Leaks aren’t always good for politics—or journalism

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump listens to a question as he appears at the "Retired American Warriors" conference during a campaign stop in Herndon, Virginia, U.S., October 3, 2016. REUTERS/Mike Segar

Both journalism and politics now live in the leak culture, and both professions will be forever changed by it. Both have always benefitted from leaks of some kind, from the officially authorized to the criminally filched. But today’s ability to download and disseminate vast banks of information constitutes a new chapter in journalistic and political practice. Wikileaks has put U.S. diplomatic cables in the public domain, followed by the much riskier leaking of sensitive files from the National Security Agency and that followed by the leaking of the Panama Papers, which showed how the rich secretly contrive to get richer.

The leak to the Washington Post of a video, made in 2005, of Republican  presidential nominee Donald Trump claiming, among much else, that “when you’re a star, you can do anything” to women differs in principle from the previous leaks. They were unambiguously about issues of public concern. The Trump leak reaches into his private life. It is, to say the least, an unedifying moment: It shows him as boastful, glorying in his fame because it allows him to assault women with impunity.

It has allowed – indeed, compelled – Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, her allies and supporters everywhere to frame Trump as a lewd, sexist brute, who in bragging about grabbing women  “by the pussy” had confessed, if not in prosecutable detail, to a criminal  assault.

Yet suppose that someone had leaked details of the argument between President Abraham Lincoln and General John Fremont, commander of the Union Army in St Louis, Missouri, in the summer of 1861. Fremont, an autocratic man who rarely consulted higher authority, proclaimed that all slaves in Missouri were free. Lincoln, concerned that this would turn pro-union slaveholders against him, rescinded the proclamation and fired Fremont.

The leak of a letter, an account of a meeting or of Lincoln’s private frustrations vented to aides or friends could easily have been represented as pro-slavery sentiments on the part of the president. In fact, it was a matter of calculation aimed at ultimate victory by one whose opposition to slavery had been constant since his youth, though only strengthened into a full emancipation conviction in the course of the Civil War. Publication of the leak could certainly have been justified as a matter of public interest. Yet it would have been wholly deceptive if used as an indication that Lincoln was pro-slavery.

The Trump leak may have been a reasonable illumination of Trump’s character. Though it caused a wave of revulsion in Republican ranks, it didn’t seem to cause much surprise. It was the kind of revelation that, when put in the public domain, we feel we know in principle, if not in detail. But it cannot encapsulate the whole person.

A leak of this kind allows no extenuating observation, of the kind Clinton herself proposed at the end of their testy second debate earlier this week. When asked what she admired about Trump, she said that “his children are incredibly able, and devoted. And I think that says a lot about Donald … I do respect that.” Clinton’s generosity had changed the frame from enclosing a sexist brute glorying in assaulting women to an affectionate and responsible father who also glories in assaulting women. We are all, to use Walt Whitman’s most famed line from Leaves of Grass, large and “contain multitudes.” Leaking isn’t, and doesn’t.

The bragging Trump video, which had lain on a shelf at NBC for more than a decade, was leaked toWashington Post reporter David Fahrenthold, presumably by an NBC employee (Fahrenthold won’t say. ) The network was itself about to broadcast the tape, but after the debate, when it would have had less impact of the kind the leaker—presumably a Clinton supporter– evidently wanted.

Julian Assange, whose Wikileaks organization has released, among other documents, Clinton, John Podesta and Democratic Party emails, has denied that he is dumping the data to help win Trump the White House. Nonetheless, he despises the liberal-interventionist record of the former secretary of state and has clearly signaled his preference for the property magnate.

The Clinton campaign has fired back, with spokesman Brian Fallon calling Wikileaks “a propaganda arm of the Russian government, running interference for their pet candidate, Trump.”

These leaks are more directly concerned with public matters but are still Clinton’s private communications about strategy and policy to her aides and her daughter, Chelsea. These internal debates, when revealed, always make participants appear cynical and disrespectful of the electorate, whose opinions the campaign wishes to manipulate. Every political figure has had such conversations for centuries: See Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince for advice on how to please the people and stay in power.

During the debate, Clinton congratulated herself for following First Lady Michelle Obama’s advice on “going high,” while Trump went low.  In fact, both candidates went “low” in using the garishly lit revelations of private behavior for political advantage. Trump’s parading of women who claim to have been sexually assaulted by her husband, Bill Clinton, was an attempt to win a battle on the same ground by claiming that Hillary Clinton threatened the women – a charge that, former editor of the New York Times Jill Abramson claims, is largely empty.

The internet never forgets. It is a dark arsenal of incidents, from embarrassing to mortal, to be used against public figures. The news media have few inhibitions left about using private scenes to humble the famous.

Trump, accustomed to taking the rewards of celebrity, is learning the old maxim that one must pay for everything. Clinton has known it for decades.

Leaking, the brilliant flash catching the guilty moment, is part of our politics, and our journalism.

John Lloyd co-founded the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, where he is senior research fellow. Lloyd has written several books, including What the Media Are Doing to Our Politics. He is also a contributing editor at the Financial Times and the founder of FT Magazine. This article was first published by Reuters.

Related Posts
Saboteurs in vain attempt to block Zimbabwe’s access to funds
It is quite disappointing that while Government is working tirelessly for economic revival, some local intended beneficiaries are equally working untiringly to throw spanners into that endeavoured. By Tafara Shumba Zimbabwe is saddled ...
Putin’s ever-shrinking circle shows a return to Soviet politics
Russia’s search for greater international influence and respect continued its downward spiral this summer. Its Olympic experience was spoiled by charges of doping. Accusations of hacking dragged it into the ...
Who could be Zimbabwe’s next president?
At 92, Robert Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe for longer than most Zimbabweans have been alive, taking office in 1980 after a brutal war and negotiated peace deal. By David McKenzie | ...
The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in western politics
The western financial crisis of 2007-8 was the worst since 1931, yet its immediate repercussions were surprisingly modest. The crisis challenged the foundation stones of the long-dominant neoliberal ideology but ...
After stripping off Shabanie Mine its assets, Mawere strips off his descency for Mugabe ass-licking
Listening to Mutumwa Mawere on South Africa’s ANN7 defending his once personal foe President Robert Mugabe left a sour taste in the mouth. This is the same man Mugabe and ...
Zimbabweans should be geared for the State of emergence and the worst
The political atmosphere in Zimbabwe is volatile and the Zimbabweans should expect the worst. Minster of Home affairs (Chombo) is the source of the current violence caused by the police ...
It happens……..
IT’S very hard to admit that your partner is cheating on you and thus you find many women comforting themselves with lies and convincing themselves that their partners will never ...
Unleashing the power of Africa’s civil society
A Liberian women’s peace movement led by 31-year-old Leymah Gbowee did something extraordinary in July 2003 to force Liberian warlords to sign a peace agreement that ended 10 years of a ...
Obama’s overlooked legacy: He leaves liberal imprint on U.S. law
WASHINGTON - When President Barack Obama entered the White House in 2009, the federal appeals courtbased in Virginia was known as one of the most conservative benches in the country. By ...
Jah Prayzah-Gonyeti sex scandal: Sexual abuse rife in showbiz
When Rita Marley told the world in 2004 that her beloved and iconic husband, Bob Marley had forced himself on her back in 1973, the world reacted with incredulity. By Bruce ...
Saboteurs in vain attempt to block Zimbabwe’s access
Putin’s ever-shrinking circle shows a return to Soviet
Who could be Zimbabwe’s next president?
The death of neoliberalism and the crisis in
After stripping off Shabanie Mine its assets, Mawere
Zimbabweans should be geared for the State of
It happens……..
Unleashing the power of Africa’s civil society
Obama’s overlooked legacy: He leaves liberal imprint on
Jah Prayzah-Gonyeti sex scandal: Sexual abuse rife in

Arts & Entertainment