So, here's something to consider. When we record archaeological sites, we are required to keep the location information (as well as any information that might lead you to find the location) confidential. The reason for this is that archaeological sites are prone to being looted - that is, they are prone to people locating the site and destroying it in an attempt to find collectable or profitable artifacts. Many sites have been lost due to this - I know of several sites that have been destroyed by everything from shovels to jackhaqmmers to backhoes to a bulldozer, all with the intention of stealing artifacts.
So, the reasons for keeping the information confidential seem pretty clear-cut.
At the same time, the laws that provide for archaeological research to be performed do so under the assumption that there is public interest in such research.
This, it seems to me, creates a weird sort of tension. On the one hand, we are required to protect sites, and that requires that we keep the hidden. On the other hand, we are required to be open about what we find. Now, we do a relatively good job of seperating information from specific locations, and as such we can usually meet the basic requirements to both protect and explain.
However, I often wonder what the long-term result of this tension will be. There is already rumblings both amongst archaeology and the interested public to make site location information available. There are also counter-rumblings amongst the same communities to prevent this from happening. In the end, it's anyone's bet who will win out.
Not the most interesting matter to those outside of my field, I suppose, but it's one of those things that I spend time thinking about.