IMO: the snowden documents have shined a spotlight on methodologies, and were released to established journalists. Manning, in contrast, released docs and lists naming names of men and women in the field, a major threat to the wellbeing of an active operative.
I am all for transparent dealings and in principle i agree with both of their actions, but snowden was inarguably more meticulous and conscious of his actions.
In Manning's case those journalists removed the names before publication.
Snowden released a lot of sensitive information to the exact same organisation who decided what to publish. It was essentially just an internal Wiki dump. He didn't personally curate it.
You'll have to cite cases where Manning published the names of people directly which put them at risk. Last I heard everything went through third parties before publication.
I am all for transparent dealings and in principle i agree with both of their actions, but snowden was inarguably more meticulous and conscious of his actions.