揭秘者——朱利安.阿桑奇

他身攜一臺(tái)電腦和一個(gè)背包便輾轉(zhuǎn)漂泊于全球，肯尼亞、坦桑尼亞、澳大利亞、美國和歐洲各國都有他的足跡;他長著一張年輕的臉，卻擁有一頭老人的銀發(fā)，工作與生活的艱辛已然在他身上留下了痕跡;他是黑客“羅賓漢”，以自己的方式推動(dòng)信息完全透明化，美軍襲擊伊拉克平民視頻、關(guān)塔那摩監(jiān)獄手冊、佩林私人郵件內(nèi)容、阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭日志等的揭露都是他的“杰作”。他便是被美國政府視為“眼中釘”的神秘人物——“維基泄密”網(wǎng)站的創(chuàng)始人朱利安·阿桑奇。他的人生經(jīng)歷復(fù)雜離奇，他的泄密工作頗受爭議，他就像是一個(gè)說不清道不明的謎。

Everything about this is odd. Julian Assange， the founder， director， frontman2， guiding spirit of global whistleblowing service WikiLeaks looks a bit odd for a start. Tall， cadaverous3， dressed in ripped jeans， brown jacket， black tie， battered trainers. He detests subjectivity in journalism; I fear that part of him detests journalists， too， and that WikiLeaks—which describes itself as an “uncensorable system for untraceable mass document leaking”—is essentially a way of cutting out subjectivist idiots such as me.

If Assange was producing this article， he would post the rambling4 hour-and-a-half-long talk he delivers at the Centre for Investigative Journalism’s summer school at London’s City University online， plus the 10 minutes we spend talking on the way to a restaurant and the additional 20 minutes of chat in the restaurant before it’s politely suggested I’ve exhausted my time. “When you’re dealing with any secondary sources about me， be extremely careful，” he says as we walk.

“Journalism should be more like science，” he tells me in the restaurant. “As far as possible， facts should be verifiable5. If journalists want long-term credibility for their profession， they have to go in that direction.” He likes the idea of a 2，000-word article backed by 25，000 words of source material， and says there is no reason why you can’t provide that on the internet.

Assange’s Wikileaks

Assange unveiled wikileaks.org in January 2007 and has pulled off6 some astonishing coups7 for an organisation with a handful of staff and virtually no funding. It has exposed evidence of corruption in the family of former Kenyan president Daniel arap Moi8， published the standard operating procedures for the Guantánamo Bay detention centre9， even made public the contents of Sarah Palin’s Yahoo account. But what has really propelled WikiLeaks into the media mainstream is the video it released in April， 2010 of a US helicopter attack in Baghdad in July 2007， which killed a number of Iraqi civilians and two Reuters personnel.

The video， posted in a 39-minute unedited version and as an 18-minute film called Collateral10 Murder， gives a chilling insight into US military attitudes: sloppiness in identifying targets， eagerness to finish off11 a grievously wounded man as he attempts to crawl to safety， and lack of concern even for two children in a van that arrives to pick up the bodies and is immediately attacked. “It’s their fault for bringing their kids to a battle，” says one of the pilots. “That’s right，” replies his colleague matter-of-factly12.

WikiLeaks has just five full-time staff and about 40 others who， he says， “very frequently do things”， backed by 800 occasional helpers and 10，000 supporters and donors—an amorphous13， decentralised structure， which might become the model for many media organisations in the future， as what might be called “journalism factories” become both outmoded and unfinanceable. This is a delicate moment in the development of what Assange prefers to think of as a “movement”. “We have all the problems that a growing startup organisation has，” he says， “combined with an extreme adversarial14 environment and state spying.”

The danger of penetration by the security services is acute. “It makes it hard to get new talent quickly，” he says， “because everyone has to be checked out， and it makes internal communication very difficult because everything has to be encrypted and security procedures put in place. And we also have to be ready to respond to lawsuits.”

Assange has to be careful about his personal security. Bradley Manning15， a 22-year-old US army intelligence analyst， has been arrested and charged with allegedly giving WikiLeaks the footage of the Baghdad attack. There have also been disputed reports that WikiLeaks may be holding 260，000 classified diplomatic cables， and the US authorities have been quoted as saying they want to interview Assange about all this material. Some sources with links in the intelligence agencies have warned him he is in danger and advised him not to travel to the US.

When I ask him whether the rapid growth and increasing significance of WikiLeaks surprises him， he says no. “I was always confident the idea would succeed， otherwise I wouldn’t have spent my time on it or asked other people to spend their time on it.” He has spent a good deal of that time in Iceland， where freedom of information is protected and he has high-level supporters. It was here that the complex work of decrypting the video of the Baghdad attack was done.

Assange’s Life

Assange was born in Queensland in 1971 into what sounds a highly unconventional family. His parents ran a touring theatre company， and he went to 37 different schools， though some accounts suggest his mother thought school encouraged deference16 to authority， so educated him mainly at home. His parents divorced， his mother remarried， there was a bustup with her new husband， which led to her， Julian and his half-brother going on the run.

He fell in love with computers in his teens， became a skilled hacker and formed a group called International Subversives， which broke into US defence department computers. He married at 18， and he and his wife soon had a son， but the marriage broke down and he fought a long custody battle， which， it is said， entrenched17 his dislike of authority. There are also suggestions he felt some people in the government had been conspiring18 against him. So we have a neat journalistic picture: computer expert with two decades of hacking experience， hostility to authority， conspiracy theorist. Setting up WikiLeaks in his mid-30s looks like an inevitable move.

Challenging Conventional Journalism

In his talk， Assange had said that he is neither of the right nor the left—his enemies are forever trying to pin labels on him in order to undermine his organisation. What matters first and foremost is getting the information out. “First the facts， ma’am，” is how he summarises his philosophy to me. “Then we’ll get down to what we want to do about it. You can’t do anything sensible until you know what the situation is that you’re in.” But while he rejects political labels， he says WikiLeaks does have its own ethical code. “We have values. I am an information activist. You get the information out to the people. We believe a richer intellectual and historical record that is fuller and more accurate is in itself intrinsically good， and gives people the tools to make intelligent decisions.”

Is WikiLeaks’s impact today an inherent criticism of conventional journalism? Have we been asleep19 on the job? “There has been an unconscionable20 failure to protect sources，” he says. “It is those sources who take all the risks.” Journalists， he says， let other people take the risks and then take the credit. They have been letting the state， big business， vested interests get away with it21 for too long， and a network of hackers and whistleblowers hunched over computers， making sense of complex data and with a mission to make it freely available， is now ready to do a better job. It’s an incendiary22 argument， and one I’d stay and contest if he wasn’t sipping white wine and about to order dinner.

But one thing I have to say. Julian Assange may represent the future of news reporting， but he is not a journalist， at least not in the conventional sense.

這事無論怎么看都很怪異。首先，作為“維基泄密”這家全球性揭秘服務(wù)網(wǎng)站的創(chuàng)始人、總指揮、領(lǐng)頭人和精神領(lǐng)袖，朱利安·阿桑奇一開始看上去就有點(diǎn)怪異。此人瘦高個(gè)子，身上的牛仔褲開著口子，穿著棕色夾克，打著黑色領(lǐng)帶，腳上的運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋破破爛爛。他討厭新聞報(bào)道中的主觀主義;我覺得他其實(shí)在一定程度上也討厭記者。“維基泄密”將自己描述為無需接受審查的系統(tǒng)，專門用于泄露難以查詢的文件。我想這一網(wǎng)站從本質(zhì)上來說是要取代像我這樣的主觀主義傻瓜。

如果讓阿桑奇來寫這篇文章，他肯定會(huì)把他在倫敦城市大學(xué)新聞?wù){(diào)查中心開設(shè)的暑期培訓(xùn)班上發(fā)表的冗長的演講發(fā)到網(wǎng)上，外加我們在去飯店的路上那十分鐘的聊天錄音，以及我們在飯店里那20分鐘的談話內(nèi)容。要不是我禮貌地提醒他我沒有時(shí)間了，他還會(huì)聊下去。“當(dāng)你研究任何有關(guān)我的二手資料時(shí)，一定要非常小心。”我們走的時(shí)候，他如是說。

“新聞報(bào)道應(yīng)該更像科學(xué)，”他在飯店里面告訴我，“事實(shí)應(yīng)該盡可能地得到證實(shí)。如果記者們想讓自己的行業(yè)擁有長期的信譽(yù)，他們就應(yīng)該朝這個(gè)方向努力。”他崇尚這樣一種觀點(diǎn):一篇2，000字的文章應(yīng)該有25，000字的原始材料作為支撐。他還說，你完全有理由在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上提供這些原始材料。

阿桑奇的“維基泄密”

阿桑奇于2007年1月將wikileaks.org公布于眾，自那以后便有“驚人之舉”迭出。對(duì)于一個(gè)只有幾名員工，也基本沒有資金支持的機(jī)構(gòu)來說，能有這些“驚人之舉”著實(shí)令人驚訝。該網(wǎng)站揭露了肯尼亞前總統(tǒng)丹尼爾·阿拉普·莫伊家族腐敗的證據(jù)，發(fā)表了關(guān)塔那摩監(jiān)獄的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)運(yùn)作程序，甚至還將薩拉·佩林的雅虎郵箱的郵件內(nèi)容公之于眾。但真正讓“維基泄密”進(jìn)入主流媒體行列的，還是其于2010年4月公布的一架美軍直升機(jī)于2007年7月在巴格達(dá)發(fā)動(dòng)攻擊的錄像。那次攻擊殺害了許多伊拉克平民以及兩名路透社的工作人員。

這段錄像以一段39分鐘的未經(jīng)剪輯版本和一段18分鐘的名為《連帶謀殺》的影片形式發(fā)布出來，使公眾了解到美軍那令人不寒而栗的態(tài)度:確定目標(biāo)時(shí)的馬虎，干掉一個(gè)試圖爬向安全地帶的受重傷男子時(shí)的迫切，以及哪怕是面對(duì)兩個(gè)孩子時(shí)也同樣表現(xiàn)出的漠然。那兩個(gè)孩子坐著貨車來收尸，卻立刻遭到了攻擊。“那是他們的錯(cuò)，誰讓他們把孩子帶到戰(zhàn)場上來呢。”一名飛行員說。“沒錯(cuò)。”他的同事毫無表情地回應(yīng)道。

“維基泄密”只有五名全職員工，據(jù)阿桑奇宣稱，網(wǎng)站還有大約四十名經(jīng)常參與干活的人士、八百名偶爾提供幫助的人，以及一萬名支持者和捐助者。這是一種非結(jié)構(gòu)化的、權(quán)力分散的組織形態(tài)。隨著現(xiàn)在或許可能被稱為“新聞工廠”的模式變得過時(shí)且難以融資，這種組織形態(tài)很可能會(huì)成為媒體機(jī)構(gòu)未來的模式。阿桑奇傾向于把這種發(fā)展趨勢稱做“運(yùn)動(dòng)”，目前這一運(yùn)動(dòng)進(jìn)入了微妙的時(shí)刻。“我們同樣面臨著處于成長階段的新興機(jī)構(gòu)所遇到的全部問題，”他說，“而且我們還處于極端敵對(duì)的環(huán)境和政府的監(jiān)視之下。”

安全機(jī)構(gòu)的介入對(duì)網(wǎng)站來說是個(gè)嚴(yán)重的威脅。“這使我們很難快速獲得新的人才，”阿桑奇說，“因?yàn)槊總€(gè)人都不得不接受個(gè)人背景調(diào)查，而且這也使得內(nèi)部溝通非常困難，因?yàn)樗械慕涣鞫急仨毤用埽?yán)格執(zhí)行安全程序。而且，我們還必須準(zhǔn)備好應(yīng)訴。”

阿桑奇不得不注意自己的人身安全。22歲的美國陸軍情報(bào)分析員布拉德利·曼寧已經(jīng)被捕，并因涉嫌向“維基泄密”提供巴格達(dá)直升機(jī)發(fā)動(dòng)攻擊的那段錄像而受到指控。還有一些具有爭議的報(bào)道稱，“維基泄密”可能掌握了260，000份機(jī)密的外交電報(bào)。有人引用美國當(dāng)局的話說，政府想與阿桑奇會(huì)面，談?wù)勥@些電報(bào)的事。而一些與情報(bào)機(jī)構(gòu)有聯(lián)系的消息來源警告阿桑奇，說他會(huì)有危險(xiǎn)，并建議他不要去美國。

“維基泄密”快速成長，影響力與日俱增。當(dāng)我問阿桑奇是否對(duì)此感到驚訝時(shí)，他回答說沒有。“我一直堅(jiān)信這個(gè)主意會(huì)成功，否則我是不會(huì)在上面花費(fèi)時(shí)間的，也不會(huì)叫其他人在上面花費(fèi)時(shí)間。”他花在“維基泄密”上的很大一部分時(shí)間是在冰島度過的，因?yàn)槟抢锉Ｗo(hù)信息自由，而且他還有高層的支持者。對(duì)直升機(jī)在巴格達(dá)發(fā)動(dòng)攻擊的那段錄像進(jìn)行解密這一復(fù)雜工作就是在那里完成的。

阿桑奇生平

阿桑奇1971年生于澳大利亞的昆士蘭州，他的家庭聽起來相當(dāng)?shù)牟煌瑢こ！Ｋ母改附?jīng)營一家流動(dòng)劇團(tuán)，他上過37所不同的學(xué)校，當(dāng)然也有人說，他主要是在家里接受母親的教育，因?yàn)樗赣H覺得學(xué)校總是助長屈從權(quán)威的惡習(xí)。他父母后來離了婚，母親改嫁，與新丈夫大吵一架后，最后只好帶著阿桑奇和他同母異父的弟弟四處流浪。

阿桑奇十幾歲的時(shí)候愛上了電腦，成了一名技術(shù)嫻熟的黑客，并成立了一個(gè)名為“國際顛覆者”的組織，該組織曾侵入過美國國防部的電腦。他18歲結(jié)婚，不久妻子就給他生了個(gè)兒子。但是后來他的婚姻破裂，為了爭取孩子的監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)，他陷入了耗時(shí)漫長的官司之中。據(jù)說，正是這場官司讓他對(duì)政府權(quán)威深惡痛絕。還有人說，他覺得政府里有人在密謀對(duì)付他。這樣，我們就勾勒出一幅有關(guān)阿桑奇的完整的新聞圖片:一位具有20年黑客經(jīng)歷的電腦專家，一個(gè)對(duì)政府充滿敵視的人，一個(gè)陰謀論者。看來，他在三十多歲時(shí)創(chuàng)立“維基泄密”是人生不可避免的一步了。

挑戰(zhàn)傳統(tǒng)新聞

阿桑奇在談話中聲稱自己既不是右派也不是左派——他的敵人總是想給他貼上標(biāo)簽，以破壞他的機(jī)構(gòu)。對(duì)他來說，首要的事情是把信息發(fā)布出去。“首先要有事實(shí)，女士。”他這么向我總結(jié)他的信條。“然后，我們才能認(rèn)真考慮如何處理這些事實(shí)。只有當(dāng)你知道自己所處的形勢如何時(shí)，才能采取明智的行動(dòng)。”不過，他盡管拒絕政治性的標(biāo)簽，卻也表示“維基泄密”有自己的道德準(zhǔn)則。“我們有自己的價(jià)值觀。我是信息活動(dòng)分子。你得把信息透露給民眾。我們相信，如果能夠有更豐富、更全面和更準(zhǔn)確的知識(shí)與歷史記錄，從本質(zhì)上來說是一件好事，它能夠?yàn)槊癖娮鞒隼碇堑臎Q定提供必要的材料。”

“維基泄密”當(dāng)今收獲的影響力從本質(zhì)上看是不是對(duì)傳統(tǒng)新聞事業(yè)的一種批判呢?我們這些傳統(tǒng)記者一直以來是不是已對(duì)工作麻木不仁了呢?“對(duì)于信息來源我們沒有盡力保護(hù)，這是極不公正的，”阿桑奇說，“現(xiàn)在承擔(dān)所有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的都是這些信息來源人士。”

他說，記者讓其他人承擔(dān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，到頭來卻把功勞攬到自己身上。長久以來，他們一直讓政府、大企業(yè)和既得利益集團(tuán)逃脫懲罰，逍遙法外。而現(xiàn)在，一幫黑客和揭秘者彎腰弓背地坐在電腦前，從紛繁復(fù)雜的資料中梳理頭緒，擔(dān)負(fù)起讓民眾能自由獲取這些資料的使命，他們已為改變新聞現(xiàn)狀作好了準(zhǔn)備。這是一個(gè)煽動(dòng)性的論調(diào)，如果不是因?yàn)樗吰分灼咸丫七厹?zhǔn)備開始點(diǎn)菜的話，我是會(huì)坐下來與他好好辯論一番的。

但是有一點(diǎn)我還是得聲明。朱利安·阿桑奇可能代表了新聞報(bào)道的未來，但他并不是一名記者，至少不是傳統(tǒng)意義上的記者。

注釋

1. whistleblower n. 告密者，揭發(fā)者

2. frontman n. 領(lǐng)頭人

3. cadaverous a. 瘦削的，骨瘦如柴的

4. rambling a. 長而離題的

5. verifiable a. 能作證的，能證實(shí)的

6. pull off:干成某事，努力實(shí)現(xiàn)

7. coup n. 妙計(jì)，出乎意料的行動(dòng)

8. Daniel arap Moi:丹尼爾·阿拉普·莫伊(1924~)，1978~2002年間擔(dān)任肯尼亞總統(tǒng)一職，于2006年被查出在擔(dān)任總統(tǒng)期間涉嫌收受巨額賄賂資金。“維基泄密”通過英國《衛(wèi)報(bào)》公布了有關(guān)其家族收受賄賂等的腐敗證據(jù)。

9. Guantánamo Bay detention centre:關(guān)塔那摩監(jiān)獄，位于古巴東南端的關(guān)塔那摩市，是美軍2002年1月建立的一座監(jiān)獄，最初的目的是臨時(shí)關(guān)押囚犯，現(xiàn)已改建成一個(gè)長期使用的監(jiān)獄。2007年，“維基泄密”公布了一份美國國防部下發(fā)給士兵的《關(guān)塔那摩監(jiān)獄管理指導(dǎo)手冊》，規(guī)定了對(duì)囚犯權(quán)利的限制條款。

10. collateral a. 連帶的，并行的

11. finish off: 結(jié)束，干掉

12. matter-of-factly:不動(dòng)感情地

13. amorphous a. 無組織的，不定型的

14. adversarial a. 對(duì)抗的，敵手的

15. Bradley Manning: 布拉德利·曼寧(1987~)，美國陸軍情報(bào)分析員，因涉嫌向“維基泄密”提供文中提到的美軍在巴格達(dá)的空中襲擊視頻而被捕，今年7月份又被懷疑與泄露阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭日志有關(guān)，現(xiàn)已經(jīng)受到泄露軍方機(jī)密數(shù)據(jù)等數(shù)項(xiàng)指控。

16. deference n. 順從，服從

17. entrench vt. 確立，使……處于牢固地位

18. conspire vt. 搞陰謀

19. asleep a. 麻木的，不重視的

20. unconscionable a. 不合理的，極不公正的

21. get away with it:逃脫懲罰，僥幸成功

22. incendiary adj. 煽動(dòng)的