The best one by far is the Harvard Law Review article. Very fair, very deliberate, and in my opinion does a good job at presenting both sides.
I diffidently agree that there are major operational differences with these organizations, and even within the Wikileaks community, some dissent and division (most likely due to being open in nature).
It's not a white or black issue. While I think that there have been faux pas on both sides, IMO, the US gov should be the bigger man and just tighten it's security and not make so many outrageous and scary threats all the time. It makes them look bad and incompetent. Fix the security problem and move on. I also personally feel that this NGO (Wikileaks), has the right to exist. Read up on the awesomeness that they helped facilitate in Iceland! Some of that info is contained in this documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvmfOaZ34Pk
It appears I was wrong regarding them not redacting any info.
My main intention was to clarify (and I think you'll agree) that an organization like wl and the NYT operate substantially differently.
Due to this operational difference, it makes some sense that a government would treat them differently and have different policies regarding them.
Thanks for the sources. I haven't had a chance to check them out, but I will.