[liberationtech] 2 WikiLeaks questions

[Douglas Lucas]

Dear Libtech,

Curious for the community's thoughts on these two questions.

1. It's not my theory, but what do you make of the theory that WikiLeaks
would go under if it were not of the steady stream of celebrity
endorsements (Lady Gaga, Pamela Anderson, many more)? Is hugely
emphasized "soft power" a necessary component for a liberation
technology cabal out to change the world? Or could, say, a cabal
demonstrate more independence and still be supported by enough people
who do not need their hands held to the conclusion by Lady Gaga?

2. How could/should a liberation technology organization with more than
two million followers tweet in order to improve the world? Could it give
the public specific, actionable instructions for overthrowing
governments and corporations? They might have to be less specific, so as
not to qualify as threats that would get the account closed. But the
account could massively amplify the instructions to the public given by
victims such as Doctors Without Borders. Or it could organize boycotts
of private spy firms such as Stratfor. What do you think? People who
care about branding might argue that such tweets wouldn't fit WikiLeaks'
brand, but things can be easily framed as freedom of the press/speech or
cryptography--e.g., something like Israel's attacks on Gaza: you can't
publish accounts of injustice with Tor when bombed to death.

Thanks,

Douglas