I think there is a massive difference between people who leak and get information in unethical ways, via blackmail, hacking, robbery, etc., and people who do journalistic reporting on rumors they hear coming out of a company/developers about something happening soon.
I do agree that most leaks aren't good for the industry and the creatives who make the games we play, and I do think sometimes it can be very cheap to just leak something RIGHT before it happens. Leaks like what happened to Insomniac last year were awful because they leaked a good chunk of employees' personal information, it leaked all of their plans for the next 10 years, and it was due to a Ransomware attack. However, sites like IGN didn't bother reporting on the damage it did, at least in its headlines. They only promoted that Insomniac was working on a brand new Marvel IP and that it was planned to be released by 2030 or whatever, failing to acknowledge the harm it did to the company and the people who are actually going to make those games. Even if it was briefly mentioned in the article, that type of leak and reporting is obviously wrong. However, that doesn't mean people can't be curious about the details that were leaked or that they shouldn't be allowed to talk about it. (Obviously, unless it was about the personal information that was leaked. Spreading that sort of thing could be and has been incredibly dangerous and harmful.)
People like Nate, Necro, and Jeff Grubb aren't leaking things or reporting on rumors due to their blood lust or something. While they do try to build a platform out of their information, they only do journalistic reporting on rumors coming out of specific companies, which isn't unethical. Nobody people talk about often here in good faith has, to anyone's knowledge, gotten their information in an unethical way or has skewed values and not a good understanding of what is right and wrong. Some journalists are banned from being talked about/sourced here due to what they've said or done to other people and their values; even if their information has been "accurate," nobody wants to promote that kind of person. That needs to be understood.
Of course, this sort of thing will always fall into more of a "gray" zone than it being a purely "good" or "bad" area, and while I feel like mainstream "leak culture" does a lot more harm than good, I feel like many people here are more victims of mainstream "leak culture" than actually being apart of it. For example, speculators often get their posts stolen, and then 10-20 minute YouTube videos get made about their research with no compensation and rarely credit (cough cough); many news sites fail to report on an investigation somebody might do on a rumor and simply reduce what happened so much to fit into a clickbait headline, being extremely vague to get clicks, then said person gets harassed on Twitter and other social media platforms due to that vagueness or because they reached the wrong conclusion or the information was simply just wrong.
It's important to be aware that not everyone who has information or "leaks" gets it in the same way, reports on it in the same way, or leaks it for the same reason. I wouldn't generalize every insider or person who has information about a video game company as "criminal," as that's bluntly false and is a gross generalization of many people. The best we can do is try to filter out the good and the bad and make sure nobody is harmed when something is leaked and that nobody is harmed when somebody tries to obtain information. Unfortunately, there have been many people who have done very wrong things to get their information, causing many journalists to quit. Though thankfully, it has been a good couple of years since I've seen somebody like that.