Interlinear ...
All the world for days and its founder, Julian Assange'ı discussing WikiLeaks'i. The news, leaked documents from the scandals that are read, deals with different dimensions. Of course, in this process, WikiLeaks'in journalism, does his espionage, a very large denilemeyeceği Assange'a denilip journalist launched an international media debate. If Assange, themselves, direct their resources to reach the 'scientific journalism' is an important representative of the claim. That will be the subject of this week, we discussed the future of journalism and flaming with WikiLeaks'le. For this, the U.S. and the world's leading journalism schools at Columbia University School of Journalism Dean Nicholas Lemann talked with. Lemann Professor at the same time the most prestigious journalism at Columbia University and the United States hosted the Pulitzer Prize selection committee member.
The most controversial WikiLeaks last few weeks and leaked documents. The content of documents to, foreign policy, the U.S. image can have effect, and how the issues discussed between the future of journalism. All these questions concerning the Faculty of Journalism of Columbia University Dean of the United States. Lemann'a asked, Nicolas. Professor of journalism and politics Lemann'ın AKŞAM'a his assessments on the following:
- Published by WikiLeaks site for some time because of the secret American documents to occupy the agenda of the world's media. Site itself is a part of the media and 'scientific journalism' pioneer sees. You are one of the world's most important schools of journalism and dean of the Pulitzer Prize selection committee based in the United States as a noun though WikiLeaks'i Pulitzer awards such as the Internet may request a nature as a structure in the field of journalism do you see?
I yönetmiyor program and policy, the Pulitzer Prize, but I belirlemiyorum kurulundayım selective. This is just my personal opinion I'll say so. Having said that, you know the terms of participation in writing on the site. WikiLeaks he wants to show you a candidate in this regard, may I think. Of course, being a candidate, there is a big difference between win.
- What they do journalism?
Pulitzer'le about my quest to set aside, if I only respond to you as Dean of the Faculty of Journalism, I do not think that WikiLeaks'in professional journalism. WikiLeaks, journalists and media institutions, the website provides the pure material, but it passed by hand to reach the public are not in a journalistic effort. Internet site, put a professional journalistic activity, considered as a pure material. Here we look at what happened, dozens of resources in a single key press, the U.S. government is sending confidential documents Assange'a. Assange'da press another button, all the raw documents 'available' are making. Them in any way interpret, analyze and provide communication between the public documents, I think just is not journalism. This is just a part of ürecin. Document to provide pure, this is pure there is a big difference between the documents to produce news or analysis. NY Times, for example, does not do journalism, but if you look at what WikiLeaks, teams sit down and read, classified, haberleştiriyorlar. They have done in journalism. So here is the only first-hand sources provides WikiLeaks reporters. For this reason, I can not say they do journalism.
ONLY 'SOURCE' MAY BE
- WikiLeaks'in publish the document in this way, together with comments as well as being the birthplace of a new form of journalism. Do you think this event will change the parameters of journalism is still a big turning point?
I am deeply affect anything that would lead to journalism, I do not think will change the parameters by the profession. Because, if you are trying to institute a news, WikiLeaks'teki a full document, such as thinking that you try to deliver news you'll see a lot of professional people throughout your life. Therefore, for the first time that journalists do not live. WikiLeaks'in news organizations in the world forever, so I do not think they would dominate. This is definitely an interesting process, but I think it will be the turning point in the sector. If you are in the middle 10 WikiLeaks site, of course, will be important for journalists to get their information. Will be the source. But news organizations have different values. Journalism is not only the transfer of the document. Behind every story there is almost a kind of documentation already.
WikiLeaks'LER INCREASE
- Do you think these sites do not increase gradually? Then change the root cause of journalism that will inevitably do in the coming period açmayacaklar?
Yes, we live in the age of online media Given the fact that, probably by unprocessed documents such web sites will increase. But this is still completely change the industry. In fact, if we look at what he did here in the hands of so many documents in the Assange'nın such a concern is understandable I think there is very significant. Because Assange 'have in my hand all these documents, do not care about all of them publish on the Internet, will end' did not say. First, according to the directions of major media organizations knocked on the door, and they gradually began to publish the document. This process is carried out with the support of these institutions. I think this is a very important sector in terms of evidence of how it will function.
Leaked forgotten DOCUMENT AUTHORS
- Those in the U.S. to leak confidential documents how it will affect the next time you think diplomacy?
After a while I do not think too much influence unutulacaktır. I'm such a little yatışıp mess, the U.S. Ambassador in over 5 years later, the President of Turkey is to check the 'remember WikiLeaks'i, sincere and open konuşmayayım' I do not think I would consider. This process can not go like this forever. In addition, a very long time WikiLeaks'in many reasons I do not think that it is today effectively remain standing. In addition, the U.S. government already 'lower-level Pentagon officials not see the documents' he began to take precautions. Therefore, the risk of leakage will fall, when I moved over time people will forget and will not be long-term residual effect.
THEY IS NOT THE SECRETS embarrassing
- Julian Assange'ın to publish final documents after the start of the arrest of alleged sexual harassment as a political event, do you see?
I'm not an expert in the Swedish government's legal system. But so far the same offense must look at how many people have received the penalty. If you are not too much, you probably can think politically.
- You know you're doing work kapamlı at about the history of the United States. Open secret correspondence of diplomats in this way, the most embarrassing diplomatic incident in the United States do?
No, no, no, never. It was a lot like American history. Many countries in the United States was on such leaks, and much more, as was travmatikleri. This is not the most terrible. Learned that the U.S. atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets in the 1940s, and this event is all politics, foreign policy has changed in that period. WikiLeaks'in today, so they created a lot more trauma.
USA TRUCK FOR LEAK
- Why the U.S. constantly exposed to them?
Full of history and the fact that this kind of diplomacy sızıntılarla I do not think the U.S. lived in it more. For people to make a country strong in terms of leakage should be more attractive than, for example with China have the chance of leaking the document to be a more democratic system.
TRANSPARENCY VICTORY
- Do you see this as a triumph of transparency in what happened?
Actually, yes. What is still open to the public, is experiencing a big debate about what should not. Many people do not trust the media world, you can now say that they want to read the original documents, participate in conferences. This has satisfied them.
- Assange for the political actors, such as the definitions of the anarchist who have cuts. How do you define Assange'ı?
I can not say he was doing spying. No one seems to carry information. Just open the secret information to the public. There are dozens of such a controversial source working for one of the big newspapers. They are not actually make ends transparency. Rather they see the wrong they resort to some of the actions set out to change this. This is the motivation for almost all of them.
OBAMA'S NORMAL remain silent
- Do you think President Obama is busy with it all over the world why so quiet? To date, no explanation on the subject have not heard of him in front of the cameras. Why do you think?
This does not surprise me at all. Every day, thousands of things not happening? What causes one to respond and make comments on the event, that will make larger. I'm sure every day consultants' Do you talk to the President on it, do not speak? " he thinks. But so far said nothing. The reason for this is that probably will add düşünmemişlerdir comments. However what we will win? Voltage is low, but they said this is a very big event, at least görememişlerdir benefits. I do not think I'm going to say something too.
No comments:
Post a Comment