Throughout history, the media’s role in democratic society has fluctuated and changed due to a number of economic, political and technological shifts. There is certainly one feature that has maintained it’s value from the early days of democratic media systems though, that being the media playing the role of political watchdog. The media acting as a watchdog is embedded in the make-up of the democratic media system and highlights the importance of a media free from state imperatives and governmental bias. The media in democratic nations has traditionally taken this stance within society and acted as the ‘fourth estate’ (separate from the executive, the legislature and the administrative services) in order to create a separation of power and ensure citizens are protected and informed. With the rise of corporations and large transnational companies owning the media, it has also become apparent that these organisations of power should be taken into account as well when it comes to the media’s role as a watchdog. It should be the media’s duty to ensure these highly powerful bodies, both public and private, remain honest and do not abuse the positions they find themselves in.
However, in recent times investigative journalism under the umbrella of traditional media platforms, particularly the printing press, has been significantly eroded. Time and money for these important projects has diminished, with a focus instead on bite-sized, often sensationalist nonsense. Yet, this doesn’t necessarily mean the death of the media as the fourth estate. New media platforms are certainly picking up the slack when it comes to keeping powerful ruling elites honest.
In a very short period of time, Julian Assange, founder of whistleblower website Wikileaks, has become one of the most intriguing, elusive and important figures involved in furthering the media’s role as the fourth estate both in Australia and abroad. Despite the fact that Assange has never officially admitted to being the brains behind the website, it is widely known that the 38 year old Australian was heavily involved in the formation of Wikileaks. The site has been publishing confidential and secret documents for over three years now, and shows no signs of abating.
It is critical to note that traditional media outlets would have much more difficulty releasing such highly sensitive information on a continuous basis. It is through the ambiguity and networking capabilities of new media platforms that the media’s role as a watchdog can truly be achieved. Wikileaks as new media outlet has the advantage of not having a fixed headquarters, rendering common retaliatory responses such as tapping phones and raiding offices useless. The covert nature of providing relevant and important information to the people via sites such as Wikileaks has no doubt given the media a huge boost in fulfilling it’s democratic role as the fourth estate.
The other important point to make is the fact that unlike many traditional media outlets, a site such as Wikileaks is very much a global organisation. Not being restricted by national boundaries or reach means that the role of the democratic watchdog can be taken to a new level. As Assange says, it helps not to be ‘swept up in the trivialities of a nation’. The greater global context and scope a media outlet upholding democratic values attains the better. That is obviously the opinion of Assange and the other journalists, academics and technicians of Wikileaks. Whether it is a leak from the United States military, the Australian Communications and Media Authority or even an Icelandic bank, both public and private institutions are going to be scrutinised in a manner never seen before. It’s no wonder people in high places across the globe are feeling a little uneasy.
