This article explicitly states for one case it describes that the indicted trader received the insider information from a third party, not the journalist. So i

This article explicitly states for one case it describes that the indicted trader received the insider information from a third party, not the journalist. So it seems the flow of information was from him to the journalist, not the other way around. The purpose would be to get the news out there fast after buying into the stock, as otherwise it may take months for it to be released the normal way or, in some cases such as mergers not yet finalized, to fall through completely. As such, the journalist wouldn’t have done anything wrong. Receiving and publishing inside information is their job, and as long as the information is accurate it isn’t their job to make up for a lack of secrecy on the company’s part. Since the information was already circulating among unauthorized traders, making it public actually serves to level the playing field and prevent further harm.