Leaks have their value, but this is dangerous

For those eagerly following U.S. politics, this week’s headlines delivered yet another cornucopia of dirt. President Donald Trump has angered the Navy by blabbing about the location of U. S. submarines! The president’s sonin-law is said to be the target of the ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the election! U. S. intelligence officials are supposedly mortified by the president’s speech to allied leaders at the NATO summit in Brussels! And dozens more. Anonymously sourced scoops and exclusives come so fast that one can hardly be digested before the next arrives and renders all before it mere footnotes.

The common link here isn’t just the Trump White House. It’s also the source of all these scoops, exclusives, and breaking news alerts: leaks. The U.S. government is leaking like a sieve.

As journalists, our newsroom has benefited plenty from leaks, so we cherish the value of a well-timed brown envelope that reveals important information that is in the public interest. Leaked information helps shape citizens’ understanding of their governments, which are habitually secretive and evasive about their inner workings.

But leaks can also be a fraught and even dirty business, and journalists should use discretion when publishing sensitive material. Moreover, the individuals in possession of sensitive information may have an obligation — either legal or ethical or both — to not disclose information to the press.

The torrent of leaks now emanating from Washington leave one with a growing sense that many government insiders have lost sight of this fact. There is good reason to feel unease, if not outright alarm, at this trend. No government can effectively operate when sensitive information is at risk of being leaked from any place, at any time, and for any reason. The president and his inner circle are not wrong to insist that the leaks must stop, or to suggest that consequences are in order for the officials who persist in handing over sensitive information to the press.

Of course, there can be no doubt that many of the president’s own actions have fuelled this backroom-whisper feeding frenzy. But whether Trump’s detractors like it or not, Trump is the leader of the free world. And whether Trump him- self likes it or not, he is responsible for its safety. That duty necessitates that he feel comfortable consulting with his closest military and intelligence advisers with the confidence that the details of his conversations won’t be public by dinnertime. Much of the world’s security rests on America effectively wielding its power. It can’t do that now.

If this fact was at all in doubt, this week’s events in Britain put it to rest. After the horrific suicide-bombing of a teen pop concert in Manchester, British police and intelligence agencies began sharing the results of their investigation with their allies in Washington (and presumably with the intelligence and police services of other close allies, including Canada). The results of these agencies’ efforts began appearing in American news publications in something close to real-time. The information was apparently leaked by U. S. officials to members of the domestic press.

Consider it: While an ally was scrambling to protect its public from further attacks ( Britain remains on critical alert, with troops deployed to its major cities), U.S. officials were leaking the information as it rolled in. The investigation into the Manchester atrocity continues. The lives of the officers carrying out raids and executing warrants are in danger, to say nothing of the millions of citizens who continue to go about their daily lives. The leak of sensitive information shared between intelligence agencies is more than just a breach of etiquette; it directly compromises the interests of an allied nation fighting to protect more innocent people from being maimed and murdered. British officials were right to protest, and the Trump administration was right to promise to get to the bottom of it.

It’s true that the Trump administration remains beset by far too many scandals and mysteries. It’s true that there are numerous questions about top officials’ dealings with Russia or other interests that must be answered. It’s also true that a powerful mix of news reporting (some valuable, some reckless) and leaking ( ditto) have played a critical role in getting the president to concede to calls for an investigation.

So here we are. An investigation has been ordered. A special counsel has been appointed. Subpoenas are being issued. Witnesses are being called. In short, there are now proper channels through which damning information and shocking revelations can and should come to light. If the leakers in the U.S. government were merely concerned that poor conduct might go unscrutinized, they’ve won their battle. But if they’re now leaking simply for the thrill of it, they do not deserve the world’s encouragement. They deserve to feel the full force of American law.

THERE IS GOOD REASON TO FEEL UNEASE, IF NOT OUTRIGHT ALARM, AT THIS TREND.