sponsored links
TEDGlobal 2010

Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks

July 16, 2010

The controversial website WikiLeaks collects and posts highly classified documents and video. Founder Julian Assange, who's reportedly being sought for questioning by US authorities, talks to TED's Chris Anderson about how the site operates, what it has accomplished -- and what drives him. The interview includes graphic footage of a recent US airstrike in Baghdad.

Julian Assange - Whistleblower
Internet activist Julian Assange serves as spokesperson for WikiLeaks, a controversial, volunteer-driven website that publishes and comments on leaked documents alleging government and corporate misconduct. Full bio

sponsored links
Double-click the English subtitles below to play the video.
Chris Anderson: Julian, welcome.
00:15
It's been reported that WikiLeaks, your baby,
00:17
has, in the last few years
00:19
has released more classified documents
00:21
than the rest of the world's media combined.
00:24
Can that possibly be true?
00:26
Julian Assange: Yeah, can it possibly be true?
00:28
It's a worry -- isn't it? -- that the rest of the world's media
00:30
is doing such a bad job
00:33
that a little group of activists
00:35
is able to release more
00:37
of that type of information
00:39
than the rest of the world press combined.
00:41
CA: How does it work?
00:43
How do people release the documents?
00:45
And how do you secure their privacy?
00:48
JA: So these are -- as far as we can tell --
00:51
classical whistleblowers,
00:53
and we have a number of ways for them
00:55
to get information to us.
00:57
So we use this state-of-the-art encryption
00:59
to bounce stuff around the Internet, to hide trails,
01:01
pass it through legal jurisdictions
01:03
like Sweden and Belgium
01:05
to enact those legal protections.
01:08
We get information in the mail,
01:12
the regular postal mail,
01:14
encrypted or not,
01:17
vet it like a regular news organization, format it --
01:19
which is sometimes something that's quite hard to do,
01:22
when you're talking about
01:25
giant databases of information --
01:27
release it to the public
01:29
and then defend ourselves
01:31
against the inevitable legal and political attacks.
01:33
CA: So you make an effort to ensure
01:36
the documents are legitimate,
01:38
but you actually
01:40
almost never know who the identity of the source is?
01:42
JA: That's right, yeah. Very rarely do we ever know,
01:45
and if we find out at some stage
01:49
then we destroy that information as soon as possible.
01:52
(Phone ring) God damn it.
01:55
(Laughter)
01:57
CA: I think that's the CIA asking what the code is
02:01
for a TED membership.
02:03
(Laughter)
02:05
So let's take [an] example, actually.
02:08
This is something
02:10
you leaked a few years ago.
02:12
If we can have this document up ...
02:14
So this was a story in Kenya a few years ago.
02:16
Can you tell us what you leaked and what happened?
02:18
JA: So this is the Kroll Report.
02:21
This was a secret intelligence report
02:23
commissioned by the Kenyan government
02:26
after its election in 2004.
02:28
Prior to 2004, Kenya was ruled
02:31
by Daniel arap Moi
02:33
for about 18 years.
02:35
He was a soft dictator of Kenya.
02:37
And when Kibaki got into power --
02:40
through a coalition of forces that were trying
02:42
to clean up corruption in Kenya --
02:44
they commissioned this report,
02:46
spent about two million pounds
02:48
on this and an associated report.
02:50
And then the government sat on it
02:52
and used it for political leverage on Moi,
02:55
who was the richest man --
02:57
still is the richest man -- in Kenya.
02:59
It's the Holy Grail of Kenyan journalism.
03:02
So I went there in 2007,
03:05
and we managed to get hold of this
03:08
just prior to the election --
03:10
the national election, December 28.
03:12
When we released that report,
03:17
we did so three days after the new president, Kibaki,
03:20
had decided to pal up with
03:23
the man that he was going to clean out,
03:25
Daniel arap Moi,
03:27
so this report then
03:29
became a dead albatross
03:32
around President Kibaki's neck.
03:34
CA: And -- I mean, to cut a long story short --
03:38
word of the report leaked into Kenya,
03:41
not from the official media, but indirectly,
03:44
and in your opinion, it actually shifted the election.
03:47
JA: Yeah. So this became front page of the Guardian
03:50
and was then printed in all the surrounding countries of Kenya,
03:53
in Tanzanian and South African press.
03:56
And so it came in from the outside.
03:59
And that, after a couple of days,
04:01
made the Kenyan press feel safe to talk about it.
04:03
And it ran for 20 nights straight on Kenyan TV,
04:05
shifted the vote by 10 percent,
04:08
according to a Kenyan intelligence report,
04:11
which changed the result of the election.
04:13
CA: Wow, so your leak
04:15
really substantially changed the world?
04:17
JA: Yep.
04:19
(Applause)
04:21
CA: Here's -- We're going to just show
04:25
a short clip from this
04:27
Baghdad airstrike video.
04:30
The video itself is longer,
04:32
but here's a short clip.
04:34
This is -- this is intense material, I should warn you.
04:36
Radio: ... just fuckin', once you get on 'em just open 'em up.
04:39
I see your element, uh, got about four Humvees, uh, out along ...
04:42
You're clear. All right. Firing.
04:46
Let me know when you've got them. Let's shoot.
04:49
Light 'em all up.
04:52
C'mon, fire!
04:54
(Machine gun fire)
04:56
Keep shoot 'n. Keep shoot 'n.
04:59
(Machine gun fire)
05:02
Keep shoot 'n.
05:05
Hotel ... Bushmaster Two-Six, Bushmaster Two-Six,
05:08
we need to move, time now!
05:10
All right, we just engaged all eight individuals.
05:12
Yeah, we see two birds [helicopters], and we're still firing.
05:15
Roger. I got 'em.
05:18
Two-Six, this is Two-Six, we're mobile.
05:20
Oops, I'm sorry. What was going on?
05:22
God damn it, Kyle. All right, hahaha. I hit 'em.
05:24
CA: So, what was the impact of that?
05:29
JA: The impact on the people who worked on it
05:32
was severe.
05:35
We ended up sending two people to Baghdad
05:37
to further research that story.
05:39
So this is just the first of three attacks
05:41
that occurred in that scene.
05:44
CA: So, I mean, 11 people died in that attack, right,
05:46
including two Reuters employees?
05:48
JA: Yeah. Two Reuters employees,
05:50
two young children were wounded.
05:52
There were between 18 and 26 people killed all together.
05:55
CA: And releasing this caused
05:58
widespread outrage.
06:00
What was the key element of this
06:02
that actually caused the outrage, do you think?
06:04
JA: I don't know. I guess people can see
06:07
the gross disparity in force.
06:09
You have guys walking in a relaxed way down the street,
06:12
and then an Apache helicopter sitting up at one kilometer
06:14
firing 30-millimeter cannon shells
06:17
on everyone --
06:19
looking for any excuse to do so --
06:21
and killing people rescuing the wounded.
06:24
And there was two journalists involved that clearly weren't insurgents
06:26
because that's their full-time job.
06:29
CA: I mean, there's been this U.S. intelligence analyst,
06:33
Bradley Manning, arrested,
06:36
and it's alleged that he confessed in a chat room
06:38
to have leaked this video to you,
06:41
along with 280,000
06:44
classified U.S. embassy cables.
06:46
I mean, did he?
06:48
JA: We have denied receiving those cables.
06:51
He has been charged,
06:53
about five days ago,
06:55
with obtaining 150,000 cables
06:57
and releasing 50.
07:00
Now, we had released,
07:02
early in the year,
07:05
a cable from the Reykjavik U.S. embassy,
07:07
but this is not necessarily connected.
07:11
I mean, I was a known visitor of that embassy.
07:13
CA: I mean, if you did receive thousands
07:15
of U.S. embassy diplomatic cables ...
07:17
JA: We would have released them. (CA: You would?)
07:20
JA: Yeah. (CA: Because?)
07:22
JA: Well, because these sort of things
07:25
reveal what the true state
07:27
of, say,
07:30
Arab governments are like,
07:32
the true human-rights abuses in those governments.
07:34
If you look at declassified cables,
07:37
that's the sort of material that's there.
07:39
CA: So let's talk a little more broadly about this.
07:41
I mean, in general, what's your philosophy?
07:43
Why is it right
07:45
to encourage leaking of secret information?
07:47
JA: Well, there's a question as to what sort of information is important in the world,
07:51
what sort of information
07:54
can achieve reform.
07:56
And there's a lot of information.
07:58
So information that organizations
08:00
are spending economic effort into concealing,
08:02
that's a really good signal
08:05
that when the information gets out,
08:07
there's a hope of it doing some good --
08:09
because the organizations that know it best,
08:11
that know it from the inside out,
08:13
are spending work to conceal it.
08:15
And that's what we've found in practice,
08:18
and that's what the history of journalism is.
08:20
CA: But are there risks with that,
08:23
either to the individuals concerned
08:26
or indeed to society at large,
08:29
where leaking can actually have
08:31
an unintended consequence?
08:33
JA: Not that we have seen with anything we have released.
08:35
I mean, we have a harm immunization policy.
08:37
We have a way of dealing with information
08:39
that has sort of personal --
08:41
personally identifying information in it.
08:43
But there are legitimate secrets --
08:46
you know, your records with your doctor;
08:49
that's a legitimate secret --
08:52
but we deal with whistleblowers that are coming forward
08:54
that are really sort of well-motivated.
08:56
CA: So they are well-motivated.
08:59
And what would you say to, for example,
09:01
the, you know, the parent of someone
09:03
whose son is out serving the U.S. military,
09:06
and he says, "You know what,
09:09
you've put up something that someone had an incentive to put out.
09:11
It shows a U.S. soldier laughing
09:13
at people dying.
09:15
That gives the impression, has given the impression,
09:17
to millions of people around the world
09:19
that U.S. soldiers are inhuman people.
09:21
Actually, they're not. My son isn't. How dare you?"
09:23
What would you say to that?
09:25
JA: Yeah, we do get a lot of that.
09:27
But remember, the people in Baghdad,
09:29
the people in Iraq, the people in Afghanistan --
09:31
they don't need to see the video;
09:34
they see it every day.
09:36
So it's not going to change their opinion. It's not going to change their perception.
09:38
That's what they see every day.
09:41
It will change the perception and opinion
09:43
of the people who are paying for it all,
09:46
and that's our hope.
09:48
CA: So you found a way to shine light
09:51
into what you see
09:54
as these sort of dark secrets in companies and in government.
09:57
Light is good.
10:01
But do you see any irony in the fact that,
10:03
in order for you to shine that light,
10:05
you have to, yourself,
10:07
create secrecy around your sources?
10:09
JA: Not really. I mean, we don't have
10:12
any WikiLeaks dissidents yet.
10:15
We don't have sources who are dissidents on other sources.
10:19
Should they come forward, that would be a tricky situation for us,
10:23
but we're presumably acting in such a way
10:26
that people feel
10:29
morally compelled
10:31
to continue our mission, not to screw it up.
10:33
CA: I'd actually be interested, just based on what we've heard so far --
10:37
I'm curious as to the opinion in the TED audience.
10:40
You know, there might be a couple of views
10:45
of WikiLeaks and of Julian.
10:47
You know, hero -- people's hero --
10:49
bringing this important light.
10:52
Dangerous troublemaker.
10:55
Who's got the hero view?
10:58
Who's got the dangerous troublemaker view?
11:02
JA: Oh, come on. There must be some.
11:06
CA: It's a soft crowd, Julian, a soft crowd.
11:09
We have to try better. Let's show them another example.
11:11
Now here's something that you haven't yet leaked,
11:13
but I think for TED you are.
11:16
I mean it's an intriguing story that's just happened, right?
11:19
What is this?
11:21
JA: So this is a sample of what we do
11:23
sort of every day.
11:25
So late last year -- in November last year --
11:27
there was a series of well blowouts
11:30
in Albania,
11:32
like the well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico,
11:34
but not quite as big.
11:37
And we got a report --
11:39
a sort of engineering analysis into what happened --
11:42
saying that, in fact, security guards
11:45
from some rival, various competing oil firms
11:48
had, in fact, parked trucks there and blown them up.
11:51
And part of the Albanian government was in this, etc., etc.
11:55
And the engineering report
11:59
had nothing on the top of it,
12:00
so it was an extremely difficult document for us.
12:02
We couldn't verify it because we didn't know
12:04
who wrote it and knew what it was about.
12:06
So we were kind of skeptical that maybe it was
12:08
a competing oil firm just sort of playing the issue up.
12:10
So under that basis, we put it out and said,
12:12
"Look, we're skeptical about this thing.
12:14
We don't know, but what can we do?
12:16
The material looks good, it feels right,
12:18
but we just can't verify it."
12:20
And we then got a letter
12:22
just this week
12:25
from the company who wrote it,
12:28
wanting to track down the source --
12:31
(Laughter)
12:34
saying, "Hey, we want to track down the source."
12:38
And we were like, "Oh, tell us more.
12:41
What document is it, precisely, you're talking about?
12:43
Can you show that you had legal authority over that document?
12:46
Is it really yours?"
12:49
So they sent us this screen shot
12:51
with the author
12:54
in the Microsoft Word ID.
12:56
Yeah.
13:01
(Applause)
13:03
That's happened quite a lot though.
13:08
This is like one of our methods
13:10
of identifying, of verifying, what a material is,
13:12
is to try and get these guys to write letters.
13:15
CA: Yeah. Have you had information
13:17
from inside BP?
13:20
JA: Yeah, we have a lot, but I mean, at the moment,
13:22
we are undergoing a sort of serious fundraising and engineering effort.
13:25
So our publication rate
13:28
over the past few months
13:30
has been sort of minimized
13:32
while we're re-engineering our back systems
13:34
for the phenomenal public interest that we have.
13:37
That's a problem.
13:40
I mean, like any sort of growing startup organization,
13:42
we are sort of overwhelmed
13:45
by our growth,
13:47
and that means we're getting enormous quantity
13:49
of whistleblower disclosures
13:51
of a very high caliber
13:53
but don't have enough people to actually
13:55
process and vet this information.
13:57
CA: So that's the key bottleneck,
13:59
basically journalistic volunteers
14:01
and/or the funding of journalistic salaries?
14:03
JA: Yep. Yeah, and trusted people.
14:06
I mean, we're an organization
14:08
that is hard to grow very quickly
14:10
because of the sort of material we deal with,
14:12
so we have to restructure
14:14
in order to have people
14:17
who will deal with the highest national security stuff,
14:19
and then lower security cases.
14:22
CA: So help us understand a bit about you personally
14:24
and how you came to do this.
14:27
And I think I read that as a kid
14:29
you went to 37 different schools.
14:31
Can that be right?
14:34
JA: Well, my parents were in the movie business
14:36
and then on the run from a cult,
14:39
so the combination between the two ...
14:41
(Laughter)
14:43
CA: I mean, a psychologist might say
14:47
that's a recipe for breeding paranoia.
14:49
JA: What, the movie business?
14:52
(Laughter)
14:54
(Applause)
14:57
CA: And you were also -- I mean,
15:00
you were also a hacker at an early age
15:02
and ran into the authorities early on.
15:04
JA: Well, I was a journalist.
15:07
You know, I was a very young journalist activist at an early age.
15:10
I wrote a magazine,
15:12
was prosecuted for it when I was a teenager.
15:14
So you have to be careful with hacker.
15:17
I mean there's like -- there's a method
15:19
that can be deployed for various things.
15:21
Unfortunately, at the moment,
15:23
it's mostly deployed by the Russian mafia
15:25
in order to steal your grandmother's bank accounts.
15:27
So this phrase is not,
15:29
not as nice as it used to be.
15:32
CA: Yeah, well, I certainly don't think
15:34
you're stealing anyone's grandmother's bank account,
15:36
but what about
15:39
your core values?
15:41
Can you give us a sense of what they are
15:43
and maybe some incident in your life
15:46
that helped determine them?
15:48
JA: I'm not sure about the incident.
15:53
But the core values:
15:55
well, capable, generous men
15:58
do not create victims;
16:01
they nurture victims.
16:03
And that's something from my father
16:05
and something from other capable, generous men
16:07
that have been in my life.
16:10
CA: Capable, generous men do not create victims;
16:13
they nurture victims?
16:15
JA: Yeah. And you know,
16:17
I'm a combative person,
16:19
so I'm not actually so big on the nurture,
16:23
but some way --
16:25
there is another way of nurturing victims,
16:28
which is to police perpetrators
16:31
of crime.
16:34
And so that is something
16:36
that has been in my character
16:38
for a long time.
16:40
CA: So just tell us, very quickly in the last minute, the story:
16:42
what happened in Iceland?
16:45
You basically published something there,
16:48
ran into trouble with a bank,
16:51
then the news service there
16:54
was injuncted from running the story.
16:56
Instead, they publicized your side.
16:59
That made you very high-profile in Iceland. What happened next?
17:01
JA: Yeah, this is a great case, you know.
17:04
Iceland went through this financial crisis.
17:06
It was the hardest hit of any country in the world.
17:08
Its banking sector was 10 times the GDP
17:10
of the rest of the economy.
17:12
Anyway, so we release this report
17:14
in July last year.
17:17
And the national TV station was injuncted
17:20
five minutes before it went on air,
17:22
like out of a movie: injunction landed on the news desk,
17:24
and the news reader was like,
17:26
"This has never happened before. What do we do?"
17:28
Well, we just show the website instead,
17:30
for all that time, as a filler,
17:32
and we became very famous in Iceland,
17:35
went to Iceland and spoke about this issue.
17:37
And there was a feeling in the community
17:40
that that should never happen again,
17:42
and as a result,
17:44
working with Icelandic politicians
17:46
and some other international legal experts,
17:48
we put together a new sort of
17:50
package of legislation for Iceland
17:52
to sort of become an offshore haven
17:55
for the free press,
17:58
with the strongest journalistic protections in the world,
18:01
with a new Nobel Prize
18:04
for freedom of speech.
18:06
Iceland's a Nordic country,
18:08
so, like Norway, it's able to tap into the system.
18:10
And just a month ago,
18:13
this was passed by the Icelandic parliament unanimously.
18:15
CA: Wow.
18:18
(Applause)
18:20
Last question, Julian.
18:26
When you think of the future then,
18:28
do you think it's more likely to be
18:30
Big Brother exerting more control,
18:32
more secrecy,
18:34
or us watching
18:36
Big Brother,
18:38
or it's just all to be played for either way?
18:40
JA: I'm not sure which way it's going to go.
18:43
I mean, there's enormous pressures
18:45
to harmonize freedom of speech legislation
18:47
and transparency legislation around the world --
18:50
within the E.U.,
18:53
between China and the United States.
18:55
Which way is it going to go? It's hard to see.
18:57
That's why it's a very interesting time to be in --
19:00
because with just a little bit of effort,
19:02
we can shift it one way or the other.
19:04
CA: Well, it looks like I'm reflecting the audience's opinion
19:07
to say, Julian, be careful,
19:10
and all power to you.
19:12
JA: Thank you, Chris. (CA: Thank you.)
19:14
(Applause)
19:16

sponsored links

Julian Assange - Whistleblower
Internet activist Julian Assange serves as spokesperson for WikiLeaks, a controversial, volunteer-driven website that publishes and comments on leaked documents alleging government and corporate misconduct.

Why you should listen

You could say Australian-born Julian Assange has swapped his long-time interest in network security flaws for the far-more-suspect flaws of even bigger targets: governments and corporations. Since his early 20s, he has been using network technology to prod and probe the vulnerable edges of administrative systems, but though he was a computing hobbyist first (in 1991 he was the target of hacking charges after he accessed the computers of an Australian telecom), he's now taken off his "white hat" and launched a career as one of the world's most visible human-rights activists.

He calls himself "editor in chief." He travels the globe as its spokesperson. Yet Assange's part in WikiLeaks is clearly dicier than that: he's become the face of creature that, simply, many powerful organizations would rather see the world rid of. His Wikipedia entry says he is "constantly on the move," and some speculate that his role in publishing decrypted US military video has put him in personal danger. A controversial figure, pundits debate whether his work is reckless and does more harm than good. Amnesty International recognized him with an International Media Award in 2009.

Assange studied physics and mathematics at the University of Melbourne. He wrote Strobe, the first free and open-source port scanner, and contributed to the book Underground: Tales of Hacking, Madness and Obsession on the Electronic Frontier.

The original video is available on TED.com
sponsored links

If you need translations, you can install "Google Translate" extension into your Chrome Browser.
Furthermore, you can change playback rate by installing "Video Speed Controller" extension.

Data provided by TED.

This website is owned and operated by Tokyo English Network.
The developer's blog is here.