WikiLeaks and Opinion Polls

Published in NF Daily
(China ) on 25 October 2010
by 徐贲 Xu Ben (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by NG AI FERN . Edited by Jessica Boesl.
WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange defended the release of nearly 40,000 secret U.S. military files on the Iraq war on Oct. 23. These documents revealed new details such as civilian casualties, the torture of prisoners and the role of Iran in Iraq. Assange told a news conference in London that these documents revealed the truth of the Iraq War. The original documents did not mention any names or contain any information prejudiced about any organization or individual. The documents on the Iraq War show that since American troops entered Iraq in March 2003 until the end of last year, a total of 109,000 people died and 63 percent of them were Iraqi civilians.

Before the release of the secret Iraq War documents, the U.S. had expressed its concern about the harm their release may cause. After its release on WikiLeaks, the U.S. government and military criticized the publication of these documents, saying that this could threaten the lives of U.S. troops and Iraqi soldiers. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen had severely criticized the decryption of Iraq War files, but the U.S. media did not go along with the government and made independent, objective news reports.

Compared to the release of 75,000 secret documents on the Afghanistan War on WikiLeaks in July, the release of secret documents this time is comparably less influential, with little coverage. One of the main reasons could be the upcoming midterm elections on November 2, with media coverage focused on the competition between the Democratic and Republican Parties. Moreover, for many Americans, the past Iraq War is different than the ongoing Afghanistan War. Even though the deaths and tortures revealed in the documents are much more serious than in the previous report, it is not something new.

The volume of the released Afghanistan War secret files is only one-fifth of the Iraq War's, but the attention from the public and the media was much higher before. At that time, public polls showed that those in support of and those against the declassification of the documents were almost equal. The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, an organization conducting research on current affairs and politics, found out through a public poll that 42 percent of people think the decryption of the Afghanistan War is good for the public interest, while 47 percent think it is bad.

The Pew Research Center provides a meticulous and objective opinion poll. It shows that the release of secret documents from the Afghanistan War had increased Americans' concern over the war from 22 percent to 34 percent, reaching the highest point after President Barack Obama announced the increase of troops in December 2009. It also showed that, even though the public was concerned about the war documents and the Afghanistan War, they were more concerned about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Pew Research Center also found that different people showed different [levels of] interest in the Afghanistan War secret files. Regarding the released Afghanistan War secret documents, 37 percent of people said they understand, 36 percent said they had some understanding and 27 percent totally don’t know anything. At the same time, 53 percent of those who understand and 40 percent of those who had some understanding of the documents think encryption is bad for the public interest. It thereby shows that concern and understanding of the documents has a considerable impact on people's reactions.

During the release of secret files from the Afghanistan War another catchy news item that grabbed the public’s attention — other than the Gulf of Mexico oil spill incident — was the wedding of former President Clinton's daughter, Chelsea. On the issue of whether the media handled the other news appropriately, the Pew Research Center found that 58 percent of people thought the media coverage of Chelsea’s wedding was excessive, 8 percent thought it was inadequate and 25 percent said it was appropriate. With regard to the secret files on the Afghanistan War, 15 percent of respondents thought coverage was excessive, 41 percent thought it was inadequate and another 32 percent said it was appropriate. Hence, it seems that most Americans really want to know more about the real situation in Afghanistan. For them, despite how the decryption will embarrass their government, they believe citizens have the right to obtain the real information. At least for the public's right to information, the declassification of the Afghanistan War documents is something consistent with the public interest. The declassification of Iraq War documents today is equally important.

The Pew Research Center's public opinion polls on current affairs are not meant to act as a government tool to get public support. Their purpose is to find the discrepancies between public interest in the truth and media coverage. This type of poll, based in a free country with open public information, is relatively fair and objective. The more open the public information is, the less likely authority is to control any public information. The release of any information will then be beneficial to the people and won’t cause any uncontrollable public response.


作者:徐贲
10月23日,“维基解密”负责人朱利安•保罗•阿桑奇(Julian PaulAssange)为公布了将近40万份有关伊拉克战争的美国军方机密文件进行辩护。这些文件透露了平民死亡、虐待囚徒、伊朗在伊拉克的作用等方面的新细节。阿桑奇在伦敦的新闻发布会上说,这些文件揭露了伊拉克战争的真相,这些有关战场原始资料的报告没有提及任何人的名字,也不包含可能伤害任何组织和个人的信息。伊战解密文件显示,自2003年3月美军领导的部队进入伊拉克到去年底,总共10.9万多人死亡,63%的死者是伊拉克平民。
在伊拉克战争机密文件公布之前,美国政府就对这一解密可能造成的伤害表示了忧虑,公布后,政府和军方人士批评公布这些文件,说这可能会威胁美军和伊拉克军人的生命。美国国务卿希拉里和北大西洋公约组织秘书长拉斯穆森(A ndersFoghRasm ussen)都严厉批评了伊战文件解密,但美国媒体对伊战文件解密作了独立、客观的新闻报道,并没有附和政府的立场。
与7月份维基解密公布7.5万份有关阿富汗战争的美军机密文件相比,这次的伊战文件解密引起的公众反应要小得多,媒体报道也少得多。主要原因可能是现在已经非常临近11月2日即将举行的美国中期选举,媒体的报道集中于民主、共和两党在国会中力量的角逐与消长上。而且,对许多美国人来说,和正在进行的阿富汗战争不同,伊拉克战争已经成为过去,伊战文件解密中的平民死亡、刑讯逼供虽然程度要超过以前的报道,但毕竟不是闻所未闻的新闻。
阿战文件解密虽然不足伊战文件解密的1/5,但当时民众和媒体的关注程度却要高得多。当时,对阿战文件解密,民众舆论的赞同和反对几乎势均力敌。“人民与新闻的Pew研究中心”(PewResearch CenterforthePeople&the Press,是一个专门对时事政治等做调查的民间机构)所作的一次民意调查发现,认为阿战文件解密“有益”和“有害”于“公共利益”的人数分别是42%和47%。
Pew研究中心提供的是一种相当精细、客观的民调,它显示,阿战文件解密使得对阿富汗战争关心的美国民众从22%一下子提升到34%,达到奥巴马总统2009年12月宣布增兵阿富汗后的最高点。它同时显示,尽管民众关心阿战文件解密和阿富汗战争,但当时他们最关心的仍然是墨西哥海湾的漏油事件。
Pew研究中心还发现,不同的美国民众对阿战文件解密表现出不同的兴趣。对阿战文件解密“很了解”和“稍有了解”的人数分别是37%和36%,而27%的民众则是“完全不知道”。“很了解”和“稍有了解”的民众中,认为解密有害于公共利益的人数分别是53%和40%,可见关心或不关心,了解或不了解某个事件,对民众实际有何种反应有相当大的影响。
在阿战文件解密的时候,除了墨西哥湾漏油事件,还有一桩“新闻”也非常吸引美国民众的注意,那就是前总统克林顿的女儿切尔西结婚的事情。就媒体是否对不同“新闻”予以适当报道,Pew研究中心的民调发现,认为媒体“过度”和“不足”报道切尔西结婚的公众分别是58%和8%,有25%的人认为“适当”。对阿战文件解密,认为媒体“过度”和“不足”报道的公众分别是15%和41%,有32%的人认为“适当”。由此可见,大多数美国民众确实是想更多地了解阿富汗战争的真实情况。对他们来说,无论解密会不会使政府难堪,公民都有权利获得真实的公共信息。至少从重视和实现民众对公共信息的知情权来看,阿战文件解密做的是一件与公共利益相一致的事情。今天的伊战文件解密也是一样。
“人民与新闻的Pew研究中心”对时事政治的民众反应进行调查,不是为了数据而数据,更不是为政府行为寻找所谓的“民意支持”。它的目的是,要在民众对新闻的真实兴趣和新闻传媒的实际报道之间,保持一种最大程度的一致,或者至少是发现这二者之间实际存在的差异。这种民意调查比较公正客观,是以整个国家的自由公开的公共信息环境为条件的。公共信息越公开,政府权力对公共信息越不强行控制,信息的公布就越可能有益于民众,也越不会引起令政府无法应付的民众反应。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Iran: US Strategy on Iran: From Sanctions to Perception Warfare

Austria: The Showdown in Washington Is about More Than the Budget

Mexico: The Kirk Paradox

Germany: A Sensible Plan for Gaza*

Germany: The Main Thing Is That the War Stops

Topics

Russia: Trump Essentially Begins a ‘Purge’ of Leftist Regimes in Latin America*

Mexico: Trump’s Climate Denialism vs. Reality

Turkey: Dismembering Syria, Bombing Gaza: Can Trump Finally Veto Neocons?

Sri Lanka: Israel-Hamas Truce: Trump’s Peace Push-Dividends or Deception?

Germany: Cooly Calculated: Trump Constructs Authoritarian Realities

Germany: The Main Thing Is That the War Stops

Germany: It’s Not Only Money That’s at Stake: It’s American Democracy

South Korea: Trump: ‘I’ve Never Walked into a Room So Silent Before’

Related Articles

Thailand: Southeast Asia Amid the US-China Rift

Taiwan: Can Benefits from TikTok and Taiwan Be Evaluated the Same Way?

Singapore: TikTok Deal Would Be a Major Win for Trump, but Not in the Way You Might Expect

Pakistan: US Debt and Global Economy

Malaysia: The Tariff Trap: Why America’s Protectionist Gambit Only Tightens China’s Grip on Global Manufacturing