Yeah, I know. A lot of us are getting paranoid - but there are a lot of reasons for moderate doses of paranoia, don't you think Networkers? Anyway, in the USA they are exhibiting massive, nay I should say extreme, rather than moderate doses of paranoia. When we get to keeping Twitter categorisation honest we could be accused of paranoia, but geeks and WikiLeaks go hand in hand and the whole point of being a geek is that you pay attention to technical detail. I am certainly no geek so in the Blogosphere and Twitterverse I am, from time to time, dependent upon their ideas, work, and suppositions.
So it is that I want to share with you something from safety first. A lot of work lies behind the post, Twitter is censoring the discussion of #Wikileaks. Take a look, Networkers, especially if you Tweet. Firstly, it must be said that Twitter deny any form of censorship. But even non-Geeks can get the drift - if not the detail - of the post.
Why bother, one might ask? At the moment, in case you haven't noticed, here in the Land of Oz people are counting. They are counting responses to newspaper polls; comments on articles; comments on blog posts. And there are many in these categories chalking up huge numbers - most in support of Julian Assange and Wikileaks. So, if organisations such as Twitter are not providing clear and accurate data, people notice. Governments notice. And people who support Freedom of Information/Wikileaks/Assange in Australia are watching the numbers and watching the response of the Gillard Government to how our Australian citizen, Julian Assange, is being treated. To be sure, the Gillard Government is not letting the responses to newspaper polls; comments on articles; comments on blog posts go unremarked.
The USA might be watching how its allies - such as Australia - respond to the Assange/WikiLeaks controversy. It is clear that Aussies are watching how their government responds to an Australian citizen being harassed by the US Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment
This blog does not take Anonymous comments. Experience shows that comments cluttered with "Anonymous" are boring and people don't know whether "Anonymous" is one person or many. This is not a decision about freedom of speech. It is a decision about boring or unwillingness to be known by even a pseudonym.