What the Pharos Project shares with WikiLeaks is being a transformative platform for transparency. But we do not use shadowy tactics to achieve this goal. We do not play geopolitical games. We’re encouraging voluntary disclosure by manufacturers, and we’re empowering consumers to make informed choices. There are important distinctions between types of transparency, data collection tactics, and information dissemination. There are state secrets, and then there are marketplace secrets. There are data dumps, and then there are contextualized fact-based evaluations. There is now a healthy debate about the role full transparency has in global affairs — does it encumber authoritarianism (as Assange argues) or engender anarchy? It is hard to judge where the release of state secrets falls — does it hurt or help people to satisfy basic human needs, and protect human rights? It shakes up the status quo, but what is end game of this chaos strategy? In the marketplace, the role of transparency is clear. As consumers who want a healthier planet, we have the power to demand to know what we are buying. We are in a position of strength, though some corporations try to flip the equation through black-box certifications and greenwash. The Pharos Project has had some positive results in obtaining fully transparent information from manufacturers. Many companies are clearly committed. Others are much more reluctant to say even where their products are made. If we (and you) want to know, it is our choice to buy only from companies that are transparent. 
The word of the year 2010 is transparency. Credit its prominence to the modern James Bondian figure Julian Assange and his WikiLeaks divulgence of state secrets. But WikiLeaks’ efforts have done as much to cloud the debate over transparency as they have to shed light on matters that impact our daily lives.
Filed under: Uncategorized
