Tom Usher wrote or added | Birgitta Jonsdottir has done a solid job here. I left essentially the following as a comment on her Wall post that I'm sharing with this.
I think the privacy aspect is important, but the example about a sorority that wants to keep its rituals secret is not up to WikiLeaks but the sorority. As to whether it's relevant to the public, it would depend on many things not the least of which is exactly what the rituals entail and whether or not the given individuals constituting the public might feel those rituals could represent bad practices.
As Birgitta pointed out, WikiLeaks doesn't go hunting for sorority rituals to expose. Someone who gained knowledge of them leaked them to WikiLeaks because likely that leaker felt the public should know.
WikiLeaks will though face frivolous submissions. I assume it already has – sort of "leakspam," to coin a word for it. I've actually been anticipating that the US cyber spooks would attempt to inundate WikiLeaks with junk submissions in denial-of-service attacks but also to bog down WikiLeaks as WikiLeaks attempts to sort the valid from the junk. Some of that junk could look very authentic in an attempt to tempt WikiLeaks to run with it and be subsequently embarrassed. They need a Disclaimer with every leak if they don't already have one.
Birgitta's concept of looking for the best legislation across-the-board all over the world is exactly the right thing to have done.
I must say, Birgitta may very well be the leading politician on such matters in the world. Frankly, I can't think of anyone who is doing more.