> Content that compromised national security or exposed sensitive personal information was withheld.<ref name=":8" /> WikiLeaks, on the other hand, made little effort to do either, Snowden said. WikiLeaks responded by accusing Snowden of pandering to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.<ref name=":8" /> At the same time, [[Glenn Greenwald]] criticized WikiLeaks for refusing to redact, telling [[Slate (magazine)|Slate]] "I definitely do not agree with that approach and think that they can be harmful to innocent people or other individuals in ways that I don’t think is acceptable."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chotiner |first=Isaac |date=2016-07-28 |title=Is the Attempt to Link Trump and Putin a New McCarthyism? |url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/07/glenn-greenwald-on-donald-trump-the-dnc-hack-and-a-new-mccarthyism.html |access-date=2022-09-15 |website=Slate Magazine |language=en}}</ref> In January 2017, the WikiLeaks Task Force, a Twitter account associated with WikiLeaks,<ref name=":19">{{Cite news |url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/01/06/wikileaks-threatens-publish-twitter-users-personal-info/96254138/ |title=WikiLeaks threatens to publish Twitter users' personal info |author=Jessica Guynn |date=6 January 2017 |work=USA Today}}</ref> proposed the creation of a database to track verified Twitter users, including sensitive personal information on individuals' homes, families and finances.<ref name=":19" /><ref name=":18">{{Cite news |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-wikileaks-tracking-verified-twitter-20170106-story.html |title=WikiLeaks proposes tracking verified Twitter users' homes, families and finances |last=Fung |first=Brian |work=Chicago Tribune|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://thehill.com/policy/technology/313071-wikileaks-floats-creating-database-of-twitter-users-personal-data |title=WikiLeaks floats creating database of Twitter users' personal data |last=Mali |first=Meghashyam |date=6 January 2017 |work=The Hill|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref> According to the ''Chicago Tribune'', "the proposal faced a sharp and swift backlash as technologists, journalists and security researchers slammed the idea as a 'sinister' and dangerous abuse of power and privacy."<ref name=":18" /> ===Internal conflicts and lack of transparency=== In January 2007, [[Cryptome|John Young]] quit the advisory board and accused the group of being a CIA conduit. He published 150 pages of WikiLeaks emails.<ref name=":502"/> In a 2010 interview with [[CNET.com]] Young accused the group of a lack of transparency regarding their fundraising and financial management. He went on to state his belief that WikiLeaks could not guarantee whistleblowers the anonymity or confidentiality they claimed and that he "would not trust them with information if it had any value, or if it put me at risk or anyone that I cared about at risk."<ref>{{Cite web |last=McCullagh |first=Declan |date=20 July 2010 |title=Wikileaks' estranged co-founder becomes a critic (Q&A) &#124; Privacy Inc. – CNET News |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html |access-date=1 December 2010 |publisher=News.cnet.com |archive-date=30 November 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101130065550/http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> He later became supportive of the group again.<ref name=":502"/> Within WikiLeaks, there has been public disagreement between founder and spokesperson Julian Assange and [[Daniel Domscheit-Berg]], the website's former German representative who was suspended by Assange. Domscheit-Berg announced on 28 September 2010 that he was leaving the organisation due to internal conflicts over management of the website.<ref name="bates">{{cite news |url=http://www.aolnews.com/2010/09/28/wikileaks-woes-grow-as-spokesman-quits-site/ |title=WikiLeaks' Woes Grow as Spokesman Quits Site |author=Bates, Theunis |date=28 September 2010 |work=AOL News|access-date=22 October 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209122932/http://www.aolnews.com/2010/09/28/wikileaks-woes-grow-as-spokesman-quits-site/ |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.physorg.com/news205093515.html |title=WikiLeaks chief lashes out at media during debate |last=Satter |first=Raphael G. |date=30 September 2010 |publisher=PhysOrg.com|access-date=22 October 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101020041136/http://www.physorg.com/news205093515.html |archive-date=20 October 2010 |url-status=live |agency=Associated Press}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/09/28/businessinsider-wikileaks-spokesman-quits.DTL |title=WikiLeaks Spokesman Quits, Blasts Founder Julian Assange As Paranoid Control Freak, Admits To Using Fake Name |last=Blodget |first=Henry |date=28 September 2010 |work=San Francisco Chronicle|access-date=12 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120306180126/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/09/28/businessinsider-wikileaks-spokesman-quits.DTL |archive-date=6 March 2012 |url-status=live |author-link=Henry Blodget }}</ref> [[File:Assange Domscheit-Berg.jpg|thumb|Julian Assange (left) with Daniel Domscheit-Berg who was ejected from WikiLeaks and started a rival "[[whistleblower]]" organisation named OpenLeaks.]] On 25 September 2010, after being suspended by Assange for "disloyalty, insubordination and destabilisation", Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the German spokesman for WikiLeaks, told ''[[Der Spiegel]]'' that he was resigning, saying "WikiLeaks has a structural problem. I no longer want to take responsibility for it, and that's why I am leaving the project."<ref name="spiegel20100927">{{cite news |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,719619,00.html |title=WikiLeaks Spokesman Quits |date=27 September 2010 |work=Spiegel International |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101130022133/http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0%2C1518%2C719619%2C00.html |archive-date=30 November 2010 |url-status=live |place=Hamburg }}</ref><ref name="wikileaksrevolt">{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/wikileaks-revolt/ |title=Unpublished Iraq War Logs Trigger Internal WikiLeaks Revolt |author=Poulsen, Kevin |date=27 September 2010 |magazine=Wired|access-date=14 February 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131020030321/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/wikileaks-revolt |archive-date=20 October 2013 |url-status=live |author2=Zetter, Kim |place=New York}}</ref> Assange accused Domscheit-Berg of leaking information to ''[[Newsweek]]'', with Domscheit-Berg claiming that the WikiLeaks team was unhappy with Assange's management and handling of the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghan war]] document releases.<ref name="wikileaksrevolt" /> Daniel Domscheit-Berg wanted greater transparency in the articles released to the public. Another vision of his was to focus on providing technology that allowed whistle-blowers to protect their identity as well as a more transparent way of communicating with the media, forming new partnerships and involving new people.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1103/S00288/interview-with-daniel-domscheidt-berg-of-open-leaks.htm |title=Interview with Daniel Domscheidt-Berg of Open Leaks |last=Jon |first=Stephenson |date=29 March 2011 |website=Scoop Independent News|access-date=25 March 2015}}</ref> Domscheit-Berg left with a small group to start [[OpenLeaks]], a new leak organisation and website with a different management and distribution philosophy.<ref name="spiegel20100927" /><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/10/former-wikileaks-worker-rival-site-under-way/ |title=Former WikiLeaks worker: Rival site under way |last=Nordstrom |first=Louise |date=10 December 2010 |work=[[The Washington Times]]|access-date=13 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131025045922/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/10/former-wikileaks-worker-rival-site-under-way/ |archive-date=25 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> While leaving, Daniel Domscheit-Berg copied and then deleted roughly 3,500 unpublished documents from the WikiLeaks servers,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/02/10/germany.openleaks.wikileaks/index.html |title=WikiLeaks defector blasts Assange in book – CNN |date=12 February 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022023545/http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/02/10/germany.openleaks.wikileaks/index.html |archive-date=22 October 2013 |url-status=live}}. Edition.cnn.com. Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref> including information on the US government's 'no-fly list' and inside information from 20 right-wing organisations, and according to a WikiLeaks statement, 5&nbsp;gigabytes of data relating to Bank of America, the internal communications of 20 neo-Nazi organisations and US intercept information for "over a hundred Internet companies".<ref name="BBC_14616899">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14616899 |title=Ex-Wikileaks man 'deleted files' |date=22 August 2011 |work=BBC News|access-date=3 December 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131020210919/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14616899 |archive-date=20 October 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref> Assange stated that Domscheit-Berg had deleted video files of the [[Granai airstrike|Granai massacre]] by a US Bomber. WikiLeaks had scheduled the video for publication before its deletion.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Dorling |first1=Philip |title=WikiLeaks has more US secrets, Assange says |url=https://www.theage.com.au/national/wikileaks-has-more-us-secrets-assange-says-20130305-2fihd.html |access-date=16 June 2021 |work=The Age |date=5 March 2013 |language=en}}</ref> In Domscheit-Berg's book he wrote: "To this day, we are waiting for Julian to restore security, so that we can return the material to him, which was on the submission platform."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/wikileaks-book/all/1 |title=WikiLeaks Defector Slams Assange in Tell-All Book Threat Level |last=Zetter |first=Kim |date=10 February 2011 |magazine=Wired |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209220641/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/02/wikileaks-book/all/1 |archive-date=9 February 2014 |url-status=live}}. Wired.com (10 February 2011). Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref> In August 2011, Domscheit-Berg claimed he permanently deleted the files "in order to ensure that the sources are not compromised."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,781581,00.html |title=Assange Battle Escalates: Ex-Wikileaks Spokesman Destroyed Unpublished Files – SPIEGEL ONLINE – News – International |newspaper=Der Spiegel |date=22 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110830185102/http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0%2C1518%2C781581%2C00.html |archive-date=30 August 2011 |url-status=live }}. Spiegel.de. Retrieved 22 November 2011.</ref> Herbert Snorrason, a 25-year-old Icelandic university student, resigned after he challenged Assange on his decision to suspend Domscheit-Berg and was bluntly rebuked.<ref name="wikileaksrevolt" /> Iceland MP [[Birgitta Jónsdóttir]] also left WikiLeaks, citing lack of transparency, lack of structure, and poor communication flow in the organisation.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/15/qa-former-wikileaks-spokeswoman-birgitta-jonsdottir/ |title=Q&A: Former WikiLeaks spokeswoman Birgitta Jonsdottir |author=McMahon, Tamsin |date=17 January 2011 |work=National Post|access-date=14 February 2011 |archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20110220142821/http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/15/qa-former-wikileaks-spokeswoman-birgitta-jonsdottir/ |archive-date=20 February 2011 |url-status=live |place=Toronto}}</ref> According to the British newspaper, ''[[The Independent]]'', at least a dozen key supporters of WikiLeaks left the website during 2010.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/secret-war-at-the-heart-of-wikileaks-2115637.html |title=Secret war at the heart of Wikileaks |last=Taylor |first=Jerome |date=25 October 2010 |work=The Independent |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140312085337/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/online/secret-war-at-the-heart-of-wikileaks-2115637.html |archive-date=12 March 2014 |url-status=dead |place=London}}</ref> ====Non-disclosure agreements==== Those working for WikiLeaks are reportedly required to sign sweeping [[non-disclosure agreement]]s covering all conversations, conduct, and material, with Assange having sole power over disclosure.<ref name=":6">{{Cite news |url=https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/heres-what-i-learned-about-julian-assange |title=Here's What I Learned About Julian Assange While Working Alongside Him |work=BuzzFeed|access-date=23 October 2016}}</ref> The penalty for non-compliance in one such agreement was reportedly £12&nbsp;million.<ref name=":6" /> WikiLeaks has been challenged for this practice, as it is seen to be hypocritical for an organisation dedicated to transparency to limit the transparency of its inner workings and limit the [[accountability]] of powerful individuals in the organisation.<ref name=":6" /><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/2011/05/nda-wikileaks/ |title=WikiLeaks Threatens Its Own Leakers With $20 Million Penalty |last=Poulsen |first=Kevin |magazine=Wired|access-date=23 October 2016 |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/may/12/wikileaks-confidentiality-agreement-julian-assange |title=WikiLeaks, get out of the gagging game |date=12 May 2011 |work=The Guardian|access-date=23 October 2016 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> [[File:Bilbao - Ribera de Deusto 04.JPG|thumb|upright=.75|[[Graffiti]] in [[Bilbao]] "We want to know."]] ===Public positions taken by politicians concerning WikiLeaks=== In 2010, after WikiLeaks' release of classified U.S. government documents leaked by [[Chelsea Manning]], then [[Vice President of the United States|U.S. Vice President]] [[Joe Biden]] was asked whether he saw Assange as closer to a high-tech terrorist than to [[Pentagon Papers]] whistleblower [[Daniel Ellsberg]]. Biden responded that he "would argue it is closer to being a high-tech terrorist than the Pentagon Papers". Biden said Assange "has done things that have damaged and put in jeopardy the lives and occupations of people in other parts of the world."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/19/assange-high-tech-terrorist-biden | title=Julian Assange like a hi-tech terrorist, says Joe Biden | first=Ewen | last=MacAskill | work=The Guardian | date=19 December 2010 | access-date=23 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/assange-is-a-hi-tech-terrorist-says-biden-2164988.html | work=The Independent | title=Assange is a 'hi-tech terrorist', says Biden | first=David | last=Usborne | date=20 December 2010 | access-date=23 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.apnews.com/503474636dab425d80eab46f7bc655fa | title=Analysis: WikiLeaks founder unlikely to be extradited soon | first=Raphael | last=Satter | date=11 April 2019 | access-date=23 April 2019}}</ref> Several Republicans who had once been highly critical of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange began to speak fondly of him after WikiLeaks published the DNC leaks and started to regularly criticise Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.<ref name=":17">{{Cite news |url=https://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/trump-assange-and-the-control-of-the-republican-mind.html |title=Donald Trump, Julian Assange, and the Control of the Republican Mind |last=Chait |first=Jonathan |work=Daily Intelligencer|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref><ref name="washingtonpost.com">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/04/how-some-republicans-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-julian-assange/ |title=How some Republicans learned to stop worrying and love Julian Assange |newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref> Having called WikiLeaks "disgraceful" in 2010, President-elect Donald Trump praised WikiLeaks in October 2016, saying, "I love WikiLeaks."<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300327-trump-i-love-wikileaks |title=Trump: 'I love WikiLeaks' |last=Master |first=Cyra |date=10 October 2016 |work=The Hill|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/04/politics/kfile-trump-wikileaks/index.html |title=Trump in 2010: WikiLeaks 'disgraceful,' there 'should be like death penalty or something' |first=Andrew |last=Kaczynski |publisher=CNN|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref> In 2019, Trump said "I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It's not my thing."<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.democracynow.org/2019/4/12/headlines/trump_claims_i_know_nothing_about_wikileaks_despite_praising_site_repeatedly_in_2016 |title = Trump Claims "I Know Nothing About WikiLeaks" Despite Praising Site Repeatedly in 2016|website = [[Democracy Now!]]}}</ref> Newt Gingrich, who called for Assange to be "treated as an enemy combatant" in 2010, praised him as a "down to Earth, straight forward interviewee" in 2017.<ref name=":17" /> [[Sean Hannity]], who had in 2010 said that Assange waged a "war" on the United States, praised him in 2016 for showing "how corrupt, dishonest and phony our government is".<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/> Sarah Palin, who had in 2010 described Assange as an "anti-American operative with blood on his hands", praised Assange in 2017.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/04/politics/donald-trump-julian-assange-sarah-palin/index.html |title=Trump, Palin break with GOP, warm up to Assange |author1=David Wright |author2=Eugene Scott |publisher=CNN|access-date=6 January 2017}}</ref> [[Tulsi Gabbard]] spoke of the "chilling effect on investigative journalism", first of the US government's reclassification of WikiLeaks (from "news organization" during the Obama administration to "hostile intelligence service" after the 2016 election), then of his arrest.<ref>{{cite news|work=[[heavy.com]]|title=Tulsi Gabbard: The U.S. Government's Treatment of Wikileaks Will 'Have a Chilling Effect on Investigative Reporting'|url=https://heavy.com/news/2019/03/tulsi-gabbard-wikileaks/|date=9 March 2019|access-date=21 April 2019}}</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite news|work=CNN|title=2020 Democrat says Assange arrest is 'slippery slope' for journalists, Americans|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html|author=Katie Bernard|date=11 April 2019|access-date=21 April 2019}}</ref> ===In popular culture=== * ''[[Mediastan]]'' is a documentary released in 2013, directed by [[Johannes Wahlström]], produced by [[Ken Loach]]'s company Sixteen Films and featuring the people behind WikiLeaks.<ref name="Mediastan">{{Cite web|url=https://www.wikileaks.org/Watch-MEDIASTAN.html|title=WikiLeaks - Watch MEDIASTAN|website=www.wikileaks.org}}</ref> The film debuted at the [[Raindance Film Festival]]. It was released for free online to counter ''The Fifth Estate'' which was released at the same time.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Wiseman |first1=Andreas |title=Julian Assange's WikiLeaks doc stalks The Fifth Estate |url=https://www.screendaily.com/news/julian-assanges-wikileaks-doc-stalks-the-fifth-estate/5062617.article |access-date=4 February 2021 |work=Screen |date=18 October 2013 |language=en}}</ref> * ''[[Underground: The Julian Assange Story]]'' is a biography movie of the early life of Julian Assange, directed by [[Robert Connolly]]. * The documentary ''[[We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks]]'' by director [[Alex Gibney]] premiered at the 2013 [[Sundance Film Festival]].<ref name="We Steal Secrets">{{cite web |title=We Steal Secrets: The Story of WikiLeaks |url=http://filmguide.sundance.org/film/13040/we_steal_secrets_the_story_of_wikileaks |publisher=[[Sundance Film Festival]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130820153734/http://filmguide.sundance.org/film/13040/we_steal_secrets_the_story_of_wikileaks |archive-date=20 August 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref> WikiLeaks released a complete, annotated transcript of the film prior to its release. WikiLeaks criticised the film for containing dozens of factual errors and instances of "sleight of hand". It also criticised the film's depiction of Chelsea Manning's decision to leak US military and diplomatic documents as "a failure of character, rather than a triumph of conscience".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Blagdon |first1=Jeff |title=WikiLeaks tears apart 'We Steal Secrets' documentary in full annotated transcript |url=https://www.theverge.com/2013/5/24/4361774/wikileaks-slams-we-steal-secrets-documentary-full-annotated-transcript |access-date=4 February 2021 |work=The Verge |date=24 May 2013 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="wikileaks_on_WeStealSecrets">{{Cite web|url=https://www.wikileaks.org/IMG/html/gibney-transcript.html|title=Annotated Transcript of "We Steal Secrets" by Alex Gibney|website=www.wikileaks.org}}</ref> * ''[[The Fifth Estate (film)|The Fifth Estate]]'' is a film directed by [[Bill Condon]], starring [[Benedict Cumberbatch]] as Assange. The film is based on WikiLeaks defector Domscheit-Berg's book ''Inside WikiLeaks: My Time with Julian Assange and the World's Most Dangerous Website'', as well as ''WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange's War on Secrecy'' by David Leigh and Luke Harding.<ref>{{cite news|author= Brooks, Xan |url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/mar/02/spielberg-assange-wikileaks-guardian |title=DreamWorks lines up WikiLeaks film based on Guardian book |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=2 March 2011 |access-date=29 March 2013 |location=London}}</ref> WikiLeaks leaked the full script of the film prior to its release and criticised both books on which the film was based as "inaccurate and libellous". WikiLeaks said that the film was "careful to avoid most criticism of US foreign policy actually revealed by WikiLeaks" and covered "almost none of the evidence WikiLeaks published that year of serious abuses within the US military and the State Department". It said the film contained fabrications which had the effect of obscuring the benefits of WikiLeaks' releases and demonising Assange.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/19/4747994/wikileaks-leaks-fifth-estate-script-calls-it-irresponsible|title=WikiLeaks leaks 'Fifth Estate' script, calls it 'irresponsible, counterproductive, and harmful'|last=Robertson|first=Adi|date=19 September 2013|website=The Verge|access-date=19 April 2019}}</ref><ref name="internal_memo_fifth_estate">{{Cite web|url=https://www.wikileaks.org/IMG/html/wikileaks-dreamworks-memo.html|title=The Fifth Estate|website=www.wikileaks.org}}</ref> * ''War, Lies and Videotape'' is a documentary by French directors [[Paul Moreira]] and Luc Hermann from press agency Premieres Lignes. The film was first released in France, in 2011 and then broadcast worldwide.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://variety.com/2011/tv/news/zodiak-sells-wikileaks-docu-1118035194/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407161600/http://variety.com/2011/tv/news/zodiak-sells-wikileaks-docu-1118035194/|title=Zodiak sells 'WikiLeaks' docu|first1=Elsa|last1=Keslassy|date=8 April 2011|archive-date=7 April 2014}}</ref> * ''[[The Source (oratorio)|The Source]]'' is a 2014 [[oratorio]] by [[Ted Hearne]], with a libretto by Mark Doten that features WikiLeaks document disclosures by Chelsea Manning.<ref name="nytimes-24oct2014">{{cite news |author=Zachary Woolfe |title=Shadowed, Clamoring, Blurry. And With Reason. |author-link=Zachary Woolfe|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/25/arts/the-source-an-oratorio-about-chelsea-mannings-leaks.html|access-date=25 February 2017 |work=The New York Times |date=24 October 2014}}</ref> * ''The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange'' is a 2020 documentary by Juan Passarelli.<ref>{{cite web |title=Watch: The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange |url=https://consortiumnews.com/2020/08/28/watch-the-war-on-journalism-the-case-of-julian-assange/ |publisher=Consortium News |access-date=4 February 2021 |date=28 August 2020}}</ref> * ''A Secret Australia: Revealed by the WikiLeaks Exposés'' <ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Ruby |editor1-first=Felicity |editor2-last=Cronau |editor2-first=Peter |title=A Secret Australia Revealed by the WikiLeaks Exposés |date=December 2020 |publisher=Monash University Publishing |isbn=9781925835939 |url=https://publishing.monash.edu/product/a-secret-australia/ |access-date=15 February 2021}}</ref> was published in December 2020. The book contains 18 essays by [[Julian Burnside]], [[Antony Loewenstein]], [[Scott Ludlam]], [[Helen Razer]] and others about how WikiLeaks has affected the Australian media and the Australian government's connections to the US intelligence and military industries.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Tu |first1=Jessie |title=What Assange and WikiLeaks said about Australia |url=https://www.smh.com.au/culture/books/what-assange-and-wikileaks-said-about-australia-20210129-p56xyo.html |access-date=15 February 2021 |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=3 February 2021 |language=en}}</ref> == Spin-offs == Release of United States diplomatic cables was followed by the creation of a number of other organisations based on the WikiLeaks model.<ref>{{cite news |author=Piven, Ben |date=17 December 2010 |title=Copycat WikiLeaks sites make waves&nbsp;– Features |publisher=Al Jazeera |url=http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2010/12/20101216194828514847.html |url-status=live |access-date=18 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110108150656/http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2010/12/20101216194828514847.html |archive-date=8 January 2011}}</ref> * [[OpenLeaks]] was created by a former WikiLeaks spokesperson. [[Daniel Domscheit-Berg]] said the intention was to be more transparent than WikiLeaks. OpenLeaks was supposed to start public operations in early 2011 but despite much media coverage, {{as of|2013|April|lc=y}} it is not operating.<ref>{{cite web |date=14 December 2018 |title=Official (inactive) Web site, for OpenLeaks |url=http://www.openleaks.org/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110221164331/http://www.openleaks.org/ |archive-date=21 February 2011 |access-date=14 December 2018 |publisher=OpenLeaks}}</ref> * In December 2011, WikiLeaks launched ''Friends of WikiLeaks'', a social network for supporters and founders of the website.<ref>{{cite web |date=19 December 2011 |title=Wikileaks launches Social Network |url=http://www.netzwelt.de/news/89988-wikileaks-enthuellungsplattform-gruendet-soziales-netzwerk.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140324015155/http://www.netzwelt.de/news/89988-wikileaks-enthuellungsplattform-gruendet-soziales-netzwerk.html |archive-date=24 March 2014 |access-date=24 August 2012 |publisher=Netzwelt.de}}</ref> * On 9 September 2013<ref>{{cite web |title=Vanaf vandaag: anoniem lekken naar media via doorgeefluik Publeaks |url=http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2694/Tech-Media/article/detail/3506349/2013/09/09/Vanaf-vandaag-anoniem-lekken-naar-media-via-doorgeefluik-Publeaks.dhtml |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131008173321/http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2694/Tech-Media/article/detail/3506349/2013/09/09/Vanaf-vandaag-anoniem-lekken-naar-media-via-doorgeefluik-Publeaks.dhtml |archive-date=8 October 2013 |access-date=22 February 2014 |website=De Volkskrant}}</ref> a number of major Dutch media outlets supported the launch of Publeaks, which provides a secure website for people to leak documents to the media using the [[GlobaLeaks]] whistleblowing software.<ref>{{cite web |title=Handling ethical problems in counterterrorism An inventory of methods to support ethical decisionmaking |url=https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR200/RR251/RAND_RR251.pdf |access-date=24 February 2014 |publisher=RAND Corporation}}</ref> * RuLeaks was launched in December 2010 to translate and mirror publications by WikiLeaks. In January 2011, it started to publish its own content as well.<ref>{{cite news |author=Razumovskaya, Olga |date=21 January 2011 |title=Russia's Own WikiLeaks Takes Off |work=The Moscow Times |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2011/01/20/russias-own-wikileaks-takes-off-a4391 |url-status=live |access-date=21 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209151358/http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russias-own-wikileaks-takes-off/429370.html |archive-date=9 February 2014}}</ref> * Leakymails is a project designed to obtain and publish relevant documents exposing corruption of the political class and the powerful in [[Argentina]].<ref>{{cite news |date=11 August 2011 |title=Argentina: Judge orders all ISPs to block corruption reporting website |url=http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2011/08/argentina-judge-orders-all-isps-to-block-corruption-reporting-website/ |url-status=live |access-date=11 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121127154425/http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2011/08/argentina-judge-orders-all-isps-to-block-corruption-reporting-website/ |archive-date=27 November 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=11 August 2011 |title=Argentina: Judge orders all ISPs to block the sites LeakyMails.com and Leakymails.blogspot.com |url=http://opennet.net/blog/2011/08/argentina-judge-orders-all-isps-block-sites-leakymailscom-and-leakymailsblogspotcom/ |url-status=live |access-date=11 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105224031/https://opennet.net/blog/2011/08/argentina-judge-orders-all-isps-block-sites-leakymailscom-and-leakymailsblogspotcom |archive-date=5 November 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=19 August 2011 |title=Argentine ISPs Use Bazooka to Kill Fly |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/argentina-isps-ip-overblocking |url-status=live |access-date=19 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105224323/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/argentina-isps-ip-overblocking |archive-date=5 November 2013}}</ref> *[[Distributed Denial of Secrets]] is a [[whistleblower]] site founded in 2018. Sometimes referred to as an alternative to WikiLeaks, it's best known for its publication of a large collection of internal police documents, known as [[BlueLeaks]]. The site has also published data on [[Russian oligarch]]s, fascist groups, [[Shell corporation|shell companies]], [[tax haven]]s, banking in the Caymans and the [[Parler#Content scraping|Parler leak]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=A new group devoted to transparency is exposing secrets Wikileaks chose to keep |url=https://www.cjr.org/tow_center/emma-best-ddosecrets.php |access-date=26 February 2021 |website=Columbia Journalism Review |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=An Embattled Group of Leakers Picks Up the WikiLeaks Mantle |language=en-us |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/story/ddosecrets-blueleaks-wikileaks/ |access-date=26 February 2021 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> ==See also== {{div col}} * [[2016 Democratic National Committee email leak]] * ''[[Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority]]'' * [[Chilling Effects]] * [[Classified information in the United States]] * [[Data activism]] * [[Digital rights]] * ''[[Democratic National Committee v. Russian Federation]]'' * [[Freedom of information]] * [[Freedom of the Press Foundation]] * [[ICWATCH]] * [[Information warfare]] * ''[[New York Times Co. v. United States]]'' * [[Open society]] * [[Pretty Good Privacy#Criminal investigation|1993 PGP criminal investigation]] * [[Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections]]{{div col end}} {{Portal bar|Internet|Freedom of speech|Politics}} ==References== {{reflist}} ==External links== {{Wikiquote}} * {{official website|https://wikileaks.org/}} * [https://couragefound.org/ Courage Foundation official website] An organisation that supports whistleblowers and political prisoners {{WikiLeaks|state=expanded}} {{National intelligence agencies}} {{Anonymous and the Internet}} {{Censorship and websites}} {{DEFAULTSORT:WikiLeaks}} [[Category:2006 establishments in Australia]] [[Category:Applications of cryptography]] [[Category:Classified documents]] [[Category:Espionage]] [[Category:Information sensitivity]] [[Category:Internet censorship by organization]] [[Category:Internet leaks]] [[Category:Internet properties established in 2006]] [[Category:Internet services shut down by a legal challenge]] [[Category:MediaWiki websites]] [[Category:National security]] [[Category:News leaks]] [[Category:Online archives]] [[Category:Online organizations]] [[Category:Open government]] [[Category:Organizations associated with Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections]] [[Category:Organizations established in 2006]] [[Category:Whistleblowing]] [[Category:WikiLeaks| ]]'