500N
Not always. Firstly, the internet is a powerful tool and forums especially. Governments can't block everyone. Multi post the same information on enough web sites the world over and if what is being leaked is of any interest, it will be promulgated world wide in 24 hours and probably picked up by the mainstream media.
As the ability to broadcast information increases, so will the government's ability to censor it. You have to keep in mind there are various methods of censorship which do not require a person constantly monitoring things.
You could of course also use talk back radio as another way of getting info out.
Not many people use radio these days
IF the NY Times thought that a competitors newspaper was going to get a scoop on the above info, I dare say it would have published it REGARDLESS of the date.
To use an example, Prince Harry on his tour of Afghanistan, all the media kept quiet about it. That was until some insignificant Aussie newspaper published the details. Then all hell broke loose and the main stream tabloids couldn't get to print fast enough.
Regardless, they newspapers only followed up
after wikileaks leaked the data. The mainstream media didn't intend to publish the leak before that -- they actually seem to have sat on it.
"Missing out" is a powerful force and if you manipulate it to your advantage, you could get the media to do the work for you. Prince Charles and Princess Diana did.
True, but the fact is that until a non-mainstream media outlet published the data, the mainstream-media sat on it. If the government could block the non-mainstream media outlets, that information would have either never been released, or released such a long time from now that it would no longer be useful.