There is a good chance that the newspaper will have consequences. I mean very sensitive information has been leaked and as addressed in the article this information can and probably will be accessed by terrorists. Somehow security of this sensitive information failed and unfortunately now many have to suffer the aftermath.
I think the newspaper should be punished.Even though the responsibility of the newspaper is reporting the truth; but if the truth involves the country's political problems, especially the security services. Media have the duty to protect national security rather than leak the secret to attract more attention. After all, as the national media, it should protcet their own country.
I think that there is a possibility that the Guardian will face consequences from Parliament. While it is possible, I personally do not think that they should. They were reporting on facts and documents they received from a source. They did not seek this information out or pursue these in an illegal fashion, there for there should not consequences. They received the information and reported on it. This controversy is important and the public needed to be informed on it, and the Guardian did just that. They agreed to destroy the information and that is as far as I believe they should go.
I think that the newspaper shoukd not be published the article. I know the rolf og media is to tell truth to people and not to hide or lie, but I think this is different situation, because safety of country could be threatened by the terrorist by publising the article. Many people might not hope to do this to media, because most important thing is safty not truth for most people I guess.
It would depend on whether the paper already knew about Edward Snowden and the information they received was leaked. I think they could be punished, though, because it mentioned how they sent the info to the New York Times.
I can see the Parliament punishing the newspaper for committing these actions. If the Guardian is punished it will be because of the action is seen as a possible national threat and endorses Snowden and his actions to a certain degree. Even though the newspaper is suppose to keep the people aware, they might have went to far. Now they put themselves in the position for people to point fingers at them. I would not want a newspaper to publish secrets about myself so I can see where people would get offended and want them to suffer consequences.
I think the Guardian could face possible punishment for printing and sharing potentially dangerous material to the public, ProPublica and the New York Times. Should they receive punishment is up to those that will decide their fate, but I think that if it is decided that what they did is illegal, they should face a punishment and have to answer for what they did.
I think there is a very high likelihood that the newspaper will be punished. Do I personally think they should be? Probably. There is a fine line in media between sharing a story and keeping the pubic informed and abusing power and dipping into peoples personal lives and privacies. I do believe that they should face punishment this time.
I can see the Guardian being punished for what was published by them simple because the fact it pertains to national security. The biggest reason I see why they probably shouldn't is they agreed to destroy all of the files they had acquired. Also they were reporting on facts and they felt the need the public needed to know that information.
In this article, I want to apply the concept of utilitarianism. This theory was made by Mill. Utilitarianism has been condensed to the ethical philosophy of the "greatest good for the greatest number". Media has to meet the people's demands, which are right to know, want to know, and need to know. For this reason, I think the newpaper could not be punished. Even though they published the top secrets, they announced the news based on the truth.
The Guardian newspaper should not be punished because they got the story. I think the British government was trying to hide something. They can't accuse him of "damaging national security". A reporters job is reporting the news. They did their job like anyone else would.
If Parliament finds The Guardian to be guilty then they will be published. And if the opinion of the Parliament is anything like that of Camerons`s then i suspect they will be punished. I think that they should be punished and have to take responsibility for what they did. I think it was tacky to publish the information leaked from Snowden. It was not something that the general public needed to know and could possibly give terrorists a foothold.
Yes, they should be punished and i do think they will be eventually. It is giving the terrorists info that could give them an advantage that can lead to them taking innocent lives. Therefore, this act cant go unnoticed.
I definitely think that the news could be punished for this. They published things that could be seen as a national security threat. Some information could be harmful for certain people to know. Although reporter do have the right to publish public information they do need to take into consideration the potential harm that it could cause.