10.20am GMT

Welcome to our hub for all Edward Snowden, NSA and GCHQ-related developments around the world. As arguments rage over how much of our day to day life should be monitored in the name of security, we'll be tracking the growing global debate about privacy in the digital age. We'd like to know what you think about the whole NSA story, what you're worried about – and any new areas you'd like to read more about.

Here's a roundup of the latest developments:

• The New York Times has defended the Guardian in the face "government bullying" over the publication of Edward Snowden's disclosures about the scope of state surveillance. In an editorial it said:

Parliamentary committees and the police are now exploiting that lack of protection to harass, intimidate and possibly prosecute The Guardian newspaper for its publication of information based on National Security Agency documents that were leaked by Edward Snowden. The New York Times has published similar material, believing that the public has a clear interest in learning about and debating the N.S.A.’s out-of-control spying on private communications. That interest is shared by the British public as well. In the United States, some members of Congress have begun pushing for stronger privacy protections against unwarranted snooping. British parliamentarians have largely ducked their duty to ask tough questions of British intelligence agencies, which closely collaborate with the N.S.A., and have gone after The Guardian instead. Alan Rusbridger, the newspaper’s editor, has been summoned to appear before a parliamentary committee next month to testify about The Guardian’s internal editorial decision-making regarding the Snowden information. Members of Parliament have also demanded information on the newspaper’s decision to make some of the leaked information available to other journalists, including those at The Times. That should be none of Parliament’s business. Meanwhile, Scotland Yard detectives are pursuing a criminal investigation into The Guardian’s actions surrounding the Snowden leaks. These alarming developments threaten the ability of British journalists to do their jobs effectively. Britain’s press has long lacked the freedoms enjoyed by American newspapers. Now it appears they are less free from government interference than journalists in Germany, where Der Spiegel has published material from the Snowden leaks without incurring government bullying. The global debate now taking place about intelligence agencies collecting information on the phone calls, emails and Internet use of private citizens owes much to The Guardian’s intrepid journalism. In a free society, the price for printing uncomfortable truths should not be parliamentary and criminal inquisition.

• David Cameron has repeated his claim that Snowden's revelations have been a help to terrorists and organised criminals, after being challenged on the scope GCHQ's surveillance during a Q&A session with students in the Indian city of Kolkata.

Asked by one student whether the scandal about Project Tempora, GCHQ's programme to tap subsea internet cables, had damaged the government, Cameron defended the need for spying to keep the country safe from bombings such as the attacks on London and Mumbai. "It is perfectly legitimate for countries to have intelligence and security organisations. Our job as government, our first priority is national security … when you think of the horrendous attacks in Mumbai or London and other parts of the UK like Manchester, if we can take steps to prevent those attacks happening you should take those steps." Cameron said there was a danger with "damaging" revelations, such as Snowden's leaks, of "helping the terrorists, of helping organised criminals". He said there was "pretty good" oversight of the intelligence agencies and the UK was not closed-minded to improving governance. However, Cameron added: "But let's not be naive and think we live in a world where you don't need intelligence and security. We do."

• Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander has stopped short of defending the Guardian over the publication of Snowden's leaks. In an interview for the Politics Weekly podcast he said: "It is for the Guardian to justify their conduct, it is for politicians to justify ours."

He added: "I'm not in a position to judge on the extent to which [the Guardian's disclosures have] compromised individual investigations that were under way ... There is a heavy responsibility on the government to make sure that systems are secure where information is contained. The primary responsibility rests with the government to make sure that they are offering the assurances that are required and the explanations that are needed.

Speaking last week, ahead of the appearance of the Britain's intelligence chiefs before the intelligence and security committee, Alexander said he did not want to "rush to judgement" over whether oversight of the intelligence services needed reform.

He said: "There are processes under way to look at these issues. A responsible opposition recognises that what matters actually is the policy, because that's what will determines what is the appropriate balance between liberty and security.

He added: "Part of the vital task of our intelligence agencies is contingent upon sustaining the consent and support of the British public.

Douglas Alexander interview on Politics Weekly.

• The CIA is collecting records of international money transfers under the same law that the NSA uses to collect Americans' phone and Internet records, according to the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. The data, which includes records from companies such as Western Union Co, is part of a database of financial and personal information authorized under the Patriot Act, the newspapers reported, citing unnamed current and former government officials. The data does not include transfers within the borders of the United States or bank-to-bank transactions, they said. The CIA declined to comment on the specifics but said its operations comply with the law.

• The NSA and the Department of Homeland Security have threatened legal action to block the sale of t-shirts that ridicule the agencies, Voice of America reports.