The openness and transparency WikiLeaks has given us is invaluable—which is why I’m donating $20,000 to get its founder out of jail.
Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.
Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.
We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.
So why is WikiLeaks, after performing such an important public service, under such vicious attack? Because they have outed and embarrassed those who have covered up the truth. The assault on them has been over the top:
**Sen. Joe Lieberman says WikiLeaks "has violated the Espionage Act."
**The New Yorker's George Packer calls Assange "super-secretive, thin-skinned, megalomaniacal."
**Sarah Palin claims he's "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" whom we should pursue "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."
**Democrat Bob Beckel (Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign manager) said about Assange on Fox: "A dead man can't leak stuff... there's only one way to do it: Illegally shoot the son of a bitch."
**Republican Mary Matalin says "he's a psychopath, a sociopath ... He's a terrorist."
**Rep. Peter A. King calls WikiLeaks a "terrorist organization."
And indeed they are! They exist to terrorize the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation and to others. Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned—and now it's Big Brother who's being watched… by us!
WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept… as secrets.
I ask you to imagine how much different our world would be if WikiLeaks had existed 10 years ago. Take a look at this photo. That's Mr. Bush about to be handed a "secret" document on August 6th, 2001. Its heading read: "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." And on those pages it said the FBI had discovered "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." Bush decided to ignore it and went fishing for the next four weeks.
Supporters of Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, hold posters during a protest in front of the British Embassy in Madrid, Spain on Dec. 11, 2010. (Photo: Stringer / AP Photo)
But if that document had been leaked, how would you or I have reacted? What would Congress or the FAA have done? Was there not a greater chance that someone, somewhere would have done something if all of us knew about bin Laden's impending attack using hijacked planes?
The WSJ puts a lot of time and effort into its leders—those long, exhaustively-reported front-page exclusives about topics which might not be breaking news but which are still very important. So why is it that when a story is based on information found online, the WSJ still can’t seem to link to it? Today’s leder is a good one, about possible waste in the world of spinal surgery. But it could definitely do with a few hyperlinks:
Medtronic began releasing information about its payments to surgeons on its website in June, after coming under intense scrutiny from Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa)…
Medtronic’s website shows that the company paid Dr. Vaccaro $1.28 million in royalties in the first three quarters of 2010…
Dr. Foley has had royalty-bearing agreements with Medtronic since 1996. The company paid him more than $27 million from 2001 to 2006, according to internal Medtronic documents reviewed by the Journal. On its website, the company discloses paying him another $13 million in royalties in the first three quarters of this year alone.
The failure to link to Medtronic’s website is part of what makes this story more confusing than it needs to be. There’s also a cryptic reference to a court ruling which is preventing the WSJ from printing everything it knows:
The Journal mined hospitals’ Medicare claims to see what proportion of fusions performed fall in this category. Due to a three-decade-old court ruling guarding the confidentiality of physician information, the paper is barred from disclosing what it found regarding the five Norton surgeons.
Critics of the court ruling and of the privacy policies of the federal Medicare program argue that making such information public would help taxpayers understand where their money is going, and potentially deter abusive or wasteful practices.
A couple of hyperlinks would be great here, too: which court ruling, exactly, are we talking about? And which critics? I’m sure their criticism is online, under their real names—so why not link to that criticism, rather than wave vaguely at it before moving on to something else?
The bigger problem is that the WSJ makes it very hard to separate two different stories. The first story is that Medicare is paying lots of money—$2.24 billion in 2008—for spinal surgeries, many of which might not be necessary or even desirable. The second story is that Medtronic is paying lots of money to a select group of surgeons who perform a lot of such surgeries.
The first story is reasonably clear, although it would have been helpful to compare Medicare with private-sector insurers: if everybody’s happily paying for these surgeries, then the problem doesn’t really lie with Medicare. The second story, however, is murkier. The WSJ is aggressive chasing it:
Corporate whistleblowers and congressional critics contend such arrangements—which are common in orthopedic surgery—amount to kickbacks to stoke sales of medical devices.
The official statements from both surgeons and Medtronic make the kickback allegations seem a bit of a stretch. But look how the WSJ follows those statements with an explicit reprise of the kickback theme:
Dr. Foley responded in an email that he doesn’t receive any royalties from Medtronic on devices he has contributed to when they are implanted in patients by himself, members of his practice or hospitals where he has admitting privileges.
Brian Henry, a spokesman for Medtronic, says the company applies that policy to all its collaborating surgeons, thereby eliminating the temptation for them to do more surgeries to earn more royalty income.
Two former Medtronic employees have alleged in separate whistleblower lawsuits that the royalty agreements are intended to disguise the fact that the payments the company makes to surgeons are really kickbacks for using Medtronic devices.
The paper says it “reviewed” a copy of one of the lawsuits—again, this is something it would be great for them to have posted. And more generally, it would be great to see some mathematics on the alleged kickbacks: how do the payments to surgeons compare to the profits that Medtronic makes from their work? Are the payments linked in any way to the number of surgeries they perform? What proportion of spinal surgeons get these payments? Is there evidence that surgeons getting paid by Medtronic use more Medtronic devices than their colleagues?
My gut feeling here is that Medtronic is quite deliberately paying large amounts of money to key spinal surgeons, who as a result become well-disposed towards the company and the kind of of surgery which involves its products. In turn, their enthusiasm spreads across their hospitals and their region as a whole, since these surgeons are senior, respected physicians who are emulated by their peers.
But that kind of thing is a kickback only in the most conceptual way: if the surgeons help to make a certain procedure more popular among their peers, then they’ll eventually get larger royalty checks. What I’m not seeing is any evidence that if certain surgeons funnel money to Medtronic by using Medtronic products in their operations, then some of that money ends up getting kicked back to them.
My larger problem with the WSJ story is that by concentrating on kickbacks and Medicare, it downplays the bigger picture—that surgeons around the country are getting paid millions of dollars by Medtronic and performing lots of unnecessary surgeries, with the cost coming out of everybody’s rapidly-rising health-insurance premiums. If there’s a scandal here, it would seem to be one endemic to the healthcare industry. I don’t understand why the WSJ would narrow its focus so specifically onto Medicare.
(Cross-posted at CJR)
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scamIn April, The Washington Post integrated Facebook Platform to create a social experience across the site with “Network News.” The Washington Post has seen more than 280% increase in referral traffic year-over-year, as news becomes ...
Even Neanderthals understood the value of a diverse diet. Researchers have identified strong evidence that the Neanderthal diet, previously thought to be almost exclusively meat-based, also included a nutritious portion of cooked ...
Hal Boedeker of Orlando Sentinel is The TV Guy. Dishing on TV, the news and what everybody is talking about.
bench craft company scam
