A story that has been in the news a lot lately is the leaking of 92,000 classified documents about the Afghan war to Wikileaks.org, which in turn were made available to three newspapers (the New York Times, The Guardian, and Der Spiegel). There are several ethical and legal issues that are being discussed in relation to the case. For example, Steven Aftergood, an "anti-censorship leader" has accused the site of having a disregard for the privacy of individuals (as well as the law) in pursuit of news-worthy-ness. The New York Times felt protected under the first amendment's freedom of press, but talks about how they still struggled over what to publish (balancing right of public to know vs. prior censoring material that could "harm national security interests").
The story also brings up legal and ethical issues arising out of the global nature of the internet. Wikileaks operates its servers in several countries (including Belgium and Sweden) to seek greater protection against legal action. It has refused to reveal the name of its source (shield laws). Nonetheless, the Justice Department (presumably with support of the defense secretary) is seeking to charge Wikileaks under anti-episonage law.
*Another article claims the lukewarm reaction to this story has to do with the information overload provided (also pertaining to the new "rules" of electronic journalism).
