WikiLeaks needs editors

With thousands of confidential documents obtained illegally from the U.S. Government, posted on the web and translated into five languages for the world to read, Wikileaks claims to be furthering its mission of fully transparent government operations, a goal that's supposedly good for society.  Founder Julian Assange vows to continue releasing documents and doesn't seem phased by global outrage and looming U.S. criminal investigations.  

Of course government transparency is desirable, so that democracies can be knowledgeable about how their taxes are being used, how the government is actually functioning, and what things should be improved.  But in order to have an effective government--one that is fully informed on situations globally, has intelligence units that advise it on possible foreign operations that have consequences domestically, and has strategies that involve anything other than laying all its cards out on the table for the world to see and prepare for--there needs to be confidential communications within that government.  Stealing such confidential communication and distributing it to the world unnecessarily jeopardizes U.S. foreign relations and global strategies, and provides no benefit to anyone.


Wikileaks needs to get some editors, who review all the documents the website plans to release and who use some discretion when posting them.  Does this document reveal some government corruption, fraud, or dishonesty that people should know about?  And do the benefits of posting it outweigh the costs?  That would be real news reporting.