Some describe Wikileaks as a media or journalistic organisation. For example, in a 2013 resolution, the International Federation of Journalists, a trade union of journalists, called Wikileaks a "new breed of media organisation" that "offers important opportunities for media organisations. " Harvard professor Yochai Benkler has praised WikiLeaks as a new form of journalistic enterprise, testifying at the court-martial of Chelsea Manning (then Bradley Manning) that "WikiLeaks did serve a particular journalistic function" although "It's a hard line to draw. " Others do not consider WikiLeaks to be journalistic in nature. Media ethicist Kelly McBride of the Poynter Institute for Media Studies wrote in 2011 that "Wikileaks might grow into a journalist endeavor. But it's not there yet. " Bill Keller of The New York Times considers WikiLeaks to be a "complicated source" rather than a journalistic partner. Prominent First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams writes that Wikileaks is not a journalistic group, but instead "an organization of political activists; . . . a source for journalists; and . . . a conduit of leaked information to the press and the public. " Noting Assange's statements that he and his colleagues read only a small fraction of information before deciding to publish it, Abrams writes that "No journalistic entity I have ever heard of--none--simply releases to the world an elephantine amount of material it has not read. "