The Bush and Obama Administrations were extraordinarily aggressive in expanding US espionage action domestically. Obama was infamously aggressive in targeting the press. The notion that they'd do all of that and not begin tracking journalists in a comprehensive fashion was an improbable scenario. The first leaks by Snowden should have prompted the press to assume it. It's why so many of the major media outlets have gone to increased lengths to establish more robust communication approaches for secrecy of contact. Surely they all knew the surveillence systems had been dramatically broadened and that they'd be a key observation point for domestic intel, leaks, sources. The only thing different since the Nixon era (it really goes even further back), is the scale and efficiency at which they can do the tracking through automation; nothing ever changed about the targeting.

It is called normalizing the behavior. When the society accepts this as the new normal, no one will care.

Yes, this actually surprised me, but I guess some people really don't mind (or just didn't think about) having to testify before Congress in order to justify their actions.

Yeah, but now we know.

People said the same things when Snowden leaked PRISM etc.

I'm not surprised to see somebody here protesting their lack of surprise. Hacker news is not a thriller. If the sensation of surprise is what you seek, then go watch a shitty horror movie with jump scares.

I'd be more surprised if they weren't. It's probably just a view on the database that tracks everyone.

Just because we aren't surprised doesn't mean we shouldn't be outraged.