Framing Transparency in the U.S. – Cross-media Analysis of the Debate on WikiLeaks
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26481/marble.2013.v2.146Abstract
Some scholars have argued that the novelty of WikiLeaks for transparency is its usage of new technologies, acting as an example for the start of a new technological information era. Cull (2011), for instance, has argued that WikiLeaks exemplifies a “shift in power” made possible by “the technological revolution” that “has given one individual the communication power that was the monopoly of the nation state in the previous century” (pp. 2-3). As Bunz (2011) further outlines, Wikileaks shows how information from one can be send to many through the “digitalisation of knowledge” (pp. 139-140), whereby it has become easy to transport a great amount of information using minimal space. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the autopsy of data has become easy as programs help us order and analyse information. It is also an example of how the Internet has made it possible for anyone to publish and access information at any time (ibid.). In this chapter, we suggest that technology alone is insufficient to create different transparency standards and change the way politics are conducted. In line with Florini (2002), we believe that “transparency is a choice, encouraged by changing attitudes about what constitutes appropriate behavior” (p. 13). Thus, new technology must be accompanied by a change in attitudes, as “without a norm of transparency, technology will continue to protect private information as well as ferret it out” (Florini, 2002, p. 15). Studying the debate triggered by WikiLeaks presents the opportunity to examine whether its revelations have strengthened transparency in public perception, or if WikiLeaks is no more than the example of new technological means without any real impact on the discursive boundary between publicity and secrecy.
References
Assange, J. (2010). Exclusive: The Wikileaks Manifesto, by Julian Assange. Retrieved last June 4, 2012, from http://www.thecommentfactory.com/exclusive-the-wikileaks-manifestoby- julian-assange-3342/
Berridge, G. R., Keens-Soper, M. & Otte, T. G. (2001). Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger. New York: Palgrave.
Birchall, C. (2011). “There’s been too much secrecy in this city”: the false choice between secrecy and transparency in US politics. Cultural Politics, 7(1), 133-156.
Coe, K., Domke, D., Graham, E. S., Lockett-John, S., & Pickard, V. W. (2004). No Shades of Gray: The Binary Discourse of George W. Bush and an Echoing Press. Journal of Communication, 234-252.
Coombs, W.T. (2007). Protecting Organization Reputations During a Crisis: The Development and Application of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163-176.
Cull, N. J. (2011). WikiLeaks, public diplomacy 2.0 and the state of digital public diplomacy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 7(1), 1-8.
De Vreese, C. H., Peter, J. and Semetko, H. A. (2001). Framing Politics at the Launch of the Euro: A Cross-National Comparative Study of Frames in the News. Political Communication, 18(2), 107-122.
Domscheit-Berg, D. (2011). Inside WikiLeaks: Meine Zeit bei der gefährlichsten Website der Welt. Berlin: Econ Verlag.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 51-58.
Flew, T., & Liu, B. R. (2011). Globally Networked Public Spheres? The Australian Media Reaction to WikiLeaks. Global Media Journal – Australien Edition, 5(1), 1-13.
Florini, A. (2002). The End of Secrecy. In B. I. Finel & K. M. Lord (Eds.), Power and Conflict in the Age of Transparency (pp.15-28). London: Palgrave.
Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1-37.
Heald, D. (2006). Varieties of Transparency. In C. Hood & D. Heald (Eds.), Transparency – The Key to better Governance? (pp. 25-43). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Hood, C., & Heald, D. (Eds.). (2006). Transparency – The Key to better Governance?. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Hood, C. (2011). From FOI World to WikiLeaks World: A New Chapter in the Transparency Story? Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 24(4), 635-638.
Karhula, P. (2011). What is the effect of WikiLeaks for Freedom of Information? Retrieved last June 5, 2012, from -http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/what-is-the-effectof- wikileaks-for-freedom-of-information
Krotoski, A. (2011). Wikileaks and the New, Transparent World Order. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 526-530.
Lloyd, J. (2011). Excerpt from The Limits of Transparency. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 515-517.
Lord, K. (2003). War and Peace in an Age of Transparency. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 130-134.
Margetts, H. (2011). The Internet and Transparency. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 518-521.
Marsh, K. (2011). The Illusion of Transparency. The Political Quarterly, 82(4), 531-535.
Maurer, T. (2011). WikiLeaks 2010: A Glimpse of the Future? (Discussion Paper 2010-2011). Cambridge, MA, USA: Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School.
Bunz, M. (2011). Das offene Geheimnis: Zur Politik der Wahrheit im Datenjournalismus. In WikiLeaks und die Folgen: Netz – Medien – Politik. (pp. 134-151). Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag.
Nowotny, S. (2011). Publicity and Secrecy - Variations on Intertwining Use. In Transparency: Publicity and Secrecy in the Age of WikiLeaks (pp. 26-35). Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.
Open 22. (2011). Transparency: Publicity and Secrecy in the Age of WikiLeaks. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.
Otte, T. G. (2001a). Nicolson. In Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger (pp. 151- 180). New York: Palgrave.
Otte, T. G. (2001b). Kissinger. In Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger (pp. 181- 210). New York: Palgrave.
Page, M. & Spence, J. E. (2011). Open Secrets Questionably Arrived At: The Impact of Wikileaks on Diplomacy. Defence Studies, 11(2), 234-243.
Roberts, A. (2006). Blacked Out. Government Secrecy in the Information Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roberts, A. (2012). WikiLeaks: the illusion of transparency. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 116-133.
Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122.
Schudson, M. (2002). What’s unusual about covering politics as usual. In B. Zelizer & S. Allan (Eds.), Journalism after September 11 (pp. 36-47). London and New York: Routledge.
Schudson, M. (2008). Why Democracies Need An Unlovable Press. Cambrigde: Polity Press.
Semetko, H. A., de Vreese, C. H. and Peter, J. (2000). Europeanised politics - Europeanised media? European integration and political communication. West European Politics, 23(4), 121-141.
Semetko, H. A. and Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing European Politics: A Content Analysis of Press and Television News. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93-109.
Sifry, M. L. (2011). WikiLeaks and the Age of Transparency. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
Stalder, F. (2011). The Fight over Transparency - From a Hierarchical to a Horizontal Organization. In Transparency - Publicity and Secrecy in the Age of WikiLeaks (pp. 8-22). Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.
WikiLeaks. (2012a). About – What is WikiLeaks?. Retrieved last June 4, 2012, from http://wikileaks.org/About.html
WikiLeaks. (2012b). Secret US Embassy Cables (Press release). Retrieved last June 4, 2012, from http://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html
Zelizer, B., & Allan, S. (Eds.). (2002). Journalism after September 11. London and New York: Routledge.
