WikiLeaks. The word is tainted with an air of danger. The website has recently reached a new level of notoriety after it published in July the Afghan 'War Diary' - more than 92,000 documents related to the war in Afghanistan. And just last month, the site distributed more than 200,000 US embassy documents to newspapers such as The Guardian and The New York Times.
These releases attracted the ire of many countries, particularly the United States, which said the leaks put soldiers' and citizens' lives in danger. But is this true?
So-called 'whistle blowers' have definitely proved their worth in the past. Most famously, 'Deep Throat' played an important role in providing information on Richard Nixon's role in the 'Watergate' scandal to Bob Woodward and Carol Bernstein, journalists at The Washington Post in the 1970s.
Daniel Ellsberg, a military analyst, in 1971 leaked the 'Pentagon Papers', a history of US political-military decision making in Vietnam between 1945 and 1967.
The media plays an important role in a free society in checking up on the government to make sure politicians stay in line.
However, it is questionable whether Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, deserves the title of 'whistle blower'. The website's releases have indeed potentially endangered people.