Effects of Wikileaks and Digital Leaking on Journalism

Introduction: The Digital Leak Revolution in Journalism

The digital age transforms journalism in profound ways. Now, digital leaking stands at the centre of this transformation, reshaping how information reaches the public. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks become synonymous with this new era. Their work challenges traditional journalism, ignites global debates on transparency, and forces societies to reconsider the boundaries between secrecy and the public’s right to know. As we move through 2025, digital leaking continues to redefine journalism, raising vital questions about ethics, legality, and democracy.

The Rise of Digital Leaking

Digital leaking emerges as a direct response to the limitations of traditional journalism. In the past, journalists often face barriers such as censorship, legal threats, or editorial pressure. However, the internet and new technologies empower whistleblowers to bypass these obstacles. Through encrypted platforms and anonymous dropboxes, individuals can now share sensitive information with journalists and the public without revealing their identities. This shift allows for rapid, global dissemination of information, fundamentally altering the media landscape.

WikiLeaks, founded by Julian Assange, pioneers this approach. The platform offers a secure, anonymous way for sources to leak documents. Its model inspires other media outlets to adopt similar technologies, making digital leaking a standard tool in investigative journalism. As a result, stories that might once have been suppressed now reach audiences worldwide, sparking public debate and holding power to account.

Julian Assange: A Catalyst for Change

Julian Assange’s impact on journalism is both celebrated and controversial. In 2011, he receives Australia’s highest journalistic honour, the Walkley Award, for his contribution to the field. The award recognises WikiLeaks’ role in promoting transparency and freedom of information. Assange’s vision is clear: he wants to create a platform where journalists and whistleblowers can publish primary source material without fear of censorship or retribution.

Assange’s work with WikiLeaks demonstrates the power of digital leaking to expose government and corporate misconduct. By publishing classified documents, WikiLeaks brings hidden truths into the public domain. This approach challenges traditional media’s reliance on official sources and editorial gatekeeping. Instead, it empowers the public to interpret raw data and form their own conclusions.

The “Collateral Murder” Case: A Turning Point

One of WikiLeaks’ most significant releases is the “Collateral Murder” video in 2010. The footage, recorded from a US military helicopter in Baghdad, shows the killing of civilians, including two Reuters journalists. The video’s release shocks the world and forces a reckoning with the realities of modern warfare. Mainstream outlets such as the BBC and The Guardian amplify the story, ensuring global coverage.

The “Collateral Murder” leak exemplifies the strengths and challenges of digital leaking. On one hand, it exposes government actions that might otherwise remain hidden. On the other, it raises questions about context, interpretation, and the responsibilities of journalists when handling sensitive material. Nevertheless, the case cements WikiLeaks’ reputation as a pioneer of digital leaking in journalism.

WikiLeaks’ New Model: Networked Journalism

WikiLeaks introduces a new model of journalism based on collaboration and openness. Rather than competing with traditional media, WikiLeaks partners with major outlets to maximise the impact of its leaks. This networked approach allows for broader analysis and distribution of information. It also ensures that leaked materials reach diverse audiences, increasing their potential to drive change.

The platform’s stateless nature further complicates efforts to censor or control its activities. WikiLeaks operates beyond the reach of any single government, making it difficult to suppress its publications. This global reach is both a strength and a source of controversy, as critics argue that it undermines national security and diplomatic relations.

The Legal and Ethical Challenges

Digital leaking, while transformative, brings significant legal and ethical challenges. The most prominent example is the ongoing legal battle involving Julian Assange. The United States indicts Assange on charges of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, alleging that he helped Chelsea Manning crack a password to access classified documents. The case, known as USA v Julian Assange, raises fundamental questions about the boundaries between journalism, whistleblowing, and criminal activity.

Assange’s defence argues that his actions are consistent with investigative journalism and should be protected under freedom of the press. However, the US government contends that his involvement in obtaining the documents goes beyond traditional reporting. The case remains unresolved, with implications for journalists worldwide. For further legal context, see the LawTeacher.net summary of USA v Julian Assange.

The Swedish Extradition Case

Assange’s legal troubles extend beyond the United States. In Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority, he fights extradition to Sweden over allegations unrelated to his journalistic work. Assange fears that extradition to Sweden could lead to subsequent transfer to the US, where he might face harsher penalties for his WikiLeaks activities. The UK courts uphold the Swedish extradition request, but the case highlights the complex interplay between legal systems, human rights, and press freedom. For more details, see the LawTeacher.net summary of Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority.

The Impact on Journalism Ethics

The rise of digital leaking forces journalists and editors to confront new ethical dilemmas. Traditional journalism relies on careful verification, editorial oversight, and a commitment to objectivity. By contrast, platforms like WikiLeaks often publish raw, unfiltered information. This approach can enhance transparency but also risks spreading misinformation or causing unintended harm.

Journalists must now decide how to handle leaked materials. Should they publish everything, or only what they can independently verify? Should they redact sensitive details to protect individuals, or prioritise the public’s right to know? These questions become even more pressing as digital leaking becomes more common and the volume of leaked data increases.

The Role of Technology in Leaking

Technological innovation is at the heart of digital leaking. Encryption, anonymous dropboxes, and secure communication platforms make it possible for whistleblowers to share information safely. These tools are essential for protecting sources from surveillance and retaliation. At the same time, they make it harder for authorities to trace leaks or prevent the spread of sensitive information.

Artificial intelligence also enters the picture, both as a tool for journalists and a potential threat. AI can help reporters analyse large datasets, identify patterns, and uncover hidden stories. However, it can also be used to create deepfakes, spread disinformation, or automate surveillance. The dual nature of technology means that journalists must remain vigilant and adapt to new challenges as they arise.

The Tension Between Transparency and Secrecy

Democratic societies depend on a balance between transparency and secrecy. On one hand, transparency is vital for accountability and informed public debate. On the other, secrecy is sometimes necessary to protect national security, privacy, and diplomatic relations. Digital leaking disrupts this balance, often tipping the scales in favour of transparency.

Supporters argue that leaking is essential for exposing wrongdoing and holding power to account. Critics warn that indiscriminate leaks can endanger lives, compromise operations, or damage international relations. The debate is ongoing, with no easy answers. Nevertheless, the public’s appetite for transparency remains strong, and digital leaking continues to shape the contours of modern journalism.

Collaboration Between WikiLeaks and Traditional Media

WikiLeaks’ strategy of partnering with established news organisations marks a significant shift in journalistic practice. By working with outlets such as The New York Times, The Guardian, and Le Monde, WikiLeaks ensures that its leaks receive thorough analysis and wide distribution. This collaborative model leverages the strengths of both digital platforms and traditional journalism.

The partnership also raises questions about responsibility and accountability. When mainstream media publish WikiLeaks’ materials, they lend credibility to the leaks but also share the risks. Both parties must navigate legal threats, ethical dilemmas, and public scrutiny. The collaboration demonstrates the potential for networked journalism to amplify the impact of digital leaks, while also highlighting the need for clear standards and safeguards.

The Uberisation of Investigative Journalism

WikiLeaks introduces the concept of the “uberisation” of investigative journalism. In this model, no single entity controls the flow of information. Instead, a decentralised network of contributors, analysts, and publishers work together to uncover and disseminate stories. This approach breaks down traditional hierarchies and empowers individuals to participate in the news-making process.

The benefits are clear: more voices, greater diversity of perspectives, and faster dissemination of information. However, the model also presents challenges. Without central oversight, it becomes harder to verify facts, maintain quality, or ensure ethical standards. The “uberisation” of journalism is both a promise and a warning, illustrating the complexities of the digital media ecosystem.

The Role of Leaking in Shaping Public Discourse

Leaking, especially in the digital age, plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse. It enables citizens to access information that would otherwise remain hidden, fostering greater engagement and debate. High-profile leaks, such as the Panama Papers and Snowden revelations, demonstrate the power of digital leaking to drive global conversations and policy changes.

However, the sheer volume of leaked information can overwhelm audiences and journalists alike. Sorting fact from fiction becomes more difficult, and the risk of misinformation increases. As digital leaking becomes more prevalent, the need for robust verification processes and responsible reporting grows ever more urgent.

The Challenges of Verification and Authenticity

One of the main challenges posed by digital leaking is the verification of leaked materials. Journalists must ensure that documents are genuine, unaltered, and presented in context. The speed and scale of digital leaks make this task more difficult. Mistakes can have serious consequences, damaging reputations or spreading falsehoods.

To address these challenges, newsrooms develop new verification protocols and invest in technology to authenticate digital documents. Collaboration between media outlets, fact-checkers, and subject-matter experts becomes essential. Nevertheless, the risk of error remains, and journalists must balance the imperative to inform with the responsibility to get the story right.

The Ethical Minefield of Digital Leaking

Digital leaking presents an ethical minefield for journalists. The anonymity of sources, the scale of data, and the potential for harm all complicate decision-making. Journalists must weigh the public interest against the risks to individuals and institutions. They must also consider the motives of leakers, who may act out of conscience, self-interest, or malice.

The publication of unredacted materials, for example, can endanger lives or compromise ongoing operations. Responsible media outlets often redact sensitive details, but not all platforms follow these practices. The debate over the ethics of digital leaking is ongoing, with no consensus in sight. Nevertheless, the need for clear ethical guidelines is more pressing than ever.

The Impact on Press Freedom

The rise of digital leaking has profound implications for press freedom. Governments respond to high-profile leaks with new laws, increased surveillance, and efforts to control the flow of information. Journalists and whistleblowers face greater risks, including prosecution, harassment, and violence. The prosecution of Julian Assange is seen by many as a warning to others who might consider publishing sensitive material.

At the same time, digital leaking empowers journalists to bypass censorship and reach global audiences. The tension between state power and press freedom is at the heart of the ongoing debate over digital leaking. As we move further into the digital age, the outcome of this struggle will shape the future of journalism.

The Globalisation of News and Information

Digital leaking contributes to the globalisation of news and information. Stories that once remained local now have worldwide impact. WikiLeaks’ publications, for example, spark debates in capitals around the globe, influencing politics, diplomacy, and public opinion. The internet ensures that leaked materials are accessible to anyone, anywhere, at any time.

This global reach increases the stakes for journalists, governments, and citizens alike. Information spreads rapidly, and responses must be swift. The interconnectedness of the digital world means that the consequences of leaks are felt far beyond their point of origin. As a result, journalism becomes a truly global enterprise, with new challenges and opportunities at every turn.

The Role of AI and New Technologies

Artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies are reshaping the landscape of digital leaking. AI can help journalists analyse massive datasets, uncover patterns, and identify stories that might otherwise go unnoticed. Automated tools can assist with fact-checking, translation, and data visualisation, making it easier to process and present complex information.

However, these technologies also introduce new risks. Deepfakes, automated misinformation campaigns, and sophisticated surveillance tools threaten the integrity of journalism. The same tools that empower reporters can be used to deceive, manipulate, or silence them. As technology evolves, journalists must adapt, developing new skills and strategies to navigate the digital landscape.

The Future of Digital Leaking in Journalism

Looking ahead to 2025 and beyond, digital leaking will remain a central feature of journalism. The demand for transparency and accountability shows no signs of diminishing. Whistleblowers, empowered by technology, will continue to play a vital role in exposing wrongdoing and informing the public.

At the same time, the challenges facing journalists will grow more complex. Legal risks, ethical dilemmas, and technological threats will require constant vigilance and adaptation. Collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to core journalistic values will be essential for navigating this evolving landscape.

Conclusion: The Enduring Legacy of Julian Assange and Digital Leaking

Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have left an indelible mark on journalism. Their work has transformed how information is gathered, shared, and understood. Digital leaking, once a fringe practice, is now a central tool in the journalist’s arsenal. The debates sparked by Assange’s actions—over ethics, legality, and press freedom—will continue to shape the field for years to come.

As we reflect on the past and look to the future, one thing is clear: digital leaking is here to stay. Its impact on journalism, democracy, and society will depend on how journalists, governments, and citizens respond to its challenges and opportunities. In the end, the pursuit of truth, transparency, and accountability remains at the heart of journalism’s mission, no matter how the tools and tactics may change.

References for The Effects of Wikileaks and Digital Leaking in Journalism

A-J Sources

• Bart, P 2015, “How ideas turned into a part-time occupation: the tyranny of technology has creative and cabbies singing the blues”, Variety, vol. 1, p. 24, Academic OneFile, EBSCOhost.
• Bantz, C.R “News Organizations: Conflict as a Crafted Cultural Norm” in D Berkowitz, (ed) 1997, Social Meanings of News, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, p. 123-137.
• Brevini, B 2017, “WikiLeaks: Between disclosure and whistle-blowing in digital times”, Sociology Compass, Vol. 3, p. 1-11, Academic OneFile, Wiley Online Library.
• Benkler, Y 2013, “WikiLeaks and the Networked Fourth Estate” in B, Brevini, A, Hintz, and P, McGurdy, (ed), Beyond WikiLeaks: Implications for the Future of Communications, Journalism and Society, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
• Christensen, C 2014, “WikiLeaks and the Afterlife of Collateral Murder”, International Journal of Communication, Vol. 8, p. 2593-2602, SwePub.
• Carr, D 2010, “WikiLeaks Taps Power of the Press”, The New York Times, 12 December, viewed 25 October 2017, .
• Cohen, N and Stelter, B 2010, “Iraq Video Brings Notice to a web site”, The New York Times, 6 April, viewed 26 October 2017, .
• Coddington, M 2012, “Defending a Paradigm by Patrolling a Boundary: Two Global Newspapers’ Approach to WikiLeaks”, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 89, no. 3, p. 377-396, Academic OneFile, SAGE Publications.
• Dobson, K and Hunsinger, J 2016, “The political economy of WikiLeaks: Transparency and accountability through digital and alternative media”, Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, Vol. 7, no. 2, p. 217-233, Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost.
• Fuchs, C 2011, “WikiLeaks: power 2.0? Surveillance 2.0? Criticism 2.0? Alternative media 2.0? A political-economic analysis”, Global Media Journal: Australian Edition, Vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1-17, Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost.

K-Z Sources

• Kevin, T 2011, “Julian Assange’s clear and present danger”, Eureka Street, Vol. 24, p. 35, Informit literature & Culture, EBSCOhost.
• Lynch, L 2013, “Wikileaks After Megaleaks”, Digital Journalism, Vol. 1, no. 3, p. 314-334, Supplemental Index, EBSCOhost.
• Meikle, G 2012, “Continuity and transformation in convergent news: the case of WikiLeaks”, Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, no. 144, p. 52-59, Literature Resource Centre, EBSCOhost.
• Ottosen, R, 2012, “WIKILEAKS: ETHICAL MINEFIELD OR A DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION IN JOURNALISM?”, Journalism Studies, vol. 13, no. 5/6, p. 836-846, Communication & Mass Media Complete, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
• Rosner, J 2011, “Can WikiLeaks Save Journalism and Democracy?”, Global Media Journal: Australian Edition, Vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1-6, Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost.
• Tiffen, R 2011, “WikiLeaks and mega-plumbing issues- unresolved dilemmas revisited”, Global Media Journal: Australian Edition, Vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1-10, Communication & Mass Media Complete, ABSCOhost.
• The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists 2016, Giant Leak of Offshore Financial Records Exposes Global Array of Crime and Corruption, updated 3 April, viewed 28 October 2017, <.https://wikileaks.org/About.html>.

Updated Reference List

A-M Sources

• Al Jazeera Institute. (n.d.). Julian Assange: No Hero Among Journalists. Retrieved from http://institute.aljazeera.net/en/ajr/article/julian-assange-no-hero-among-journalists
• Freedom of the Press Foundation. (2025). Leaks and the Media in 2025. Retrieved from https://freedom.press/digisec/blog/leaks-and-the-media-in-2025/
• International Bar Association. (2019). Assange: a decisive moment for national security journalism. Retrieved from https://www.ibanet.org/article/20f4f951-8ab0-434d-8d6c-7da497d885a3
• Journalism Funders Forum. (2025). Five Developments That Will Influence Media Freedom the Most in 2025. Retrieved from https://journalismfundersforum.com/five-developments-that-will-influence-media-freedom-the-most-in-2025/
• John Menadue. (2023). A revolution in Journalism: WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. Retrieved from https://johnmenadue.com/a-revolution-in-journalism-wikileaks-and-julian-assange/
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/assange-v-sweden-3405.php
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Cases. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Human Rights and the Right to Life – Constitutional Law Essay. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-law/human-rights-and-the-right-to-life-constitutional-law-essay.php
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Internet Service Providers and Protection from Liability – International Law Essay. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/international-law/internet-service-providers-and-protection-from-liability-international-law-essay.php
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Law case summaries. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/?page=8
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Latest Updates. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/latest-updates.php
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Sexual Offences Act 2003. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/criminal-law/sexual-offences-act-2003-2.php
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). US Law. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/tags/us-law/
• LawTeacher.net. (n.d.). Whistle Blowers Protection Act. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-dissertations/whistle-blowers-protection-act-7738.php
• LawTeacher.net. (2025). USA v Julian Assange. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/usa-v-assange-1414.php

N-Z Sources

• Nieman Lab. (2025). News in 2025 is in the eye of the beholder. Retrieved from https://www.niemanlab.org/2025/05/news-in-2025-is-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder/
• Nieman Lab. (2025). The Guardian’s new whistleblower tool buries leaks to journalists within its own readers’ everyday traffic. Retrieved from https://www.niemanlab.org/2025/06/the-guardians-new-whistleblower-tool-buries-leaks-to-journalists-within-its-own-readers-everyday-traffic/
• Number Analytics. (2025). Leaking in Media: A Threat or a Necessity. Retrieved from https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/leaking-in-media-a-threat-or-a-necessity
• Number Analytics. (2025). The Role of Leaking in Shaping Public Discourse. Retrieved from https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/the-role-of-leaking-in-shaping-public-discourse
• Reuters Institute. (2025). AI and the future of news: What we learnt about how it’s impacting coverage, newsrooms, and society. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/ai-and-future-news-2025-what-we-learnt-about-how-its-impact-coverage-newsrooms-and-society