Might technology be central to exposing the torture at Abu Ghraib? Yes. Imagine if no witness to the torture had a camera. The public would then rely on other evidence--circumstantial or eyewitness--but that evidence would likely not have sufficed to convince a skeptical public of the atrocities described. That seems fairly obvious.
But now imagine that a witness does indeed have a camera--but that it is an analog device. The person would then have to take the camera (assuming it's not a Poloroid) to a photo developer--which he or she may be reluctant to do. Furthermore, there would only be one or two photos developed from the negative. The photo would be available only to those with physical access to it or to the negative. (I assume that color copiers and scanners would not be readily available--or that it would be unlikely that the owner of the photo would lend it to you to take to a copier or a scanner.)
Now imagine a witness with a digital camera. That person might well email the photos to other interested folk. And one of those people might pass those photos on to the press--with the click of a mouse.
The facts on the Abu Ghraib case seem to include a digital camera and a cd burner. MSNBC.com reports on a whistle-blower, Spc. Joseph M. Darby, who was credited by a member of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division with slipping an anonymous note under a division officer’s door. How did he learn of the abuse? He "receiv[ed] a compact disc from another soldier that contained pictures of naked detainees, according an article this week in The New Yorker magazine."