> conventional wisdom at that time was that information should be released as soon as possible with no redactions, even if doing so risked the lives of agents in the field

Actually I feel very differently about these two things specifically because Snowden didn't just blindly dump everything he could get regardless of the consequences.

Snowden and WikiLeaks were about data that is much more highly classified and is in a different league. My reading of the Twitter Files is that they are process oriented (this is how those decisions were made, these are the decisions that were made and may not have been obvious to the casual observer). The thing with the Twitter Files is they are so obviously PR-driven. Snowden and Wikileaks were doing political releases because those people/orgs believed the underlying data showed prevarication by people like General Hadley at the NSA and potential crimes within the US armed forces that needed public scrutiny.

No, there really is very little comparison there.

> the conventional wisdom at that time was that information should be released as soon as possible with no redactions

That was very much not the conventional wisdom at the time. This choice by Wikileaks was hugely controversial and in stark contrast with Snowden’s leaks, which were published by journalists after having been analysed, filtered and redacted. Citing Snowden and Wikileaks as if they operated in the same way is simply wrong.

And yes, just dumping stuff without at least checking them is morally and practically wrong. If only because it makes you very likely to take part voluntarily or not in disinformation campaigns if you’re fed false documents.