Download the eBook (8.25 MB) - ECREA Thematic Sections

Diversity of Journalisms. Proceedings of ECREA/CICOM Conference, Pamplona, 4-5 July 2011
where Assange was supposed to stay on bail, in which passers-by were asked if they
recognized Assange on a photo (which they did not, despite all personalization-efforts
by the media) (BBC, Dec 16). After mid-December, the BBC only carried several
interviews with Assange after his release on bail, then the only other BBC news item
involving Wikileaks is a bizarre piece about Peruvian traditional healers who perform a
punishment ceremony with a photo of Assange (BBC, Dec 30).
As for the format of the news items, the British, German and Swedish public television
and the news magazine Der Spiegel also carried more interviews than the newspapers.
On average, 75.5% of the news items were reports, 12.5% commentary and 9.7%
interviews. The Tagesschau (28.1%), the BBC (55.2%), SVT (13%) and Der Spiegel
(29.4%) carried considerably more interviews than the average, but very few
commentaries. With regard to the format, some cultural differences become apparent:
French and Spanish television news only carried reports, in which often the leading
newspapers were quoted (or read aloud to the viewers), while in the United Kingdom
and Germany experts were interviewed about their opinion on tv.
Commentary, frame and bias: While the public news channels only carried reports
and interviews about Wikileaks related topics, the newspapers also commented on
average in 12.5% of the items on the topic, either in editorials or guest comments. The
German (25.3%) and French newspapers (30%) had an especially high share of
comments among their articles about Wikileaks, which reflects the culture of French
and German journalism and corresponds with the apparent lack of interest in deeper
research of facts.
Regarding the publication of the U.S. Embassy cables, the evaluated media tend to
express security concerns. Only a few articles justify them on freedom of information
grounds – with the exception of the British Guardian. In Sweden, reporting was very
neutral (77% of items), whereas in the UK, The Times was rather critical (23% of
articles argue against Wikileaks because of security concerns), while the Guardian took
a pro-freedom-of-information stance in 63.5% of its Wikileaks-related articles in
December 2010. In Germany, the WAZ expressed security concerns in 63.3% of its
articles and the FAZ in 37.8%. Critical articles in the British newspapers, especially the
Guardian, were usually written by guest commentators (e.g. politicians or former
ambassadors), whereas in the German newspapers WAZ and FAZ, the editors
themselves often took a critical stance.
The conventional media often sided with the concerned politicians and governments,
warning that the publication of sensitive data could be harmful. There seems to be a
perceived competition with internet platforms like Wikileaks; especially the newspapers
which did not officially cooperate with Wikileaks condemned it as irresponsible and
unreliable. Newspaper editors which usually demand freedom of and access to
information at every opportunity suddenly argued against the disclosure of government
documents and readily followed the official government line.
Considering the lack of original research by most media in this study, and considering
as well that Wikileaks did not publish the material all at once, but that many supporters
reviewed and edited the documents before publishing them by and by, the hasty
101