Wikipedia vs. NY Times controversy regarding suppressing information on escaped reporter.

I'm fine with keeping a temporary lid on newsworthy-but-sensitive information like this in order to protect human life. But I hope that if the New York Times wants other news sources to suppress a story in order to protect one of their reporters, then they'd be equally eager to suppress a newsworthy story in order to save the life of a non-NYT hostage in similar circumstances.

If not, then perhaps reporters should think twice before working for them...