Julian Assange Versus The World Media Essay

Julian Assange Versus The cin ace caseption Media EssayBrea liaison, drinking, eating, going to the toilet, sleeping, and checking your Facebook profile nowadays, these argon the actions which basic resolelyy constitute the largest comp iodinent of our daily activities. But one of these items doesnt fit very perfectly into this list. Today, in that respect are 900 million people who guard a Facebook account and they any in all spend more than than than 700 billion minutes a month logged on to this companionable ne 2rk, according to Seth Harden (2012). Hence, we are all responsible, indirectly, of tomfool Zuckerbergs nomination as Person of the Year by date clip for 2010. Since 1927, Time pickup has been honoring trustworthy notions a person, an object, or level a concept that are deemed most influential on our alliance each br otherly class. But what does this whole networking platform add to our lives? What does it possess that is so special and why has it chan ged the course of our lives permanently maybe? An opposite prognosis for the prize was Julian Assange, the begetter of Wikileaks, an Australian international organization that incurs up massively important newsworthiness and information that should affirm been secret to the public. When flavor at the contr everyplacesy raised all near the worldly concern by Time Magazines decision of awarding Zuckerberg with the earthly concern of the Year Award over Assange in December 2010, one would suggest finding start whether the Wikileaks founder would deliver been a better choice than Facebooks CEO, since he has exposed news and information that has been much more beneficial to our societies oecumenic despite the accompaniment that m each would argue that Facebook has influenced our culture like no other previous(prenominal) phenomenon.Born on May 14, 1984 in Dobbs Ferry, New York, describe Zuckerberg was already a computer programmer at the age of 12. During his first ye ar at Harvard University, Zuckerberg developed a face-s chosenion online program called The Face Book. Its main conception was to allow its users to choose between two girl faces based on who is hot and who is not This formulate then evolved into becoming a certain type of social network The Harvard Connection. After dropping out from Harvard, Zuckerbergs project became the social network kn avouch as Facebook and reached a million users inside its first few months. (Mark Zuckerberg, 2011). According to Angela Lewis (2010), she asserts that Facebook is the second most visited website in the world, andthe rapid growing demographic 35-plus group. (p.1). As a result of Facebooks popularity, Mark Zuckerberg has cash in ones chips the twenty-fifth most violenceful man alive and the thirty-fifth youngest billionaire in the world (Worlds Most Powerful People, 2012) . However, Zuckerbergs wealth and power solely depends on us, the users of his social network who are unaware that the w hole Facebook phenomenon does nothing that benefit its creator.Today, as Facebook users, we control become Facebook dependent. In a new-fangled research about Facebook addiction conducted by the University of Bergen in 2012, results pee-pee shown that since Facebook became as ubiquitous as television in our everyday lives, it is becoming more and more difficult for many people to hit the hay if they are addicted to social media. Indeed, Facebook addiction has become such an overwhelming phenomenon that has invaded our societies worldwide. This new type of addiction is very similar to other types of dependencies. Addiction to smoking is an obvious example. Studies have shown that it displays similar characteristics to any sort of addiction The user thinks that he is doing something creative when he clearly is not. He believes that his bearing would be less swordplay without it, despite having a completely different open world wait for him. In addition to all of that, the addicted user considers it harmless when in fact the addiction greatly impacts his productivity, concentration, self-esteem and well- beingness finally, he thinks it is self-possessed when in fact it is not. (PressWire, 2012). This is not only the case with Facebook. Twitter and other social networks have been considered objects of addiction as well. People using these social networks are totally unaware of the fact that their whole flavour is at stake when logging onto the social platform and exchanging information with friends, family members, or any random fellow user. Basically, many of us do not have the habit of reading the Terms and Policy of any online website we subscribe to. Hence, we are in spades missing out on details that might be fatal for our security. For instance, Facebook halts track of ones online activity while logged onto the social network. In other words, it admits what other websites the user is using and precisely what he is doing. Furthermore, Facebook s policy states that all media or information relinquished by any user is definitely public and the Facebook team is free to access it anytime it wishes to. Finally, if a user decides to edit out or deactivate his/her account, his personal information bequeathing still cost in the Facebook databases in other words, at that place is no such thing as concealment on these kind of social platforms. Simply, Facebook is doing nothing hardly wasting our time, our lives, and our ambition. It destroys our privacy and, based on a study conducted in 2010 on children and teenagers who use Facebook and Twitter in Australia, results show that these websites only channel by making kids dumber (The Hindustan Times). Therefore, we might consider Mark Zuckerberg a privacy thief or an international serial killer whose victims are peoples minds and imaginations. However, one must not blame him alone, but blame all Facebook users for their unawareness. Time Magazine awarded Zuckerberg the Perso n of the Year award in 2010 for his work in the development and easing of communication around the world, despite creating a worldwide addiction and manipulating users personal information.Despite all of Facebooks negativities, many consider Zuckerberg a hero that has influenced the course of our daily lives. They claim that Facebook allows them to communicate with their families all around the world, as well as get in touch with the remote world, meet new people, and share their experiences. Some even dare to make that Facebook is a style to relieve stress, and others support Zuckerberg just because Facebook is a forte finished which one can post his/her photos, which is totally absurd. For starters, concerning the revolutionary bringing close together of Facebook, we all basically know that communicating with friends, family and coworkers in an interactive way is easily done through Skype since the year 2002. Moreover, one must air that Skype provides us with its services w ithout the need to communicate personal information with the headquarters. Moreover, regarding the contestation which states that Facebook helps in making new friends, one would simply suggest that there is actually no better way to make friends than going out to the real world, socializing with the people at the school, university or the workplace. But let us assume for a moment, that genuine friendships could be made through a social network. One cannot be sure whom he is talk of the town to and sharing his experiences, photos, thoughts and personal information with. The probability of communicating these private photos and facts of ones life to a hacker is very high. No real friendships exist on Facebook. When someone has a thousand friends or more on Facebook, do you think that he/she rattling knows all these people? Are they really friends? Should they be called friends in the first place? Scientists have proven that having more than 150 friends at a time is irrational and i mpossible. Finally, doctors have got the react for those claiming that Facebook is stress-relieving Facebook users with more friends suffer more stress and neurotic limbo from ghost they have to continually update and amuse their larger audiences, according to a research conducted by Dr. Kathy Charles at the University of Edinburgh in 2011 (J-A.Barnes, 2012). A better and more efficient way to reduce stress is to run, walk, and work out. Therefore, we may desist that there is no solid and concrete reason leading to award Mark Zuckerberg with the Person of the Year 2010 title over other candidates that have really influenced the course of the international semi semipolitical scene in the same year.The competitions runner-up and overwhelming reader favorite, Julian Assange, is a forty two year old activist, publisher and journalist who is mostly renowned for being the founder and editor-in-chief ofWikileaks. Despite, winning first place in the online survey, Time Magazine rejecte d the voters will and selected Mark Zuckerberg as Man of the Year. In his youth, Assange was ahacker-activist who then became a computer programmer and journalist, winning the 2011Martha Gellhorn Prize for journalism for his contributions to freedom of speech all around the world with Wikileaks (Davin, 2011). He was prosecuted in 2011 for rape in Sweden but was convinced that my his prosecution for rape in the Swedish courts was engineered by vengeful U.S. intelligence. Today, aft(prenominal) being imprisoned some(prenominal) times in the past duad of years, he is in political asylum, granted to him on August 16th 2012, by the Ecuadorian external Minister. As stated on their official webpage, Wikileaks is a non-profit media organization. Since 2007, its object was to bring important news and information to the public and provide an innovative, secure and unknown way for sources to leak information to its journalists. One of Wikileaks most important activities is to publish orig inal source material alongside news stories so that readers and historians uniform can instruct evidence of the truth. Wikileaks has sustained and triumphed against legal and political attacks knowing to silence the publishing organization, journalists and anonymous sources.According to Time Magazine (2011), no matter of what happened or happens to Assange, which he will almost certainly not deserve, the pull of stateless, secure and indestructible net profit drop boxes through which anonymous Internet users can access to circulate highly important data to is an unparalleled innovation. Secrets will never be safe again, or more specifically, they will never be hidden from the people again. Showing his true goal through the Wikileaks project, Julian Assange was asked on the December 19th 2010 episode of Saturday wickedness Live What are the differences between Mark Zuckerberg and me him? and answered ironically that I he give way private information on corporations to you for free, and Im a villain. Zuckerberg gives your private information to corporations for capital and hes Man of the Year. Therefore, Wikileaks may change things in a permanent ongoing way. By uncovering the truth on the political and geopolitical scenes all around the world through an open and privacy-free platform such as the Internet, Wikileaks has radically changed the way we perceive social media, politics and diplomatic dealing between governments in a positive manner. Moreover, it has raised awareness among the world population concerning transparency and the honesty of governments towards the people.However, the whole Wikileaks organization is facing worldwide opposition, especially by the governments. For instance, according to the Washington Post, The Obama administration warned Wikileaks chief Julian Assange that the expected release of approximately 250,000 secret State Department documents would have grave consequences and place the lives of journalists, human rights act ivists and soldiers, at risk (G. Kessler, 28 November2010) viewing that the unite States of America are ready to endanger their civilians violate journalists rights in order to keep its secrets away from the public. In addition, a law has been voted on recently condemning every individual living in the United States to a minimum sentence of 2 years in cast aside in case he/she decides to share information with Wikileaks, cover once more how the Obama administration is resolved to oppress the freedom of speech and opinion. Therefore, disregardless of whether one only considers positive events on choosing the Person of the Year, the choice may have been more credible or simply more adequate, to have Julian Assange as Person of the Year 2010.Meanwhile, some opposite viewpoints may state that Wikileaks is harmful towards a countrys national security and assume that it is the sole reason behind depriving Assange the Man of the Year title. As they may see it, the people holding these points of views think that the whole organization causes a dither of protest against the political and governing class inside a country, because disturbing its national security and prosperity. These arguments are most commonly held by people close to the reigning regime or class. They need to keep their interests secure at all price, and would do whatever that is in their power to stop any opposition to their system. This notion gives us an idea of what manager Michael Moore discusses throughout his movies and how he describes his conspiracy theory, which becomes clearer day after day, and revealed secret after revealed secret. These classes of people governing the world, these self-centered egoistic maniacs who control the media through their own TV stations only think about their interests, their final income, their undermentioned target and so on they are living their sick life regardless of the peoples will, despite being in the position they are in thank to them. The peop le have rights they have the right to know, especially to know what is really happening behind the walls, in offices, and underneath the tables. It is our right to know whether we are being lied to each and every day. If we were subject to artifice in any way, we have the right to manifest and contest the political system governing our country in order to achieve total justice within it. That is why the argument mostly used by this kind of people is not solid. It is simply biased and by no means objective.In conclusion, one may easily doubt the Man of the Year awards credibility and the criteria used in order to award a certain individual, object or concept. However, in the Time press release, Mark Zuckerberg said At a very high level, some of the themes Facebook and Wikileaks could be connectedthe Wikileaks story I think is fascinating but I also dont think were anywhere near the end of it. (Zuckerberg, December 2011) The Facebook CEOs teaching suggests that although Facebook has brought many changes to our social life, if Wikileaks path is finally more publically supported, bed covering knowledge and avoiding public deception, then Julian Assange is clearly the man who will have improved more lives and even saved them. However, hehas been maligned in the press, thrown in jail, and had his name dragged through the mud. On the same Saturday darkness Live episode stated earlier, he sarcastically stated that thanks to Wikileaks, you can see how corrupt governments operate in the shadows and lie to those who elect them. Thanks to Facebook, you can finally figure out which Sex and the metropolis character you areIm a Samantha, but if the Swedish police ask, Im a Charlotte. showing the superficiality and uselessness of a project such as Facebook. Finally, one may ask Will anyone remember this title in a few years? I think probably not. Winners of such awards are often related to events that seem like a much large deal at the time. For instance, does anyone rec all why Vladimir Putin won it a couple of years ago?