I understand your frustration, but I think you're attacking the signal instead of the noise you're talking about.
There's definitely a lot of nonsense floating around (optical signal intercepts from these providers, etc.). This is noise.
But there is also a very real signal. A journalist with an inside source is telling us about a program that indicates some of these companies have given the NSA a level of access than most of us who know anything about systems would not be comfortable with.
While the degree to which this is happening has not been supported with evidence, numerous other claims have been. It has already forced the declassification of orders to the phone companies. This seems to be a very credible source.
Instead of attacking the noise, I see you attacking the signal. You're saying "These companies could not be doing this! Why would you believe someone saying they are!"
Maybe there is no such program, maybe the NSA doesn't even know what it's doing enough to make an accurate presentation, maybe the presentation was planted for the guy to find, and maybe the journalists are hacks. These are all possibilities. But with what we know, these are the extreme possibilities, and speculation about them is mostly noise. Defending hack-job articles attacking the source and messenger isn't increasing the quality of the conversation.