Another week with NSA and PRISM news has gone by, and now the reactions and comments start to take on more substance and show that people have had to the time to reflect on the various issues, rather than just posting knee-jerk headlines.

John Naughton had an interesting comment in the Guardian, where he points out that you can check out, but never leave: We are simply too used to, too entangled with, maybe even addicted to the services provided by the big Internet actors. Between the companies mentioned in the NSA slide, pretty much everybody are somehow covered. (Maybe Richard Stallman has managed to escape, however, he is probably encrypting his e-mails, and thus is up for extra scrutiny).

Another interesting article, by James Risen and Nick Wingfield of New York Times, points out the revolving door between Silicon Valley tech companies and the surveillance industry. They give the example of Max Kelly, the chief security officer for Facebook, who got recruited by NSA, and also several Silicon Valley startups which are either funded by or selling to NSA/CIA.

Finally, and most welcome, is the Anti-PRISM campaign, a joint effort by the several European Pirate Parties. They clearly and concisely point out the dangers posed to privacy and democracy by government surveillance. The language and demands contain a certain irony towards the US, noting that Europe should be become “a worldwide beacon for digital rights and privacy protection, government transparency and whistleblower protection” (referencing America’s 19th century goal of becoming “a beacon to the world”).

Their demands are clear political and regulative goals. It’s a great opportunity for these parties to grow beyond the copyright infringement fight, show that they have a broader political agenda, and gain more mainstream support. I’m guessing the two main points to watch are: First the “uncovering of the facts”, which gives a concrete proposal to form a European Parliament committee to investigate the details of the PRISM program, and how it relates to EU states. Secondly, the point about repealing of the Data Retention Directive is interesting. It mentions that three countries have already rejected this 2006 directive in national courts. It will be interesting to see if the latest news and politics will have an effect on other EU countries as well.