Organizational resistance as a vector of deterritorialization: The case of WikiLeaks and secrecy havens

Abstract

This article investigates the relations of power and resistance manifest by the WikiLeaks network. The primary research question of this inquiry is, 'what power relations and possibilities for resistance are presented by WikiLeaks as a novel form of network organization?' The article shows that WikiLeaks has been able to exert influence from the periphery of existing networks by exploiting vectors of 'deterritorialization' to destabilize existing power relations. The article contributes to the literature on the network organization by developing an account of resistance to State and corporate power in terms of an 'absolute deterritorialization'. This idea has important implications for the tactics of resistance in network organizations, where vectors of deterritorialization have become a defining feature of resistance tactics of the WikiLeaks network. 'We do not lack communication. On the contrary we have too much of it. We lack resistance to the present'.

Theorizing dramaturgical resistance leadership from the leadership campaigns of Jeremy Corbyn

“…Lastly, we note instances of sustained and even permanent sites of resistance that gain traction and consolidate power. Examples of this phenomenon would include the ‘hacker’ or ‘whistleblowing organization’, such as WikiLeaks, which resists both state and corporate power (Munro, 2016).…”

O rizoma deleuze-guattariano nas pesquisas em Estudos Organizacionais

“…Another study that makes use of the concept of the rhizome is by Munro (2015), who investigates power relations and resistance demonstrated within the context of WikiLeaks network activity. In this work, the aspect that stands out the most in the concept of the rhizome is the networks' imagetic aspect, and the constant deterritorialization and reterritorialization process that permeates it.…”

The anonymous online self: Toward an understanding of the tension between discipline and online anonymity

“…From the negative perspective, anonymity is said to have some disinhibiting effects (Joinson, ) on bad behaviours. For example, individuals may hide behind the mask of anonymity to engage in misbehaviours such as griefing (ie, intentional, unacceptable online behaviour) (Chesney et al, ), flaming (verbal attacks intended to offend others) (Reinig et al, ), cyber‐bullying (Lowry, Zhang, Wang, & Siponen, ), leaking confidential information (Zajácz, ), and hacking (Munro, ), among others. Given these negative effects of anonymity, there has been some debate as to whether it may weaken the essential social values of accountability, openness, and honesty that hold strong the very fabric of our society (Davenport, ).…”