When American diplomatic cables were leaked by the “ambivalent” Julian Assange in the winter of 2010, news consumers knew that the day had finally arrived when information would no longer be doled out in comfortable doses but would overwhelm them. The force with which the message was delivered was brute and it benumbed as it sought to update and revolutionise.

Some people were uncomfortable. They did not know how to react, whether to gasp or overlook, accept with skepticism or resign to what could not be ignored or avoided.

WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy, an account by Guardian journalists of the story of the leaks and its central figure, and Open Secrets: WikiLeaks, War and American Diplomacy, a compilation of The New York Times coverage of the WikiLeaks documents, are part of an attempt to make sense of the large body of material that Assange, theinternet-messiah, the modern-day seeker of truth who must offend as he pleases, shocked the world with. In addition, the volumes are a celebration by the two newspapers of the roles they played in sifting through and refining the raw cables for presentation to a worldwide readership.

While the two books naturally complement each other, they also stand apart. Guardian’s is a reader friendly offering with a chronological narrative. The fascinating, crisply drawn story it relates takes its time unfolding, in contrast to the pace at which the WikiLeaks’ documents were let loose on an unsuspecting world.

Open Secrets, on the other hand, is a proud compilation of articles about the WikiLeaks, published in The New York Times between 2010 and 2011. Put together in one place, these articles provide a vivid picture of how diplomacy works or doesn’t work in a world that is largely America’s making. The book carries an introduction by The New York Times editor, Bill Keller, who recalls the journey from his paper’s first encounter with Assange, courtesy of the Guardian. Keller talks about the difficulties The Times staff faced in dealing with the documents, and eventually, with the restless, demanding Assange who the paper didn’t want to treat as more than a source.

Right from the outset, the two papers approached Assange differently. After using information provided by him to recreate what happened behind the scenes in countries such as Iraq, Tunisia, Afghanistan and Pakistan, The Times does not appear to be comfortable with their source’s “political aims”. By contrast, Guardian is more accommodating, as isevident in the title of the book, “inside Julian Assange’s war on secrecy”. The title recognises it ultimately as Assange’s war, with Guardian enjoying a privileged preview seat in what is essentially Assange’s theatre. Also, the paper is willing to treat Assange as more than just a source. He a publisher-intermediary who “sought to have a degree of control over the source’s material”.

In the introduction to WikiLeaks, Guardian’s editor Alan Rusbridger expresses surprise at the American reaction to the release of the documents: “It appears to be a different story in the US, where there was a more bitter and partisan argument, clouded by differing ideas of patriotism. It was astonishing to sit in London reading of reasonably mainstream American figures calling for the assassination of Assange for what he had unleashed. It was surprising to see the widespread reluctance among American journalists to support the general ideal and work of WikiLeaks.”

Keller feels that the influence of the leaks could well have been overstated, and cites the internet as an agent that had already opened the world to an unprecedented free flow of information. He does credit the cables with providing nuance and texture to what, to his mind, was already not just suspected but known. Hence, perhaps, the title of the book, “open secrets”.

The Times editor also sounds a warning about the mention of names in cables of people who could be identified and put at risk. For their part, both The Times and the Guardian claim to have taken sufficient care to purge the stories of names in cases where it could lead to persecution. Their readers would add that there was more than just this that the two papers were eager to protect as they served as the link between the source and the consumers of information: their reputations — Guardian’s as a left-leaning daily and The New York Times as the voice of the Americanestablishment.

Keller’s introduction and The Times articles are journalistic perspectives chiefly directed at the American public about revelations most embarrassing for the American government. But that people sitting elsewhere could have a different perspective on the same information is a point brought home by a comparison of the varied handling by the Guardian and The Times of the material from the same pile.

Keller’s and Rusbridger’s fellow professionals in Pakistan will find it hard to agree with the leaks’stated purpose — that of lending nuance and some meat to stories people already knew and knew were true. In Pakistan, WikiLeaks were accepted as an authoritative account on events and subjects local journalists are often too shy of broaching.

While they understand the nuances of power structure and make oblique references, the complete story is often missing.

In WikiLeaks was found an account of events that was hard to deny and that helped Pakistani journalists and other commentators to candidly discuss issues which they had until then been too apprehensive to take up openly.

In a column for The Times, included in Open Secrets, Mohammed Hanif observes how the Pakistani media had sprung to the defence of their spies in the wake of leaks accusing the Inter-Services Intelligence of playing a double game in the ‘war on terror’.

Subsequent developments, however, show that the WikiLeaks did manage to set in motion a process in Pakistan to help remove some of the mist gathered over decades of whispering and murmuring. And indeed, as Pakistan and America are today busy in redefining their relationship, much before the Osama Bin Laden raid in May 2011, the WikiLeaks provided the two sides with the boldness to look at each other for who and what they actually are.

The reviewer is Resident Editor, Dawn, Lahore

Wikileaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy(CURRENT EVENTS)By David Leigh and Luke HardingGuardian Books, UKISBN 9780852652398340pp. Rs850

Open Secrets: WikiLeaks, War, and American Diplomacy(CURRENT EVENTS)New York Times Publication, USISBN 9780802145760523pp. $11.16