Systematic data collection for NSA purposes.

There are parts of the US administration who prefer to do what they do with no discussion. Disconcerting them (which includes bringing their activities into the public domain) can be a career destroyer. The story as publicized, is of an IT contractor who, noting the scale of data being requested by the NSA, wrestled with his conscience, and drew the conclusion that the average person would want to be aware of this secret enterprise.

What's the issue here? Is it about precisely targeted data mining with no collateral damage? or is it systematic data mapping of every US citizen putting Joe Public further under the thumb of petty officialdom?

Whatever it is, it's been divisive for those parts of the press that hold themselves up as espousing liberal values. I had a peep at several leading papers to see how this played out. This took me to The Guardian (UK), The Independent (UK), The New York Times (US) and The Telegraph (UK).

The Guardian is close to those that demand explanations. Today's headline is:
Obama under pressure from around world to explain secret NSA surveillance tactics.
This story is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/...

The Independent takes a similar stance in:
Assange praises 'hero' as NSA whistleblower told to leave Hong Kong hideaway.
This is at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor...

Whereas the New York Times has:
U.S. Preparing Charges Against Leaker of Data
which is at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/...
After their handling of the Julian Assange leaks, I hardly expected the New York Times to put on a show of condign obeisance; but this is closer to the nuanced approach of...

The Telegraph who run with
Why shouldn't our spies use all this data?
which is at: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ben...

I bet George Orwell or Robert Heinlein would have loved this.