Good journalists know how to balance public safety and public interest, and have the resources to redact dangerous information. WikiLeaks is much more anarchic and leans heavily towards total disclosure.
Good journalists know how to balance public safety and public interest, and have the resources to redact dangerous information. WikiLeaks is much more anarchic and leans heavily towards total disclosure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Winner
That despite the EFF's technologist Micah Lee being on the Intercept's staff. (Lee was not consulted in managing the documents.)
The ICIJ seem to have robust practices and a proven track record. I'm aware of their handling multiple leaks and not compromising any sources.
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia...
Most of their leaks are bipartisan
This is utter agitprop nonsense. Do you work in the defense industry?
Wikileaks have been a lot more responsible with their reporting than the so-called journalists you revere.
Trust doesn't mean blindness. If I agree to conceal your secrets and then you tell me you are doing unspeakable acts against me and the rest of the country, why the fuck wouldn't I out you?
All of this trust, honor, integrity humdrum only makes sense when it's reciprocated. These principles are predicated on bidirectionality but for some reason, macho nationalists love to act like these principles are some one-sided blood pact, made in a sacrificial fashion by "real" men.
These agents are able to keep their mouths shut while their soul withers to dust. It's clearly not out of strength, more out of cowardice, ingroup identification, and learned psychopathy.
Lame! Fuck the spooks and the skunks they rode in on!