I was about to post this when I saw your reply. I'll add it here instead since it's similar:
The term 'competitor' is all wrong. Ostensibly, the point of WikiLeaks is to publish the truth. If WSJ wants to compete with that it sounds like they want their own truth. Of course the SafeHouse site doesn't describe itself as a competitor, but it doesn't compare itself to or even make mention of WikiLeaks either -- I think that betrays competitive intentions.
For WikiLeaks and similar sources to function, what's needed is redundancy in some kind of mutually-respectful oligarchy. Those two items will keep them online and honest in aggregate (to some degree.)
(Although if this gets the libertarians/republicans off of their cultural-identity perch and into the game, then I'm all for it.)