I'm just too young (!) to recall the incident but do clearly recall my father's explanation a few years later when Powers was exchanged and repatriated and I must have asked questions about the furore at the time.
Just to add a little 'colour' of those events as I was told them at the time at an age where I had no preconceptions of such matters this is what I was told by a very thoughtful, intelligent and worldly-wise father...
The explanation, which could only have been everyone's 'common knowlege' at the time derived from the newspapers and BBC radio was that the USAF had believed the aircraft invulnerable and so hadn't bothered to train Powers in anti-interrogation techniques on the basis that he wasn't ever going to be caught. I also seem to recall that it was thought 'inappropriate' that he had allowed himself to be caught alive as he had been issued with the means to prevent that but chose not to use it. I did think those explanations didn't quite fit together but that is what I was told at the time. I am certain too that there was a feeling that he ahd betrayed his country by blabbing secrets under interrogation through this and also had 'allowed' himself and his aircraft to fall into their hands rather less damaged than was in his power to prevent. Thus my recieved view of the incident was very much that Powers was thyought guilty of unprofessional behaviour that resulted in the enemy gaining a great deal of secret info unnecessarily - ie he screwed the pooch. Even at that tender age I recall thinking that failing to train anti-interrogation but providing the pilot with self-destruction options was a bit odd.
I'm pretty sure then that this was the tone of how events were reported at the time.