Is Top Secret America a threat to lives and security?
The Post's ombudsman, Andrew Alexander, wrote about readers' reactions and government responses to the Top Secret America series Sunday. Here's an excerpt:
"Major news organizations often come under fire when they disclose classified information. But "Top Secret America" was different. The Post took hundreds of thousands of public documents and created a massive database, available at topsecretamerica.com, that provides information on nearly 2,000 companies and an array of government organizations engaged in top-secret work. An editor's note accompanying the series said, "Every data point on the Web site is substantiated by at least two public records."
Using this "mosaic" approach to aggregating individually harmless slivers of information, The Post created a composite of the immense national security apparatus and invited readers to home in on its individual parts. They can search online by name and location and even the type of work being performed."
Do you think The Post provided too much information about government agencies and contractors, or too little? How should a newspaper balance public benefit and potential harm?
July 26, 2010; 1:05 PM ET
| Tags: Dana Priest, Top Secret America, defense contractors, intelligence agencies, intelligence secrets, national security secrets
Save & Share: Previous: Highlighted comment: Can we assess every threat?
Next: Dana Priest interviews Sec. Robert Gates: full transcript
Posted by: majorowen | July 26, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: rdorff | July 27, 2010 1:44 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: lsylvain | July 27, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: jackburris1 | July 27, 2010 6:08 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: klcasagrande | July 28, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: calvinwnc | July 29, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: rtmltn | July 29, 2010 7:16 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.