The Panama Papers not only shed light onto a secretive system of tax havens and hidden money, but also sparked a debate about how a leak of this size and scope should be reported on. Even before a public relations crisis broke out for politicians using the services of Mossack Fonseca, strong sentiments of scepticism and criticism emerged about the work of the ICIJ and publishing outlets. Could the treatment of the data be biased? Why was Putin featured prominently in the documents while US politicians were absent? Should the 2,7 Terabyte even be published altogether? In the age of digital media, where every user is also broadcaster, the means of publication themselves quickly turn into a topic of hot debate. Which practical ethics should whistleblowing and journalism apply today to ensure that the public is served and informed best? How should investigative reporters react to the feedback of its readers? And how can we make sure a leak’s revelations don’t get lost along the way?