Briefly: There has been plenty of misreporting about PRISM. I tried to correct some of that in 2013 here: http://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-t... (Note the Washington Post backed away from their initial claims and rewrote its original PRISM story.)
Thank you again for your reply. I am aware of the confusion regarding PRISM and its 'vernacular' use to encompass the activities from other disclosed programs in addition to confusion about its particular details.
In your haste I'm afraid you may have drafted a response that is not on the topic of its parent, though this is okay since it appears the conversation found a natural and agreeable conclusion.
