I don't get why they all try to protect it so much. Snowden's identity is already public so sharing the files can't hurt him. Just redact personal info and put it all out there.
A journalist's only responsibilities are tell the truth to their readers, don't report allegations as facts and don't expose a persons identity without consent if they're not already famous.
They should never care about national security because that's an instant ethical compromise, letting the government dictate what you can say.
> They should never care about national security because that's an instant ethical compromise
Free journalism in a democracy is inherently political, which means there is always an ethical balance between the duty to inform and potential harm.
For example: the name of a secret foreign agent
It is a fact. It is news. It has potential harm. What are the pros and cons of publishing it?
> They should never care about national security because that's an instant ethical compromise, letting the government dictate what you can say.
There's a difference between caring about NS, and letting the government dictate how to do so.
I think it's quite obvious that journalism is mostly PR for the current things in politics by now. It probably died around 2020 at the latest.