Anglais Terminale, lettre.

1 Darling Island Rd,

Pyrmont NSW 2009,

Australia

27 november 2016

The Editor

The Sydney Morning Herald

Dear Sir or Madam,

As a response at the article regarding Wikileaks that your newspaper published this week, I am sending you this letter. I was shocked and I still am, because I was never imagine that your newspaper could take this position. However I am still wondering how a newspaper could say that the freedom of speech is dangerous and that Wikileaks should be close. In my opinion the newspapers are by definition the institutions that are defending the freedom of speech. I could agree with the fact that some of the classified/secret information that wikileaks revealed could've be dangerous, but as all of us now, before they made public thous information they were sure that they won’t hurt or put in jeopardy someone. So where is the logic of your article?

I have spend my last 3 days reading and documenting myself about this problem, so I can tell you that the only persons that believe that Wikileaks is a threat, are those who made something wrong or those who are trying to manipulate the others with lies and half-truths. And besides this all over the world we are speaking about equality, but how could be equal if we don’t have the same access to information, how could we make decision if we don’t know the truth? Isn’it better to know an ugly truth then a beautiful lie?

In a nutshell I would say that the world needs Wikileaks and more others company like these. Because despite the fact that Wikileaks is showing us the truth, it is also a not-for-profit media organisation that keep his sources of information anonymous.

I am requesting you to republish this article because if you don’t do so you risk to lose all your credibility and offense the majority of your readers.

Expecting prompt action,