What Is Next For Assange

I don't really know what is the future of the founder of Wikileaks. Julian Assange now faces indefinite stay at the Equadorean embassy. He is in a catch-22 - cannot go to Sweden for court trials because of the rigid prosecution laws the country holds, and in case he leaves London, US could easily capture and take him to a even tougher US prison. They are gloomy predictions, but not difficult to imagine considering he defied the system and made transparency his ideal.  

We know Wikileaks is an organization that reveals documents, reports, all related to unethical behavior in governments and institutions. I don't see what is the problem with that. Wikileaks started out in 2007 oficially and brought important documents to light in all those years, such as the Guantanamo Bay files, US embassy cables and the Afghanistan war logs, amidst others.

The Equadorean embassy's asylum is one of the most difficult episodes of Julian Assange's life. He had better chosen that than being extradicted to Sweden, where he could endure tough judicial system, as Gottfrid Svartholm, Pirate Bay founder, has been having so far for hacking accusations. Besides that, Assange would be taken to a US prison without effort, which was already mentioned.

In the meantime he meets with Lady Gaga, films personal messages for support and finalises his next book about the future of internet. I believe he sowed the seed for a more open and realistic freedom of the press, which is something many are looking for, for example, Folha, a Brazilian newspaper, which has divulged a web link for leaks that leads up to investigation.

Although the future of Julian Assange is unclear, the Wikileaks site is working still, gathering lots of contributions regularly and requesting donations again via credit card. What he had done probably is difficult to undone, and that is a great keystone for transparency in politics in this new century. 

You Know You Want It Too

                          Kid browses the Internet. Illustration by trrent


Facebook has never been much of my thing because I'd rather read the world wide news on Twitter. It sounds reasonable to me. Since people I know are stored on FB I don't have the need to check them all of the time.


Mark Zuckerberg proposes that people stay connected 24/7 on the new Facebook profile. He is gonna provide all you can think of on Facebook. Uhh, Internet within the Internet. I don't think it's something for me. I'm not engaged to Facebook in a way that makes me stay connected to it all day. Google is almost the same: it's everywhere on the Internet - everything seems to be floating around the giant web company.


Regarding Google it's a bit difficult to stay away as I have a gmail account. Nothing much against it - I don't have a Facebook email, though. Nonetheless, both companies, through interaction, provide charitable support, jobs, revenue and web services.


The new Facebook's profile is gonna revolutionize the market as we know it. It is gonna give marketers the chance to find the exact profile they are looking for. If you are really a Facebook user, prepare to be induced in whatever people are watching, listing, wanting. Facebook knows you want it too.

News Corp on the unpaid news

It sounds like a corporation that you might have seen in comic books, but News Corp is real, is large, and it’s growing its tentacles everywhere. It’s demanding, too.

The latest about News Corp is that they are going to charge for journalism on the Internet. It started some months ago as the media mogul and Fox network owner, Rupert Murdoch, announced plans to offer paid content to subscribed users. This is already experienced with the London Times and the Wall Street Journal – the latter owned by News Corp. Does it have to be this way?

The public wasn’t the intended user of the internet when it was invented by American computer scientist, Vinton Cerf, in 1973. It was mostly regarded for academics and students, back in that time. It is openly used now by anyone with an available computer and a proper connection. The internet is not owned by any organization in the world.

The internet is very much integrated to everybody’s lives across the world. In one way or another, people would acknowledge that the internet is here to stay. One good fact linked to all of this is that it’s free. It’s enough to pay for technology to connect, and pay the monthly data costs.

Corporations can’t see this from the consumer’s point of view. Journalism is usually a service, either on the internet, or on the TV, radio etc. Publishing news on the internet started as an arm of the news organization’s services, this online service has become a trend, which people usually get for free. Reverse that trend and it becomes complicated.

Not that the music industry hasn’t done this - it has. People are happy to pay for songs. Nevertheless, it is not a trend. There are numerous ways to get songs for free, and internet users will always find songs for free to download.

News Corp and Journalism Online, for example, another business that has similar plans to Rupert Murdoch, need to understand that not everyone is paying for their special news in the future. Someone needs to put this in the news!