Second, journalists use their own judgement or what to publish. Had the kid given it to a news org the reporting would have been redacted.
I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. People can die due to info.
I don't think this has ever been the case. There's still large contingents of the US that think the Snowden leaks were part of a Russian operation, that the Manning leaks were bad and so on. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, but were those leaks considered unquestionably good?
Those examples seem to be addressing a statement that no one made. Is that in an effort to make people think a different statement was made, one that’s trivial to disprove rather than addressing the actual statement?
I can't afford to speed =)