About Top Secret Intelligence Briefing Documents
So far, the stuff released by Snowden, et al, are briefing documents, mostly in the form of PowerPoint slides. There seems to be some confusion about how such documents are used and how and why they are classified. Here are some points about that:
The briefing documents are classified Top Secret /SI/NOFORN. While that may well seem like a very high classification, in fact it is not. And there's a reason those documents have that classification, and not a higher level that would indicate compartmented information with only need-to-know access.
The reason is that they're designed for use in briefing people outside of the intelligence community. People like Congress members and Senators. The classification is there in large part to impress those people with themselves and to indicate that this is VERY IMPORTANT information that is being shown to them exclusively. The reality is that the same documents are used to brief new hires and others who will be working for that and other agencies. They provide an low-level overview of programs, but few details. That's because the people who will see them do not have clearance to see any more than that.
The reality is that the Top Secret classification isn't even needed. If you take any of the programs mentioned in those briefing documents and search for the name of the program in Wikipedia, you'll learn more about that program than what is disclosed in those briefing documents. Most of them have been discussed publicly, and often Requests for Proposals for vendors that disclose even more are available with a Google search.
Few people discussing the documents released by Snowden, Greenwald, and the Guardian appear to have even read those simple documents thoroughly. That is evidenced by few people discussing the safeguards and other limitations on those programs that are described in the same documents. Few people are mentioning that content in discussions here and elsewhere.
What has been disclosed is "look-see" information. Congress, for example, has to provide funding for the NSA and other intelligence agencies. Congress insists that they be "thoroughly briefed" on such agencies and their operations. So, documents like the ones leaked by Snowden are prepared for those purposes. They reveal the existence of programs, outline the function of such programs, and describe safeguards and limitations of such programs. They're designed to inform minimally, but not to reveal much. They are typical of all sorts of PowerPoint presentations, and give just enough information to satisfy people who have oversight or funding power and nothing more.
The reality is that those who see those presentations, including most of those who have seen them after they were leaked, don't really pay a lot of attention during the presentations. Most don't really care about the details. Lunch is coming soon. So, they get their egos massaged by having "TOP SECRET" information presented to them and learn a few bullet points. Their need to know is limited, and these documents provide everything they are cleared to know. Beyond that, the door is closed and those looking at these briefing documents do not have the entry codes to open it.
For those interested in the documents and what they reveal, it is important to read them thoroughly and not to rely on others to "interpret" them for you. Read them completely and think about what they reveal and who they were designed to educate. There's not a lot of information in them, really, as you will find if you extend your search on Google, where you will find much more information at reliable websites. Hint: You'll also find a lot of incorrect information on unreliable websites.
But, realize that what you are looking at is sanitized, carefully planned, and very limited in what it reveals. Consider who is the audience for those documents, and you'll understand that they merely skim over the very basics, just like all such PowerPoint briefing presentations. They are not designed to actually provide classified information. They merely are classified as TOP SECRET for effect, and the desired effect is to make those who see those documents feel like they are special and have privilege.
They reveal very little, and only what is intended to be revealed to outsiders to the intelligence community. If you're impressed by them, you shouldn't be. Much more information is readily available without any clearance at all.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Plus it matches my biases.
that the Chinese, Russians, etc., wouldn't have much interest in this info because it's superficial?
I haven't looked at any of this stuff closely but my own concern was that the "spying on Americans" suggestion was setting off all the fireworks but there may be more detailed stuff of real intelligence value buried deeper in the documents which, when made public, could be damaging.
I'm not sure any of this works like it used to since so much has been outsourced to private corporate interests. I tend to suspect the worst.
EDIT: You don't have to reply if you don't want to. The company will disavow your actions. 
First off, contrary to your assertion, those slides ARE compartmentalized. Gawd, the rest is just the type of word salad one finds over at Freeperville. #FAIL
Top Secret: Public disclosure of the document would cause 'exceptionally grave damage' to national security.
SI: Special Intelligence, formerly known as COMINT or COMmunications INTelligence, which means being part of a control system for Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI)
Orcon: ORiginator CONtrolled, meaning the originator controls dissemination and/or release of the document. These are always viewed in secured areas that are cleared for top-secret data and one cannot view or copy such a document without leaving an audit trail.
Noforn: Not releasable to foreign nationals
"merely are classified as TOP SECRET for effect"
It's like shearing a pig, lots of squealing, and very little wool or something like that..
