The problem is that we already have libel laws. If some 17 year old with his own website is writing lies about the US government to stir up trouble, then sue him and get his site shutdown. If he's telling the world the truth, then how is that not protected under the First Amendment? Snowden and Manning are not protected by the 1st, because they actively took things that didn't belong to them. This isn't protected speech anymore than it would be for a foreign spy to do the same (I am not making a moral judgment about their actions, mind you, just that I understand, legally speaking, why they got into hot water). But if your 'crime' is simply recording facts, obtained legally, that are true, then I can't at all understand why there would be a distinction between pro and amateur.