I am not sure what is there that this makes a news
This is not news for all the initiated. It is news for the general population that is not aware of the extend that current spying takes. This also makes it important news for the general population since secret services undermine fundamental principles of democracy: Transparency and accountability. All revelations in the wake of Snowdens leak show that secret services around the world try to extend their capabilities and at the same time evade their responsibilities to report correctly to their government appointed controllers - be it the senate or the bundestag or whatever you call it in your country.
Also, spying is illegal, namely by the laws of the country you're spying on. It's also immoral, at least in the cases where your president signed a treaty promising not to spy and still, someone obviously ignored that agreement.
Even when we show outrage against NSA's snooping program, the only valid argument is that NSA perhaps can not snoop on American citizens as per the 4th amendment.
The much better argument is maybe that while it's technically not illegal, the cost-benefit analysis shows a net negative. Circumvention of legal checks and balances is another one. Just because some action may be legal doesn't make it a good thing in all cases - see ciscos latest losses.
Comments
This is not news for all the initiated. It is news for the general population that is not aware of the extend that current spying takes. This also makes it important news for the general population since secret services undermine fundamental principles of democracy: Transparency and accountability. All revelations in the wake of Snowdens leak show that secret services around the world try to extend their capabilities and at the same time evade their responsibilities to report correctly to their government appointed controllers - be it the senate or the bundestag or whatever you call it in your country.
Also, spying is illegal, namely by the laws of the country you're spying on. It's also immoral, at least in the cases where your president signed a treaty promising not to spy and still, someone obviously ignored that agreement.
The much better argument is maybe that while it's technically not illegal, the cost-benefit analysis shows a net negative. Circumvention of legal checks and balances is another one. Just because some action may be legal doesn't make it a good thing in all cases - see ciscos latest losses.