A New York Times reporter, David Rhode, was kidnapped by the Taliban in Afghanistan seven months ago, and somehow managed to escape recently.  People at the Times are saying that they will not release details of the situation other than to say that a) no ransom was paid, and b) no Taliban or other prisoners were released in exchange. It appears that the reporter found the right moment and took advantage of the situation and got away.

The Times never published anything about the kidnapping until now. The editor of the Times, Bill Keller, said he sends a lot of reporters to dangerous places, and the less that is known about situations like this, the better. To quote Keller: “The more you talk about who did what … the more you’re writing a playbook for the next kidnapping,” and “As other victims have told us, discussing your strategy just offers guidance for future kidnappers.”

I agree with him completely. Unfortunately, this seems to be the first time that Bill Keller has agreed that secrecy can be a good thing. Despite numerous objections from the Bush administration, Keller and the Times had no problem publishing a story about the United States government wire-tapping foreigners (even over the objection of Democrat Jane Harmon), or the SWIFT program (monitoring financial transactions of terror suspects). The Bush administration argued that making this type of information public would let terrorists in on our game plan and our strategies, so they could change their behavior to avoid being detected (exactly what Keller argued in relation to the kidnapping). This would make it harder for us to fight the war on terror overseas contingency operations, and might cost American lives. Keller published those stories anyway. But when it’s one of Bill Keller’s people on the line, he wants secrecy. When it’s his people, he understands that if you tell your enemy what you do and how you do it, you make it harder for you to accomplish your goals. The hypocrisy of the situation is so blatant that it would be laughable if the consequences weren’t so dire.

If other news organizations were like the New York Times, they would have printed the story months ago and it might have compromized the safety of David Rhode. Fortunately, other newpapers apparently have higher ethical standards than Bill Keller does. He was afforded a courtesy by his colleagues that he would not extend to President Bush. Let’s hope that Keller remembers this when President Obama asks him to hold off on publishing a story about government secrets to protect national security.