When is a "secret" not a secret?

When The New York Times decides, in the interest of saving its old gray hide, that it is not.

On June 22, the paper trumpeted its expose of "a secret Bush administration program" to track terror finances. The banking program, reporters Eric Lichtblau and James Risen made unmistakably clear, was a "closely held secret." The front-page story referred to the secret nature of the program no less than eight times. A Times-produced Web video featuring Lichtblau promoted a brief interview in which he "reveal(ed) a secret Bush administration program to access financial records."

But by July 2, smarting from the public backlash against its blabbermouth coverage, the Times crew was backpedaling faster than circus monkeys on barrels hurtling over Niagara Falls...Michelle Malkin
Watch the rise of more Times' hot air at Hot Air.

If the New York Times knew about this FBI foils New York terror plot they probably would have warned Lebanese suspect Assem Hammoud.

THE LEFT
"We're told newspapers have a right to commit treason because of 'freedom of the press.' Liberals invoke 'freedom of the press' like some talismanic formulation that requires us all to fall prostrate in religious ecstasy. On liberals' theory of the First Amendment, the safest place for Osama bin Laden isn't in Afghanistan or Pakistan; it's in The New York Times building. Freedom of the press means the government generally cannot place a prior restraint on speech before publication.
But freedom of the press does not mean the government cannot prosecute reporters and editors for treason—or for any other crime.
The First Amendment does not mean Times editor Bill Keller could kidnap a child and issue his ransom demands from The New York Times editorial page. He could not order a contract killing on the op-ed page.
Nor can he take out a contract killing on Americans with a Page One story on a secret government program being used to track terrorists who are trying to kill Americans." — Ann Coulter