http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/what-were-watching-sunda...
but obviously cannot rebroadcast the interview unless ARD gave permission.
AP also mentions it http://bigstory.ap.org/article/german-tv-snowden-says-nsa-al...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/what-were-watching-sunda...
but obviously cannot rebroadcast the interview unless ARD gave permission.
AP also mentions it http://bigstory.ap.org/article/german-tv-snowden-says-nsa-al...
The links provided thus far in this thread (of which there are very few): either a.) are reporting that Snowden was-to-have an interview (not discussing the content therein) or b.) reduced a substantial interview to an inconsequential soundbite.
The NYT Blog - a blog post 3 days late.
Major super-duper props to the AP for writing about something globally noteworthy [sarc., as it's their mission to write about everything] in an article that few mainstream sources even carried.
There has been little (if any) meaningful discourse of Snowden's interview in mainstream US media, and, despite the video copyright entanglements - the coverage has amounted to what I'd call a "black out." (The article linked to is shit - as 'rdl' and 'dogcatcher' brought to light - but the point remains clear.)
All of this, despite the fact that the topic matter of the interview concerns the future of the internet -- arguably the greatest invention in the history of man.
Snowden doing yet another interview isn't very newsworthy. He's done interviews before, and he'll do them again. Based on the transcripts of the interview (see other posts), there isn't anything new in this interview. All in all...it's not news and the only reason it even got written about was because its Snowden.