Camisetas! Nobel da Paz! E agora filme do Spielberg! Esse Assange, viu…

• Quem está aí? • “O Orkut perdeu o pé” • Personal Nerd: Cara a cara • Mobile World Congress: Mundo móvel • WikiLeaks à brasileira: Vazamento por via direta • Social Media Week: Quase social • O que há por trás do acordo entre Nokia e Microsoft• Servidor • Vida Digital: Jane McGonigal, designer de jogos •

Taí uma parada que o WikiLeaks podia vazar: o boquete de Monica em Bill. Ou você acha que na hora em que Clinton pediu para o segurança da casa mais vigiada do mundo desligar as câmeras do circuito interno, isso foi obedecido pelos arapongas da CIA, do FBI, do Pentágono, da NSA ou de algum serviço secreto americano de que a gente nem sabe o nome? Se duvidar os caras (os EUA, não Assange) devem ter sextape até do Kennedy…

Aí sim eu queria ver a cara da Hillary.

Assange deu entrevista a alguns brasileiros, publicadas em vários sites (linko aqui o dos irmãos Lauro e Tiago), e falou sobre a possibilidade de fazerem um filme sobre o caso WikiLeaks:

Hollywood pode produzir muitos filmes sobre o WikiLeaks, já que quase uma dúzia de livros está para ser publicada. Eu não estou envolvido em nenhuma produção de filme no momento. Mas se nós vendermos os direitos de produção, eu vou exigir que meu papel seja feito pelo Will Smith. O nosso porta-voz, Kristinn Hrafnsson, seria interpretado por Samuel L Jackson, e a minha bela assistente por Halle Berry. E o filme poderia se chamar “WikiLeaks Filme Noire”.

A imagem que ilustra o post é do blog Artificial Eyes.

E quando as redações começarem a virar assunto?

A pergunta surgiu no meio do debate da Campus Party que eu participei, feita pelo Gil Giardelli, e a Ana Brambilla discordou num dos pontos em que eu e o Forastieri concordamos (o Vinícius comenta o debate melhor do que eu, além de linkar os vídeos). Pra mim, WikiLeaks é jornalismo, ponto.

Se é bom ou mau jornalismo, isso é outra história – mas agora que temos um player jogando no ventilador notícias que não vêm via release de assessoria de imprensa nem com post-it grudado escrito “leia com atenção”. Sim, há a possibilidade de haver interesses escusos e de que seu criador estaria guiando a mídia tradicional de acordo com a sua agenda, mas o não dá para fugir que o site de Julian Assange propõe ao jornalismo tradicional o mesmo enigma digital que a indústria fonográfica enfrentou com o Napster, que pairou com o YouTube sobre o cinema e a TV, que o mercado editorial começa a ter de lidar com o Kindle. São os papéis do Pentágono e Watergate numa mesma tacada, sem intermediários e com um posterboy ególatra o suficiente pra se deixar virar ícone (pessoalmente, não grilo com isso, mas há quem se incomode).

E, na longa véspera de uma revelação que o site promete desde o ano passado sobre um grande banco americano, começam a sair as primeiras reações da mídia tradicional ao contar como foi lidar com Assange. Quem começou foi Bill Keller, editor-chefe do New York Times, que escreveu um texto gigantesco para a capa de sua revista dominical, lembrando a tradição de seu jornal, acusando Assange de manipulador, dizendo que WikiLeaks não é jornalismo e defendendo a imparcialidade sobre a notícia. Chama o jornal inglês Guardian, um dos veículos escolhidos por Julian para expor seus segredos de “abertamente de esquerda” e desqualifica Assange como excêntrico:

“He was alert but dishevelled, like a bag lady walking in off the street, wearing a dingy, light-coloured sport coat and cargo pants, dirty white shirt, beat-up sneakers and filthy white socks that collapsed around his ankles (…). He smelled as if he hadn’t bathed for days.”

O Guardian, por sua vez, veio com sua versão dos fatos, peitando principalmente o fato do WikiLeaks mudar a paisagem do jornalismo em tempos digitais, citando a Hillary, e do site ter mirado nos EUA. Escreve seu editor-chefe Alan Rusbridger:

Unnoticed by most of the world, Julian Assange was developing into a most interesting and unusual pioneer in using digital technologies to challenge corrupt and authoritarian states. It’s doubtful whether his name would have meant anything to Hillary Clinton at the time – or even in January 2010 when, as secretary of state, she made a rather good speech about the potential of what she termed “a new nervous system for the planet“.

She described a vision of semi-underground digital publishing – “the samizdat of our day” that was beginning to champion transparency and challenge the autocratic, corrupt old order of the world. But she also warned that repressive governments would “target the independent thinkers who use the tools”. She had regimes like Iran in mind.

Her words about the brave samizdat publishing future could well have applied to the rather strange, unworldly Australian hacker quietly working out methods of publishing the world’s secrets in ways which were beyond any technological or legal attack.

Little can Clinton have imagined, as she made this much praised speech, that within a year she would be back making another statement about digital whistleblowers – this time roundly attacking people who used electronic media to champion transparency. It was, she told a hastily arranged state department press conference in November 2010, “not just an attack on America’s foreign policy interests. It is an attack on the international community.” In the intervening 11 months Assange had gone viral. He had just helped to orchestrate the biggest leak in the history of the world – only this time the embarrassment was not to a poor east African nation, but to the most powerful country on earth.

O debate segue em aberto, mas eis um novo efeito colateral: sobre o jornalismo. Cada vez mais os bastidores do jornalismo se tornarão notícia e interesse geral e um filme sobre WikiLeaks (cada vez mais palpável) poria a público como as coisas realmente funcionam nas redações como o filme sobre o Facebook começou a expor as entranhas do Vale do Silício. Mas antes de entrarmos na paranóia sobre quem detém o monopólio da notícia, o que é exclusividade no século 21 e a velha discussão entre transparência e segurança, deixo o recado do professor Timothy Garton Ash, que foi ao Fórum Econômico de Davos justamente pra falar sobre WikiLeaks:

“Every organization should think very hard about what it is you really need to protect. You’re probably protecting a whole lot you don’t need to. And then do everything you can to protect that smaller amount”

Ou seja, quem tem, tem medo. Se não tem, é bom ter. Como digo: paranóia é precaução.

O Guardian também publica online trecho de um livro que começam a vender nesta segunda sobre o caso WikiLeaks (será que o livro vai vazar?), contando um pouco sobre a história de Assange em seus tempos de adolescente fugido e hacker fora-da-lei:

Julian was born on 3 July 1971 in Townsville, in the state of Queensland, in Australia’s sub-tropical north. His mother, Christine, was the daughter of Warren Hawkins, described by colleagues as a rigid and traditionalist academic who became a college principal; the family settled in Australia from 19th-century Scotland.

Julian’s biological father John Shipton is absent from much of the record: at 17, Christine abruptly left home, selling her paintings to buy a motorcycle, a tent and a map. Some 1,500 miles later she arrived in Sydney and joined its counter-culture scene. She fell in love with Shipton, a rebellious young man she met at an anti-Vietnam war demonstration in 1970. The relationship ended and he would play no further role in Assange’s life for many years.

They had no contact until after Assange turned 25. Later they met, with Julian discovering he had inherited his architect father’s highly logical and dispassionate intellect. One friend said Shipton was “like a mirror shining back at Julian”. Assange believed he had inherited his “rebel gene” from his unconventional father. In 2006, at the start of Julian’s remarkable mission to uncover secrets, he registered the wikileaks.org domain name under Shipton’s name.

After the birth of her child, Christine moved as a single mother to Magnetic Island, a short ferry ride across the bay from Townsville. She married Brett Assange, an actor and theatre director. Their touring lifestyle was the backdrop to Assange’s early years. His stepfather staged and directed plays and his mother did the make-up, costumes and set design.

During his childhood Assange attended 37 different schools, emerging with no qualifications whatsoever. “Some people are really horrified and say: ‘You poor thing, you went to all these schools.’ But actually during this period I really liked it,” he later said.

After her relationship with Brett Assange broke down, Christine became tempestuously involved with a third, much younger man, Keith Hamilton.

Hamilton was an amateur musician and a member of a New Age group, the Santiniketan Park Association. He was also, according to Assange, a manipulative psychopath.

“My mother became involved with a person who seems to be the son of Anne Hamilton-Byrne, of the Anne Hamilton-Byrne cult in Australia,” said Assange, “and we kept getting tracked down, possibly because of leaks in the social security system, and having to leave very quickly to a new city, and lived under assumed names.” For the next five or six years, the three lived as fugitives.

When Assange was 13 or 14, his mother had rented a house across the street from an electronics shop. Assange began going there and working on a Commodore 64. His mother saved to buy the computer for her older son as a present. Assange began teaching himself code. At 16 he got his first modem.

He attended a programme for gifted children in Melbourne, where he acquired “an introverted and emotionally disturbed” girlfriend, as he put it. Assange grew interested in science and roamed around libraries. Soon he discovered hacking.

(…)

By 1991 Assange was probably Australia’s most accomplished hacker. He and two others founded International Subversives magazine, offering tips on “phreaking” – how to break into telephone systems illegally and make free calls. The magazine had an exclusive readership: its circulation was just three, the hackers themselves.

In the spring of 1991, the three hackers found an exciting new target: MILNET, the US military’s secret defence data network. Quickly, Assange discovered a back door. He got inside. “We had total control over it for two years,” he later claimed. The hackers also routinely broke into the computer systems at Australia’s National University.

But he suspected Victoria police were about to raid his home. According to Underground: “He wiped his disks, burnt his printouts, and left” to doss temporarily with his girlfriend. The pair joined a squatters’ union, and when Assange was 18 she became pregnant. They married and had a baby boy, Daniel. But as Assange’s anxiety increased, and police finally closed in on his outlaw circle of hackers, his wife moved out, taking their 20-month-old son Daniel with them. Assange was hospitalised with depression. For a period he slept outdoors, rambling around the eucalyptus forests in Dandenong Ranges national park; he would wake up covered in mosquito bites.

But it wasn’t until 1994 that he was finally charged, with the case only being heard in 1996. He pleaded guilty in Melbourne’s Victoria County Court to 24 counts of hacking. The prosecution described Assange as “the most active” and “most skilful” of the group, and pressed for a prison sentence. Assange’s motive, according to the prosecution, was “simply an arrogance and a desire to show off his computer skills”.

O resto do perfil segue aqui.

Julian Assange tem um filho de 20 anos, Daniel, foi até tema de uma reportagem do New York Post sobre o trato de seu pai com as mulheres “That man does have a way of making a lot of female enemies”, escreveu Assange filho em seu Facebook logo após seu pai ser motivo de buscas policiais com base em uma alegação de estupro. É questão de tempo para que o transformem em mais uma celebridade da hora – ou será que ele aguenta quieto?

E, depois dos bancos, será a vez dos ETs? No início de dezembro, Assange disse que alguns dos documentos que tem em mãos falam sobre o governo americano e vida extraterrestre. Vem bem a calhar a publicação de revelações sobre o tema em um ano repleto de filmes sobre invasões alienígenas e conspirações do governo para mantê-las em segredo – só pelas minhas contas, são quase 10, incluindo o novo filme de J.J. Abrams, Super 8.

• Campus Party, fase 2 • Vida Digital: Mario Teza • Kinect hackeado: Olha! Sem a Microsoft! • OpenKinectProject • MySpace: ladeira abaixo • A ditadura na Tunísia e as botas da internet • Governo Kennedy digitalizado • O futuro do entretenimento passa pela TV – e pela internet • Twitter e Wikileaks, banda larga, Peter Sunde