The authors/creators of Wikileaks argue that releasing all this sensitive material ensures true transparency on international affairs. And certainly, acts of human rights violation, questionable behaviour in war, and deliberate attempts to commit crimes in the name of nationalism …. should be exposed.
But among all the Wikileaks “truths” ….. how much is actually documentation of opinion, ie: discussion of personality traits of various leaders, comments about personal habits, or expressions of like/dislike. While there may be argument for the necessary release of the truth, is it really beneficial to know what the American ambassador really thinks of our Foreign Minister. While it may be a “truth” at least for the American ambassador, I don’t really think this one person’s opinion is relevant to national security.
We all have worked with a colleague we don’t like.  I can make disparaging comments about my boss (in private), but I don’t let that opinion colour the effort that I make in my job, or the professionalism I show. To me, its part of being an adult in the working world. We are not children in a sandbox ….. it is possible to play together even if I don’t want you as my friend.
I think Wikileaks is only valuable and relevant, when it sticks to the truth ….. leave opinion for the scandal rags and rubbish news channels.
