by Marci Greenstein

Ed O’Keefe’s recent look in the Washington Post at the GAO’s report on the government’s inadvertent disclosure of U.S. nuclear facilities last June follows the mistaken publication of the government’s airport security measures earlier this month.  These two events underscore the challenge of balancing the public’s right to know and protection of national security information from being released into cyberspace.  This balancing act has been around forever, you say.  Yes, but where the government is communicating so much of its operations on-line and the information is accessible by anyone, the issue becomes a bit murkier.

The draft nuclear report was intended for the United Nations only, but, Secrecy News, a Federation of American Scientists website monitoring national security issues, got hold of it and posted it online.  Some of the website’s readers were furious at the posting.  Others defended it.

We’re not talking about illegal hacking into the government’s secure networks.  These are cases of human error causing sensitive material to be published on the net.  As those of us who have pushed the “send” button too soon are painfully aware, it’s often human control (or lack of control) of technology that gets us into trouble.

The issue is giving many pause in these terror-alert times. Ben Bradlee, former Washington Post editor, recently discussed the difficulties of covering national security post-9/11 with PBS’s Jim Lehrer. Bradlee had no easy answers.  One thing is clear – reporters should be as prepared as they can to make informed decisions about reporting “sensitive” (classified or not) information.

Comment RSS - You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.