Conclusion

WikiLeaks will always be a subject of controversy in the many different categories that it can fall under. For starters, the website’s ability to escape the law by uploading information through different countries servers is genius and in the United States in using the First Amendment to shield itself from the Espionage Act of 1917. Ironically, the site lead to a proposed amendment to fix this loophole called the Shield Bill. WikiLeaks has also been mentioned in conversations regarding whether it was ethical for governments to censor, as has been done before in American history, the site due to potentially harmful classified information. The website also has people questioning their journalist morals to either publish compelling news stories with WikiLeaks as a source or not to because they don’t have the adequate resources to verify if the information provided is accurate. Social issues have been synonymous with the site as well, regarding the suppression of freedom of speech when it is clear that censorship could affect social medias, an expanding method to communicate information quickly. The controversies overshadow the benefits that WikiLeaks has enabled, helping citizens gain confidence in their governments through reassurance. Whether this website continues in the future or is ultimately shut down, its existence has seen controversies that polarized countries in a positive manner.

WikiLeaks Pros

• It is valuable to public understanding
• Helped reveal marked flaws in the U.S.'s security so in turn the government could make improvements
• The readers of its content find it fulfilling when government representatives' official statements coincide with their true motive and actions

• Legal
  • Was threatened with legal action by U.S. but couldn't be summoned to court because the First Amendment protected it
  • U.S. trying to customize an amendment (SHIELD bill) to punish those related to WikiLeaks
• Has brought about discussions of government cencorship which caused an uproar from people feeling that it'd be a violation of one of their freedoms and has media outlets questioning reliabilty of its information