[gojomo]

The context is the use of 'CIA agent' in the linked article. Is that label true enough to be used in a news account? Most would say it is, if by no other reason than Snowden's own description of his work, as corroborated by other sources. The NYTimes has also described Snowden as an "ex-CIA worker" in headlines:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/us/former-cia-worker-says-...

So what if technically Snowden was on someone else's payroll – that's how a lot of work for government agencies, covert or not, is done. And, lots of 'agents' for intelligence outfits are actually on other payrolls – often that's the whole point, serving multiple masters ambiguously! A journalist who cuts through the layers and describes the real supervisory relationship is doing their job, not carelessly getting things wrong (as alleged by Nrsolis).

[Nrsolis]

I disagree.

I've worked for the government. We all understand the difference between employee/officer/agent/contractor.

For one thing, there are different rules and regulations. You are legally responsible as an agent in a way you aren't as an officer. Same for employee vs contractor.

The CIA is not the same thing you see in the movies. Don't get your information from Hollywood.