We may have to wait for the Assange memoirs for further elaboration. The Guardian is reporting online that he has sold his memoirs to Canongate in the UK and Knopf in the U.S. The news, aptly, was leaked.
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
This is the best moment to be in journalism (25)
The WSJ editorial page hits rock bottom (19)
Public television’s attempts to placate David Koch
One journalist took matters into his own hands when a fellow audience member wouldn’t stop using her smartphone during a theater performance
Purchasing Tumblr is Yahoo’s flashy bet on a shift in social media
The shift from Facebook to more creative social networks
Gay Talese’s outline for ‘Frank Sinatra Has a Cold,’ 1966
Handwritten on a shirt board
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Sounds a bit of testy, jealous spite on the part of 'journalism' review. Assange is nothing more or less than an old-fashioned muck-raker, a thankless job that today's domesticated effete house-journalists do not wish to dirty their hands with.
Unless it's outing a Valerie Plame.
#1 Posted by danR, CJR on Tue 21 Dec 2010 at 01:30 PM
People affiliated with our organisation have already been assassinated.
No follow up on that bombshell?
#2 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Tue 21 Dec 2010 at 01:40 PM
@Mike H (and Joel Meares)
Yeah, what about that?
Any meat around that bone?
#3 Posted by murph, CJR on Tue 21 Dec 2010 at 02:22 PM
John Humphrys was so aggravating to read/listen to!!! All the assumptions he's made seem to come from the fact he reads tabloids for his background information, his insistence on making Assange call himself a matyr, his digging about for the number of sexual partners he's had... agh, way to go Julian, keeping your cool with this sensationlist!
#4 Posted by Joel, CJR on Tue 21 Dec 2010 at 05:41 PM
Amazing. This guy Assange is really on another planet. Imagine sanctimoniously describing oneself as "of good character" and admonishing people that "capable, generous men don’t create victims." And he's out on bail for multiple rape charges!
#5 Posted by JLD, CJR on Wed 22 Dec 2010 at 09:26 AM
Note to JLD.
No, repeat no, charges of rape or antyhing else have been filed in Sweden. The allegations are still under investigation.
The Swedish police have merely asked to interview Assange.
The BBC interviewer ws exceedingly aggressive in trying to catch Assange on some point, any ooint.
And, by tge way, I firmly believe that people should put their na\mes, ther real names, on their posts.
Barney Kirchhoff, Paris
#6 Posted by barney kirchhoff, CJR on Wed 22 Dec 2010 at 11:30 AM
Sorry Barney, I was quoting Michael Moore when I used the phrase "rape charges." I suppose I should apply something more stringent than Assange's own level of journalistic inquiry to the matter.
And BTW 90% of the posters here don't use their real names.
#7 Posted by JLD, CJR on Wed 22 Dec 2010 at 12:01 PM
Why did BBC send an interviewer John Humprey to go Face To Face (and NO Video produced - just AUDIO) with Julian Assange - was it just for Set-Up for a trumped-up sex charge & to get health checks (the 2 women never got health checks and we all know how those reports can be FRAUD - it's even on TV about Police depts creating fraud reports).
A reputable interview would be about Assange Wikileaks organization (what most people want to know) and why he got into it. SHAME on BBC. SHAME on John Humprey. Had Assange known the majority of interview was sex I'm sure he would not have agreed to it. He must have been told it was a "respectful" interview about Wikileaks and not some tabloid sham.
SHAM interviews are for propaganda purposes.
#8 Posted by grace S, CJR on Wed 22 Dec 2010 at 02:16 PM
@Barney: Not to beat a dead horse, but this whole subject is just so ripe with hypocrisy - imagine complaining about posters using nomes de plume when Assange's biggest supporters proudly call themselves "Anonymous."
#9 Posted by JLD, CJR on Wed 22 Dec 2010 at 08:30 PM
This review was about as meaningful as the intvu itself. The BBC had an opportunity to ask some serious questions about the information released by Wikileaks and CJR has missed a wonderful opportunity to do the same. Shame on you.
#10 Posted by Kingharvest, CJR on Thu 23 Dec 2010 at 10:58 AM
Having listened to the complete interview, I can't agree that JA was testy. He gave measured answers to predictable questions posed during a typically tiresome BBC adversarial interview. JH, sticking to his talking points, barged right past JA's remarkable assertion that Wikileaks associates have been assassinated.
Is it so difficult to tease apart the independent strands in this story? (1) Assessment of the means and aims of the Wikileaks organization. (2) The content and status of the criminal proceedings against JA in both Sweden and the US. (3) JA's exercise of his legal rights regarding extradition.
The work of Wikileaks will go on with or without JA. If he is guilty of the rape charges, he would not be the first advocate for political justice whose sexual ethics are not equal to his social ethics, nor the first to take stupid risks at a time when he should be especially cautious. He should be held accountable on all fronts, and covering these stories sans moral outrage would be a great stride in that direction.
#11 Posted by MH, CJR on Thu 23 Dec 2010 at 02:18 PM