WikiLeaks vs. Open Data

It's early innings yet for WikiLeaks'* CableGate** - they've released 1/10th of 1% of their monstrous cache of 250,000 total cables from within the State Department so far, so any analysis that doesn't come from the official partners is necessarily shallow. Fortunately I'm a shallow person, so I'll dive right in. This massive dump information, delivered electronically, sounds an awful lot like Open Data - the idea that governments automatically publish some of their information generated electronically for the public good. I'm afraid that the fact that it bears a resemblance to this leak will make any sort of data sharing by the administration tainted by association. With people calling for the head of WikiLeaks' erratic leader Julian Assange and both the Pentagon and State Department embarrassed by these releases, it's likely that the information sharing will dry up. It doesn't have to be that way. Most of the cables - over 90% - are not "secret" level classification, and (apparently) none are higher. If countries were more open about sharing the information and classified less of the vast amount of content generated, citizens would be more informed about the daily operations of their government. Failures in inter-agency communication revealed by the 9/11 attacks demanded more openness within the US executive branch. Instead of clamping that off, governments around the world should double down on what is being shared. The genie's out of the bottle; even if WikiLeaks goes away, a replacement could emerge tomorrow. By sharing more proactively, it may reduce the demand for such information. Appropriate classification of fewer items would help keep information that should be secret in fewer hands - and more likely to remain secret. From what we've seen so far, these cables shine a fairly positive light on the workings of the State Department - the reports are thoughtful, professional, and well written. (I love the description of a Caucasus wedding.) More information from all governments, more broadly distributed, would enable their citizens to be better informed about what their leadership is doing in their name. That's a good thing. Governments need to keep their secrets, as you or I do. Just, perhaps, not quite so many of them.* Why are they named WikiLeaks anyway? It's not like anyone can edit their secret documents. ** Why CableGate? It's not a scandal and didn't involve the Watergate complex or any other gated structure I'm aware of. Nixon was 40 years ago, people. Sheesh.