Excuse me if I am a little dubious of the South China Morning Post. According to the article, he gave them an exclusive interview 10 days ago that they are finally publishing now. Interesting that Snowden chose to completely ignore his contacts at the Guardian etc. for this.
Are there any other sources to back this up? Or evidence?
If Snowden granted them an interview ten days ago they've done a pretty bad job handling an internationally significant story. The one sole piece of evidence is this quote attributed to Snowden:
“The NSA does all kinds of things like hack Chinese cell phone companies to steal all of your SMS data.”
No actual evidence this time. Just a quote from a guy no one can call to verify.
I wonder if he has given various journalists pieces of information to release at set times or in response to particular events. This one could have been triggered by the charges being brought against him.
I seem to remember one of the Guardian journalists mentioning that there was more information to come.
>According to the article, he gave them an exclusive interview 10 days ago that they are finally publishing now.
A lot of wild interferences can be drawn from that fact, but isn't it just a common courtesy for a journalist or reporter to afford some control to a source providing information that can't be obtained elsewhere? "Off the record" and embargoed information are two widely accepted practices that exemplify giving publishing discretion to a source.
Are there any other sources to back this up? Or evidence?