You are connected to event: CFI-RPC10 ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** (speaking non English language) >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Good morning, everyone. My name is Tijani Ben Jemaa. I am from Tunisia. I will be the moderator of the workshop. I am engineer, but still very active in Civil Society as I have always been. Currently, I am Executive Director of the federal association of -- I am also the advice chair of ALAK. (speaking non English language) >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much. So my name is Tijani Ben Jemaa. I will be the leader of this workshop. Michael will be the moderator. I am a retired engineer but I am still very active in Civil Society as I have always been. Currently, I am the Executive Director of the Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations and advice chair of ALAK. I am also at ICANN and member of ISOC. I used to be very active participant in the WSIS. I also participated in seven of the previous ten IGFs, and I was either speaker or organizer of workshops in four of them. I serve on the IGF, and Iment a a member. First of all, I would like to thank Ines Hfaiedh for organizing this workshop and inviting me to moderate it. Thank you, Ines. This workshop is about the ICT internet implementation, a road map to achieving sustainable development goals, SDGs. For the record, the fourth SDG is -- (Audio cut out) (Audio too quiet) Also, there was some information society recognized in 2003 means that ten years ago, elearning as one of the nine e-applications forming the action line number seven of the WSIS action plan which means that e-learning was considered by head of states and governments at that time as one of the key pillars for building a inclusive information society. It was said in those action lines -- and I'm quoting here -- ICTs can contribute to achieving universal education worldwide through delivery of education and training for teachers and offering improved conditions for life long learning. Encompassing people who are outside of the formal education process and improving professional skills. End of quote. Since then, the technology has made significant improvement and now we have much more tools with better performance. This workshop is intended to discuss some core issues concerning the adoption, the implementation, and the development of the ICTs and internet and education, in the developing countries with experiences sharing and with a case study. Our first speaker will be the workshop organizer Ines Hfaiedh. Ines is Tunisian, too, and she is a teacher. She is an ICT implementation and education specialist. She is a fellow of the Arab World Internet Institute. Also, she is an internet policy analyst in the IGMENA and other foundation. She is active member of the chapter and an ICANN, ISOC, and RGF fellow. She was a guest speakerst fourth division of the Internet Governance Forum of the international symposium on ICTs and of the Tunisia national conference. The Arab educational tool portal has shared her tool of interactive ICT implementation and formal and informal learning and selected it for the international tool fair in Budapest. Also, she compiled ICT enhanced lesson plans into a padagogical paper. She was selected for rethinking the new Millennium. In this, we think about the Tunisia -- Ines will speak about the Tunisian education and the SDGs. Ines, you have the floor. >> INES HFAIEDH: Thank you very much. Okay. Do you have my presentation? If you allow me I'll be standing up. Okay, so good morning everyone. I'll be talking about ICT implementation and the road map to achieving SDGs. My name is Ines Hfaiedh. I am from Tunisia. I'm a teacher and specialist in the implementation of technologies and education. Okay. I think it's not working. Can we move to the next slide, please in it's not working. Nothing is working. Next slide, please. Okay. So, first, I'll be speaking about the creating a learning generation. Okay. So, this figure, we have the education for a new global realty, so by -- reality. So by 2050, half of today's jobs will be replaced by technology. Half of today's jobs will be replaced by technologies. It means that half of the people will not find jobs if they don't have IT skills. Also, by 2050, new jobs will demand different and higher level skills. It means that we will not need the same skills that we have today. We need new skills, and higher order skills. The population of Africa -- and I come from Africa. The population of Africa will double to 2 billion. Half will be young people. So, young people, it means that we must adapt to this age range in terms of job opportunities and educational opportunities. Also, if we do not -- if education and the education systems here do not respond to those new facts, we will have a major shortage of skilled workers in the global economy. Also, up to a quarter of the population could still live in extreme poverty, and we will have an income inequality which will fuel and create conflicts and instability. Next slide, please. Okay. So, the facts say that up to half of today's jobs -- around 2 billion jobs -- are at high risk of disappearing due to the automation by 2030, and the altering of the demand of skills. The skills that we are going to ask for are different from the skills we need today. The new technologies risk not to create new jobs at anything like the skill, they are eadvocating them. So, we have -- erad case -- eradication of jobs. Many jobs will become obsolete and useless. So the people who have high skills and capacity to adapt to change, ability to access technologies, this range of people is the only range of people who can expect an ever greater share of earnings and are expected to benefit from those technology-oriented jobs. So, the expectations with this fast paced world, we need to prioritize children at risk of being excluded. Who are those children? We have the rural child, and I am a teacher at a rural area in Tunisia, and the risk is real because we have connectivity issuings. We have also meant at issues. We have problems with women and girls with rural areas that cannot access schools and in general, not only technologies. We have the street child that we don't think much about. We have the refugee child like you have seen with the huge refugee crisis we are having right now in all countries. In Tunisia we had 2 million refugees coming from Lebanon. In Europe, there are lots coming from Syria and Pakistan. So the refugee child, and also the child who is disabled who has specific needs or who is visually impaired. Also, we must provide the resources and willingness. By willingness, I'm saying the political and economy willingness to harness the new technologies to meet the needs of those kids. Also, we need a commitment from policy and decision-makers because by the end of the day, it is the government that implements the policy and it is the government that creates the projects. Also, we must provide common and universal training to teachers. To teach 21st century skills that we need for those -- for this new generation to meet the job opportunities and the change in job sphere that we will have by 2030. So, also, we must create indexes and indicators to assess the overall performance of educational institutions so that we don't have very big gaps between those educational institutions. So, the second part of the presentation is about the transformation in education to achieve the SDGs. So, technologies restore the curiosity to education. This is what we've been noticing as teachers was because it brings sound and movement to static textbooks, because it helps us overcome physical and geographical barriers and it facilitates communication for many kids. It eliminates the artificial boundaries between the school and outside world and also promotes an environment of global citizenship so the students feel themselves they are global citizens, not only Tunisian or African citizens. So, this figure is really interesting and to be honest, I just added it recently because it's really impressive. Okay. The figure is about educating girls saved over 130 million lives. Like education is saving lives of girls. Declines in mortality rates per 1,000 in low and middle income countries between 1970 and 2010. So you can see that for the females, the percentage decline is really very high. Like 130 million lives were saved. Okay. The next slide. Okay. Education is the smartest investment. When you invest one dollar in an additional year of schooling, it generates ten dollars benefits in low income countries. Ten dollars in developing countries is a lot of money. It's not a small amount. Okay. Education -- and we are talking about the sustainable development goals -- education increases peace and stability. How? School enrollments have been shown to increase a country's level of stability and peace and reduce crime and violence because we are teachers and we are witnessing this on a daily basis. Especially, I come from Tunisia and it's a post-revolution context so us teachers when we educate our teachers -- especially, for example, in my school, we added theater. Now we allow students to air their opinions and to talk and to act, so this helps them in airing their opinions and in avoiding violence and crimes. Increasing secondary school enrollments and literacy rates decrease the probability of civil war and also every additional year of schooling reduces an adolescent boy's risk of becoming involved in conflict by 20 percent. One additional year of schooling is 20 percent risk of being vital for an adolescent -- violent for an adolescent. Basically, as teachers we are trying to teach our students that we are equipping them with skills that make them more peaceful or resilient in the as of national disasters or political shocks. When you are not educated you don't have the skills and know-how on how to deal with your anger and those problems. So the sustainable development goals. Education lifts people out of poverty. It increases equality because it creates the middle class. For example, in Tunisia, some people when they access education, they can have skills and they can have jobs and this created the middle class in Tunisia over the past 50 years. It improves health, as we have seen that it has decreased the mortality rate for women. Education empowers women by facilitating access to information about rights and services. It increases confidence and also enables participation in decision-making and accountability. Better education also increases people's awareness and commitment to conservation and climate change. Okay. So this is by the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity and it dates to 2016. It's pretty recent. So it has 12 recommendations under four goals. So, first is the performance. Second is innovativion education, third is inclusion, very important, and the fourth is finance. So these I'll be going through very quickly to leave the floor to my colleagues. It has to do with setting standards and tracking progress, not only setting standards but really tracking and scaling the progress. It has to do in innovation to strengthen and inclusion, to prioritize the poor. Early years to invest across sectors to tackle the factors preventing learning and finance to mobilize more and better domestic resources and to ensure leadership for the coming generation. So the recommendations to help us in implementing technologies and in achieving the sustainable developing goals, raising public awareness, first and foremost. Involving the youth. Enlarging the stakeholder discussion in local, regional, and international IGFs. Involving the Civil Society, the government, the academia, even the youth, they can have a say. We must lay the policy foundation. Also, we must put the issue on the government's agenda. And also, as I always say, invest in education as a value chain. Invest in the people. Next slide. So, this is my last slide. I really wanted to end up with this. The 2016 -- so it's really recent -- the 2016UNESCO global education monitor report. It says education is vital for achieving the sustainable development goals of poverty reduction, evaluation, improved health, gender equality, resilient cities and more equal and just societies. In fact, education is so central for facilitating development that each one of the 17SDGs includes a target which relates to or depends upon learning and education. I hope you enjoyed it. Thank you very much (applause) >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you, Ines. Thank you for this presentation and it's clear that education prevent the society from a lot of problems, and it's clear that the ICTs and internet is helping a lot in the education. The new tools of education gives more flexibility, more possibility to educate people who were for home. It wasn't possible to give any kind of education. So, thank you very much. Our second speaker now, it will be presentation of a special -- it will be a special presentation made by two speakers. They will address the adoption of ICTs and internet in the education system, in the Asia region, and we'll have China as a case study. So, the first speaker will be Mr. Zhou Xiang. He is member of the Committee on ICT for United In case at China Association for Science and Technology. He is professor and head of project division in the institute of remote sensing and digital earth at China Academy of Sciences and he is co-chair of the task group on scientific and technology in developing countries. Mr. Zhou, the floor is yours. >> XIANG ZHOU: Good morning, everyone. I'll be standing here for presentation. This morning, I'm going to talk about usage of ICT in education, but I will take China as a case study. So my name is Zhou Xiang from -- which used to belong to Chinese academy of science. As the chair introduced, I was the co-chair of task group preservation of an access to the science and technology in developing countries. Task group, I belong to the co-data. It's international organization. So, as we know, information communicating and technology has great potential to accelerate human progress and the great digital divide to achieve the sustainable development goals in 2013 agenda. So, definitely, there is a strong lead for each country. The commercial ICT in education for the goals of sustainable development. But, there is division on the balance of social and economic development on SDG infrastructure, also education in this. As you may know, several country in this range like Singapore, Korea, Japan, they actually have very comparatively high rank in the network performance and also infrastructure, and also several countries trying to establish the education system to better utilizing ICT technology and also there are several country that made great progress on the digital resource like digital textbook in the primary and secondary school. In general, the developed country and developing nations in Asia range all on the development of ICT and its education. So, taking Singapore as example. As you received, Singapore has a long standing master plan on the ICT implementation. So since 1997, they are already launched three master plan in past decades and in 2015, they have a new plan which aims to build intelligent nation, a global city powered by the info communication technology. So, they have achieved very good goals by implementation of ICT education. You may see in 2015, Singapore was ranked first in the world on network readiness index and also very high performance on other indicators. Other examples. Korea also has a long standing master plan for education. Now is come to, you can see current goals is to train creative minds through the education and ICT, tasks were drawn up into five categories. Also some key strategy was included in the new master plan, like opening and sharing of public data with increasing concerns in the developing country and developed country as well. So, big data, and then also, we have forum, very good service provider government like national teaching and learning center, and so on. So, how about China? China's situation is, as everybody knows, rapidly changing. Economic, social, and technology, education environment. Also Chinese government also has achieved considerable progress by construction of infrastructure, and the policy making. Also, teach resource, learning innovation of all the different user at different level. So, there is one important project which called connection and two platforms. You may find there is a very obvious trend on the proportion of school connect to internet and the classroom equipped with multimedia teaching equipment and also the teachers resource was deployed in all 64 teaching spots, including teaching spots in rural area. So, generally this tends, education at work has already build which covers the primary and secondary school, including rural area. So, the effort to promote the ICT education in China was categorized in different levels. The first we consider is policy and planning, as Singapore and Korea did. So, for the industry and the information technology, in long term ICT development and the industry-specific development, China has underlined different policy to the implementation and encouraging of development of ICT industry. As you may see, the state development strategy from 2006 to 2020, and we also have a new updated version which is called a occurring lar on the insurance of -- curricular on the influence of education and also some regulation and laws on the radio and telecommunication. For policy, in education, so China are trying to build the framework of policy and planning in different level at national, provisional and municipal to are develop and reinforce the structure of quality education resource and also the government want to view the national management system for the promotion of ICT in education. So, especially in rural area, you may notice, there's new five year plan issued in June this year is that try to build infrastructure to promote education ICT include all the stakeholders in administration, finance, laws, and other aspect. So, the promotion on ICT education includes efforts. Smart ICT as we had a session yesterday so this will be integration between this project. So that's the output we had, policy and planning in the past years. We also got some outcomes on infrastructure construction, as I mentioned, which is called preconnection. What's these connections? The first one is connect the school with broad network. You can see apparent increase on the number of PCs the student use. This diagram shows PCs students use for the K12 students and also, as you know, with growth of smartphone, there is very rapid increase on the number of mobile phone user in China which will be good foundation for the implementation of the ICT in education in China. And second connection is Connects Class with Quality Learning Resource. That means a lot of the students have a cast to the quality resource. The third one is, connect to the students with cyber learning space. We have several projects, the teaching and lending, resource sharing community, and also management tool relies these goals for access to internet learning to everyone. So, the common, also, has made great efforts to build national public platform. Two kinds of platform. First one is resource, and other one education management with closer rate to the management administration of government on ICT in education. So, until now, more than 20 programs has established the national public platform for education resource and also this platform serves 150 in school and more than 100 million students and teachers. Also for education management, more than 150 education data center was established in different province, provide including enrollment, examinations, and so on. Next issue is about -- as we know the teachers, with education of ICT is very crucial for the implementation of the information technology and communication in China. So, the Ministry of education in China requires teacher to use ICT in teaching and a stand out for them, the kinds of projects to conduct in course like TITT project. So, June 2016, the production of primary and secondary school teachers who participate in the training of ICT was reached 73.9 percentage and also here, I take Tinjin city as example, over 92 of all full-time teacher has become registered user on this platform for training program. So, for the digital resource is very crucial for implementation of ICT in education. So China has taken measure to promote learning innovation through internet, which covers the elementary and secondary school. Also higher education and academy research and also career and vocational education. The market was introduced to implement the application of ICT in education. Also, as well as the public service was provided to the user. Is okay? So, there is some case I can show you. First is for elementary and secondary school. Is two case. The first one is homework for the students reaching primary school. As China first K12 online homework platform, this registered user of this company has exceeded 23 million in past five years, and also, there is case, a project for English with native speaker at home. So you can see link and the interaction between the students, teacher, and parents was established. And it's a good circle to improve the quality of teaching and also increase interest of the stakeholder in the education -- awareness of the stakeholder in the education in teaching for the students and also government. So, there is another effort made by government on elementary and secondary school. This is called a project of learning and evaluation on digital teaching resource. You can see figure because new project launched last year so currently, there are already 7 million course online, and this year, show there is more than 4 million courses were uploaded by the teacher for evaluation and for the learning in this you're the so, so there are also some online school, regional school, and also education channels by the library was launched in April of 2014. Is commercial service but also provide support for the learning of different user at different ages. So for the higher education and research, the government also takes some measure to conduct promotion of ICT. This project was -- the project for national resource and the stability which called experimental teaching center for visual stimulation. This project was recently launched by the government. Actually, we have many different project but I select these to present to you. More than 2,600 course socially issued by the government as assessment. And also, 100 new center for teaching of with simulation was approved in last year. That means deep integration of this course in learning and information technology. Also, some shh will be introduced by professor Tao later. There is something interest here. So for everybody, I know each of us want to learn something different as interesting. So there is online course for the children. Called -- he needed to go to the physical facility or classroom. He or she just can follow the instruction online, and submit his drawing online and he can get evaluation and try to improve his or her drawing through this mechanism. Also, very interesting for the Chinese handwriting because each of us learn this kind of handwriting from very beginning of our student age, but not everybody can do very well. So, this platform, the technique to practice the handwriting, so, they have the -- sorry, this is Chinese but I can't try to explain. This is the radio and the -- how to write this character in Chinese is very interesting. And useful for the different user in different ages. Also, for career and vocational education, they are manning company and service which provide professional training like accounting, law, architecture, medicine, and so on. See, this is the service belong to one company, which already established company in United States. So, Okay. That's something about the Chinese learning. So, you may know the institute, but now we have online course. This online course has more than 4,000 online teacher, 250,000 online license which collaborate with 87 organizations. So, the user can -- this system can provide user for the service on learning Chinese, exploring culture, and community exchange with the people from different community and do the test online. So, this is very active course, lecture, on website. You see, I don't know how to pronounce in Arabic. Okay. I will make it quick. Thank you. Okay. So, as you may see, China has achieved considerable progress on the ICT in education. Also, they are still problems on the awareness, mechanism, team building, also gender difference and maybe a very special one for the common program for developing country, that's the regional gap. Safety and the rural. Actually, I show you there is a great difference between the user and the equivalent earned by the rural area and the city. So that's other area we need to address. So as a very important output on international conference, China declaration gave us a very great global ICT development and strategy towards education 2013, so we have so much work to do. I mean, common efforts on the ICT infrastructure, and training, policy, learning innovation, and so on. So, China want to share the experience -- and they go further. Thank you. Thank you. >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much Dr. Xiang. I see that you have a really good program. I really appreciate this program. You have everything. Platforms, you have the network. You even go to the Kindergarten and use the ICTs there. So, you have a comprehensive program and I think that you are one of the countries which is the most -- how to say, using ICTs and education. So, thank you very much for this presentation. I have two questions, if you don't mind. First of all, are you using for all those tools, are you always using internet or do you have internal network or internet network? And the second question, I see very well the network, the platforms, everything, but what about the content? Are you developing your MUKS yourself? Are the teacher who are not used to use ICTs, are they ready to develop MUKS for the next generation? So, thank you very much and now the second speaker about this same topic is Dr. -- who is a member on the ICT for science and technology, and who is professor at Beijing University of post and telecommunications. The floor is yours. >> Thank you. Thank you for having me here. Today my talk is about open Universities and open courses in China. I'm Tao from Cast. Here, I have some statistic figures about higher education entrance examination from the year 1985 to last year, totally about 30 years. Actually, I got permission to the University in the 1989. At that time, totally about 3 million participate and the only maybe 0.6 million got admission to the University. So, the rate is about 20, maybe. 120th. Last year, you can see totally participate over 9 million. 9 million. And perm mission is about also 7 million. Totally, admission rate over 70 percent, so totally different. So currently, just as I said, over 70 percent admission in higher education. This is one case. The second, you can see over 3,700,000,000 internet users in China is about 15 percent. And why open University in China, you can see the objective, why the access to higher standard of scholarship in higher education and -- wider access to higher standard of scholarship in higher education and promote life long learning regardless of time and education, use internet technology. And solution. Next time, University will higher education costs open to everyone. And here, just some MUKs. There's a history of the open University. You can see from the year 2003 the higher quality curriculums, construction, project launched by our government. And in the year 2011, quality really opened cost project launched. And in the year 2012, we're emerging two, for example, emerge quality with the open cost project on a central University together. And we construct open University of China. This one was very important. Central radio and TB University. About 30 years ago, I got permission to go to University, but some of my friends failed. And one of my friends throws a central radio on University, starts some courses and gets degree, and he become a lawyer. A very famous lawyer in China. So central radio on University. Lot of open University of China has male branch. So, for example, 44 for high level and over 1,000. In China over 3,000 study center and has over 100,000 teachers and over 5 million students have enrolled since 1979. A quarter of the open University of China. To use science technologies. For example, provide higher education through the radio and television. And of course, we use internet teaching platform interact between students and teachers, and over 14,000 education courses with degree. You start these kind of courses, you can -- you study these kind of courses, you can get degree. And over 16,000 education courses exist without a degree. And in open University, we have some open courses. The selection of quality open courses produced over 1,000 from the year 2011 to the year 2015. And course also have hosted by those open courses. You can see launched in the year 2013 and sponsors by Ministry of Education and Ministry of Finance. Now, over 1,000 online courses are public to everybody without charge. And you can see, somebody introduced UAE -- (Audio cutting out) Open courses. A lot of days where you have already published eight open courses on iCourse. For example, optical, complication technologies, and circuit analyses. Of course, for example, communications and the digital communication, principle of digital communication. And, our University record our post on telecommunication, so this too is very important. I'm sorry? So very important. For example, our principle of communication is very important course in our University. They're called flagship courses. Also, for most of the popular courses on iCourse. Yesterday, over 500 students learning are on principle of communication courses. And material of this course is based on the book, Principle of Communication written by our professor, professor Zho. Professor Zho is member of Chinese education, very high level. And the teacher, professor Huang and the open courses, and Professor Huang has over 20 years teaching experiments, so is very famous in our University. Especially in Principle of Communication course. And of course, we have other open education resource. For example, the MUK, as Mr. Tijani said, MUK. We also devout ourselves to teach some MUK courses. I think for open courses now shift rules of open University courses and that maybe 20 years ago, some students without getting the permission of Universities start some courses on open University and maybe then get some degree and maybe then get some good career. As I said, one of my friend get -- now he's a lawyer, very famous lawyer. But now open courses also have citizen for life long learning. That's very important for us. And we have different learning source. Just as I said, iCourse, MUK, maybe. And now open University, courses with levels of education gap with regions. For example, Beijing was very beautiful, good resources but maybe west part of China may be poor. So we can narrow the education gap through the open courses or open Universities. Okay. That's all. Thank you (applause) >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much, Dr. Tao. Now you gave the answer of my second question. I see that you are developing your open courses, your MUKs, et cetera, and this is very important because technology is not the only thing we need. We need more the content. And the content should be done by local people and local language. So normally, we should have remote participation. Remote intervention. I don't know if they are ready. Do we have something ready? We have two remote presentation. Does it work? Okay. Thank you very much. So now we are supposed to have two remote participants, but unfortunately, they are not online now. Michael is checking. But in the meantime, perhaps you will take some questions and we will start by the remote questions. So, yes. We think for those two presentations, remote presentations, we will start taking questions and we will start by the remote questions. Mike. >> MICHAEL OGHIA: All right. So this question comes from Hosan. He actually starts with a comment. First he says, the main challenges for ICT, I believe, are infrastructure, lack of awareness of new technologies, and engaging both students and instructors through the process of eeducation. How can we overcome or at least reduce these challenges, and is making policies based on ICT mean or include a reform of the national education system? He's from Tunisia, by the way. >> INES HFAIEDH: Can you hear me? Okay. Thank you very much for the question, very interesting question, indeed. Before the educational reform, this is what we're trying because at the same time, I'm a teacher with the Ministry of Education. I work for the government but at the same time I'm a Civil Society activist with an organization, we are a group of young activists called IGMENA, the Internet Governance for the -- we are raising awareness through radio shows, articles. Through conferences. We had some conferences where we invited even ministers and it was very important conference, and we are trying to push things forward. So this is our first thing we are trying to do is raise awareness and raise the public consciousness about the importance of Internet Governance and the importance of technologies in education, in general. So, this is number one. After raising the awareness, we can -- we are going to start because we are growing as a group, as IGMENA, we are becoming really influential, to be on, on the sphere of Internet Governance, so our next step is to really draft a policy and to present it to the Parliament so that we have actual and complete reform of the educational system. But, this is true that there is a problem of infrastructure, so this is why by the end of the day, we need the government to implement this policy. Thank you very much, Hosan, again. >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Good. So now our remote participant is ready now. So Bonface? Okay. So our next speaker is Bonface Witaba from Kenya. He's a founder of OER for school. An initiative that seeks to empower rural schools in Kenya through digital inclusion, flipped learning. He's an open learning writer and he's concerned in technology and policy areas of Internet Governance. He also works as learning tutors. So Bonface, if you hear me, please go ahead and start your presentation. Do you hear me? So, can he speak? >> INES HFAIEDH: Bonface, do you hear us? >> BONFACE WITABA: Hello. >> INES HFAIEDH: Hi, Bonface. This is Ines, please when you want to move from one slide to another, just tell me next, okay? We hear you very well. >> BONFACE WITABA: Yeah. Good afternoon. What's the time there? Can you hear me? >> INES HFAIEDH: Yeah, we hear you very well, Bonface. Hi. >> BONFACE WITABA: Okay. I'm excited to be on. Good afternoon, everyone. I hope it's the same time. I'm actually in Kenya. I hope I can speak on the topic. Can I proceed? >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Go ahead, please. >> BONFACE WITABA: Okay. Well I'd like to talk about open educational resource from around African continent. Recent times, once I think about couple of years back now, the government started what they call national open University. And this was to help people who couldn't leave work, get some kind of education. Like people who couldn't afford to leave their work and go to school but want to keep their work, at the same time, get an education. So, what was mainly used in this process was Open Educational Resources. They were like open source tools that students could go through. You didn't have to buy University books. You could just use these tools and learn. And most of the lecturers took their curriculum from these materials. That was really, really good because we had a lot of online tools for them to learn with. Now, why am I making case for this? This, ordinarily, it would have been textbooks that were very expensive. Very expensive textbooks and all of that. But with these open source tools like MOOCs, mass online courses that students could leverage on and there were free common license, students were able to learn and even collaborate. So that was really, really something good that has been happening and a lot of people have graduated from this open University. So that was something I know that it was through the help of ICT that we could have that kind of. And of course across the country, you could find centers all across Nigeria called National Open University Centers equipped with computers that had this free source educational resources that students could use. And those platforms, they also developed platforms that students would ask questions. >> INES HFAIEDH: Excuse me, Bonface. This is Ines. Can you tell us which slide you are now? Which slide? In the introduction, you're still on the introduction? >> BONFACE WITABA: Yes. I started -- do you have the slide shown? >> INES HFAIEDH: Yes. We are at the introduction right now. >> BONFACE WITABA: Oh, at introduction. I thought I could just speak on my topic. >> INES HFAIEDH: Okay. Which slide are you now? Which page? >> BENJAMIN AKINMOYEJE: Actually, it is Benjamin talking. Not Bonface. >> INES HFAIEDH: Okay. Benjamin. Okay. Thank you. Yes, Benjamin. Please proceed. >> BENJAMIN AKINMOYEJE: Mine is just the talk. I'm not presenting. >> INES HFAIEDH: Yes. Please proceed. >> BENJAMIN AKINMOYEJE: Okay. Yeah, that's my one picture up there. So, as I said, so this tool could really help the students to really start to learn which open source tools. Then, one of the major issues that we're coming up is how to get trainers tutors to help students because most cases, you had one lecturer to thousands of students and securing to particularly help different students. So, recently, there's an innovation that's come up, and that's the link www.tutorial.com. So this platform doesn't do only educational skills, also any kind of skills that a student might want to learn. You could search -- you could use the website to search for a tutor and the tutor would locate the students and they could come to an agreement at the minimum cost to the platform that can be made. So, what we're getting at, we're getting very good tutorials, we're highly rated. Getting opportunity to train students who are really eager to learn, and that has been happening. So you can look up that site, tutorial.com is something coming out of Nigeria and very, very good. Another thing that ICT has been doing that I've seen around Nigeria is collaborative learning, which ordinarily might not be very popular in an environmental competition where everybody wants to be the best, but with ICT now, people are learning collaboratively, we are having Facebook groups created in which ises. WhatsApp group created around learning materials. These classes are basically free beyond the fact that you have to pay for your data and that's why it's a real big issue right now that governments in Nigeria want to increase the data cost. So we're really worried because that will greatly affect students who are already using these tools to get some knowledge. Moving to the next point that I highlighted on it is creative learning as well. I actually put on there the website which is a very fantastic site doing amazing things in Nigeria and bringing about collaborative learning through the use of ICTs and addressing a lot of social issues mostly targeted to the SDG goals and I would encourage you to look at the website and look at what they're doing. Other point I have in this short paper that I put together is, creative learning that we're seeing around Nigeria and I'm sure is happening also every other place in Africa. We have integrative learning. We have some schools right now that have ICT installed in computers. Most private schools now have a lot of internet infrastructure but I don't think it's been maximized yet, but it's bringing about some improvements. What you also have, the fifth points is evaluating learning. People train and they talk allot about poor quality of education and all of that, but most of the schools now are using softwares, open source tools. Initially, this started with Google applications, but now, I mean, there's Google for business. There's also Google education and all of that but there are also a lot of open source tools that allow school management to manage their attendance, track student performance, organize exams, rules for teachers. All of these things put in the hands of the school administrators tools that help them manage students and their staff more effectively. In the end, bringing about better outcomes. So students and parents would result check the progress they made Math or English, and that way, we're getting some improvement. So all of this, I didn't have to mention any particular name of application or anything, because I'm not here to sell any product. But I'm saying, there's a o whole lot of application in those regards so I would like to conclude right now that I think ICT is finding an amazing relevance in Nigeria and open resources are really the way to go. Thank you. >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much, Benjamin (applause) And I really apologize for the confusion of the names but thank you very much. Now, we are running out of time and we will have a question and answer session. So, we have -- Bonface is here? But, -- >> INES HFAIEDH: Bonface, can you hear us? >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Can you hear us, Bonface? Bonface? So, I don't think we will have time for that. We have only 15 minutes and we didn't get any questions from the floor, so now we will go to the Q and A session. So, the floor is yours. Please give us your question if you have any question. Do we have remote questions? No. Do we have questions? Otherwise, I will give the floor to our Chinese plans to answer our question already, my first question. >> Does it work? Okay. Mr. Tijani raised two questions. The first about education based on the network capacity, and second is the course, written MOOC. So so I would like to try to answer the first question and leave the second question to my colleague, Mr. Tao. Regarding the ICT based on infrastructure, Chinese has quite a situation. We can take a different strategy based on the foundation of the physical infrastructure. I mean, for the city and the area with enough bandwidth. That means very strong connectivity on network. The kinds of resource like I introduced on the other side. So could be visual stimulation, online. There are also online course for different user, but key point is the area, especially rural area, result in half the network capacity. So there are different means. For example, we do have data receiving stations so we can receive some digital resource regularly, periodically from this kind of mean and update the local digital textbook for provide the update information for students. And in some other area, we still use compact disk or television, so this is also the scope of -- >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Okay. Excuse me. This is not my question. My question was, you are using networks. Are you using only the internet or are you using some internet network? This is the question. >> XIANG ZHOU: Yes, yes, yes. So the first strategy I talked to is internet because it depends on different infrastructure. For intranet, is also depends on the situation. Some organization like my academy for the internal training, we have also online program. So this is internet. But for the contents I talked today, since strongly connect to the internet. So, this is -- >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: So I understand that you are using a mixture of internet and intranet. A mixture of them. Very good. Question please, yes. Go ahead. Microphone. >> Yeah. My name is Usdan. I'm from Ghana. And I'm a MAG member. I noted a few points. And I went to -- I try to give what is happening in Ghana, the case is Ghana. That's my contribution. Internet adoption and income inequality as mentioned by Ines in her presentation on economic groove. Now, there is an estimation that the implied effect of internet adoption on groove negative for some countries which high income equality. Especially in the developing countries. Because the income groove incurred by the internet. Now, from a policy standpoint, this resource implies that positive impacts of the internets on grooves will be reinforced by income redistribution. Now my question is, how can this be achieved? Now my thinking, I think putting in investment in ICT infrastructure within the educational sector in all countries, especially in the developing countries. Now, I think this can also be done in two levels. The educational sector takes this upon itself and invests in ICT infrastructure within the educational sector. Our government will look at it as a national issue and then come out with a national infrastructure. A shared national infrastructure where education can also tap their resources and all that. So, in the case of Ghana, what we did was government actually took the initiative to come out a national photograph. So we have currently -- infrastructure. So we currently have a national infrastructure which is spear headed by my agency and the Ministry of Communication and we've been able to lay a fiber cable throughout the whole country of Ghana, connecting all public schools, government institutions on to one platform. We have a national data center, and I think it's one of the biggest in west Africa. And then, what we're doing now is getting the e-applications for these educational institutions for them to actually put their resources on it and their vision on it. Now, what do we do? We have the internet as part of it, and then we have the intranet as part of it. So even if the internet goes off, educational or institution can still use their resources that is being put on the platform. So I think that is what we should be looking at to see how we can leverage on that. Also, we need to share resources so what we're trying to do now is to connect on to our platform. We're also planning to connect Google on to our platform. We also planning to connect (Indiscernible) on to our platform. So, this is what we have been doing I think we try looking to this policy to see how we can all help to solve this educational issues. I want to find out from C chin ease, what -- Chinese. What tools do you have you like to share with developing country, especially African developing countries will be very, very happy. Some of these resources would like to leverage. >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much. Any other question before we give the floor to the panelists? Five minutes. Okay. No questions? So. First of all, I will give elements of answer and then I will give the floor to our friends here. Ah, he is leaving. I think that infrastructure is very important. Without infrastructure, we cannot do anything. It is needed. But, infrastructure is not everything. You may have the best infrastructure and can't make education by ICTs because you don't have the content. The content is more important than infrastructure because if you buy or you take content from other countries, it will not be adopted to your country so it will be useless and you will not be really educating your people. I think you did very good things. You have the platform and you are helping other countries so I think for the infrastructure, now you are not -- you don't have real problem. I think the problem is to have the content. >> XIANG ZHOU: Okay. First I want to answer Tijani's MOOC question. I remember about three or four years ago, Ministry of Education encouraged top University in China for MOOC and also our University, is one of top University, especially in telecommunication area. So our University also encourage teachers, staff, especially for young teachers for MOOC courses. Now days, I see many courses in MOOC. are designed for the public. I think more and more Universities pay much attention to MOOC course design, yes. And maybe my answer for Usban's question. The first one, our government also encourage us to make cooperation. Currently, we have one belt, one road. Our government want to encourage us in collaboration with other overseas. This month, most Ministry of Science and Technology, and we had a meeting. Encouraging top University, making some cooperation and share some thermos with others. I think maybe this is very important. Thank yo you >> TIJANI BEN JEMAA: Thank you very much. Any other question before we adjourn this? Any other questions? Is this working? So, if there is no question, I think that the conclusion that we may have here is that for the developing countries, ICTs should be a tool for enhancement of the education for the quality of education and of the -- how do you say, the target people. Because now some people cannot be educated because of their geographic situation, because of their also perhaps even social situation. But, with the ICTs in education, we can reach everyone. So, as I said, infrastructure, we need it. And if we don't have infrastructure, we cannot go ahead. We cannot make education with ICTs. But if we have those infrastructure, we have also to work on the content and I know that for most of our countries, most professors were not skilled to use ICTs and those who think that their courses are appropriated, they cannot -- are their property. They cannot share it. If they share it, other people will take it. They are thinking like this and I understand them. In this case, if you ask them to put their course on the net, they will not accept. We need young people because young people understand that all properties is different now. And people who are making the MOOCs are generally young people. The knowledge generally is taken from the old one, from people who have most knowledge, experience. But the work of the MOOCs, the work of the courses is done by young people and I think in our countries, our youth is very active and we have to lay on them so that we can improve the inclusion of the ICTs in the education and so that we can benefit from this use of ICTs. I think that we reach the end of our session, so thank you very much. It was very good. I want to thank, again, Ines for organizing this workshop. Our two Chinese speakers. They were very kind, and also our friends from Africa who tried to make online presentation but technology is not always good there so we are sorry for that. I also want to thank our technicians and our remote moderator, Michael, for helping us. So, thank you everyone. Thank you for coming, for attending, and this session is adjourned. (applause) (Session was concluded at 10:32 a.m. CST) ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** Services Provided By: Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 www.captionfirst.com ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM 2016 ENABLING INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH JALISCO, MEXICO 7 DECEMBER 2016 DC ON INTERNET RIGHTS AND PRINCIPLES 10:45 A.M. >> Okay. Full house is good. Oh, yes, there are. Okay. So good morning. Thank you, everyone for coming. Oh, sorry. Check. Can we do a check with the mic? >> This one is working. >> Hello. Yeah. (speaking non English language) >> Good morning. Thank you for coming to the internet rights and principles coalition -- Internet Rights and Principles Coalition, it's wonderful to be talking about a title when we have entitled, when death threats go viral, defending Human Rights in the face of orchestrated harrassment campaigns in the social media was Amnesty International article 19, and Mexico bloggers Charisma foundation and we're very happy to see we have Google here. I will introduce the panelists but first make a very, very important comment about today. This meeting marks seven years since the Coalition charters or Human Rights and internet. Two copies in front of me are here for viewing. We have it in nine languages and it is being used by different stakeholders to make it clear on not only Human Rights advocacy but also for judiciaries, intergovernment organizations, institutional -- educational institutions, grass roots organizing. So coming to today. Considering that Human Rights have been formally recognized at the UN level that all Human Rights existing offline should also apply online, this is the UN Human Rights Council's resolution of 2014, it is now time for concrete discussions on the roles and responsibilities of online service providers as well as regulators to ensure that human rights are protected and fulfilled in the online environment. So this meeting is one of our opportunities to provide a place where we can discuss the local Human Rights issues of we are in Mexico and Latin America, and to work on, start thinking about concrete solutions that will enable Human Rights online to be protected in the same way as they are offline by law. So that brings us to today. The first two thirds of this meeting will be this roundtable discussion and that will take about an hour and then please stay for the final half-hour where we will look at work of the IRP Coalition and think about the next step. Invited Human Rights experts and activists and/or online service provider representative from Google and we're going to be looking at issues such as cyber harrassment and other emerging forms of techno censorship and particularly, we're looking at how online service providers, regulators in Civil Society can manage these threats to ensure that people can converse, congregate and learn in an environment that is safe but also doesn't impede on the right of freedom of expression and right to information. So these are complex issues, ethical, legal. I'll turn it over to our members and we're going to look at these trends particularly with respect to Mexico and others in Latin America. Let me introduce our panel. We have a large panel, it is a roundtable. Before I introduce each person in turn, the request is that each initial comment is brief so that we can get as much interaction as possible. We have some slides so we can show you exactly what we're talking about. So, first of all, we have Tanya OCarroll from Amnesty International. To her right, we have AlbertoEscorci E. we have Paulina Gutierrez, Amalia Toledo, and we are very happy to see Marcel Leonardi from Google, and here in the front we have Hanane bodge who has experienced other -- Hanane Boujemi. I'll turn it over to. If you have questions for the audience, first let us speak to the roundtable. Please, for the record, say who you are. Please keep your interventions short so we have time for everyone and if we have remote participation we will see as well. So thank you very much. Tanya. >> TANYA O'CARROLL: Thank you and good morning everyone. I want to say thanks to the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition for allowing us to have this space because I've been working in Mexico this year for six months with Amnesty International's regional basis. I'm normally based in London and I was working a lot with Alberto and Paulina in particular on what I think is a really striking and very, very concerning new trend that is very, very clear here in Mexico but I think is also rearing its head in many other countries around the world and it would have been a real shame to not share some of their experiences about how they're tackling this issue because I think us in Civil Society but also regulators, governments and companies are yet to really grasp the extent and trail of what this trend looks like and how we can begin to actually fight back against it and what those kind of solutions look like. So what am I talking about? I'm talking about massive orchestrated disinformation campaigns run by troll farms. I think when we talk about harrassment and abuse, we've traditionally thought about it as the troll who spent some time -- traditionally against women and activists. To me, this is it not what we're talking about. We're talking about a market of misinformation, a commercialization of disinformation tactics, of defamation tactics and of hate speech, very violent death threats an that's something we're seeing here in Mexico. And who are these actors? It's very difficult to know and that's one of the things we'll be talking about today but what we do know is they are small PR companies that have sprung up in the last four years in Mexico and they sell a range of services to whoever will pay them. They're professionalized trolls. Alberto can talk more about this but one troll operator might be doing over 50 accounts for pay. We can promise to make your topic a trending topic, Mr. Government. We can get your issue -- they run propaganda much but also spread fake news, they make up -- they feed lies and scandals at prominent voices in Mexico so activists and journalists particularly, human rights groups as well. It's a whole ecosystem, not just trolls on Twitter, a whole ecosystem of fake blogs that are operating with a commercial background and benefiting people profiting from it. So what can we do about it? I just want to very quickly before I hand it over to you guys, the Human Rights impact of this is serious not only because it has a chilling effect. Obviously this is just a reflection in the online space of what happens offline. Death threats. Anyone who knows anything about Mexico knows the situation for Human Rights in this country is very grave. It's one of the most dangerous countries to be a journalist and now we're seeing that transported into the online environment. Just an example of that, there's a journalist who recently told me she was thinking of leaving Twitter. She said, it's not self- censorship, it's self-protection. That really sums it up, that the chilling effect comes from the fact that these spaces, including Twitter, are no lopinger safe spaces so speak out about Human Rights violation, but at least we can see them and report them to Twitter's process of reporting harrassment. What's the more and maybe even more concerning side of all of this is the defamation which is so hard to put a finger on. -- I'll give you an example. There were two leaked phone calls. The the first made it sounds like he was receiving money from cartels. The second made it sounds like he was making racial slurs. He is a prominent Human Rights lawyer in this country, an incredibly important part of the case and getting justice for those families and what happened? Just at the moment when they were about to release a very important investigation, they had done a very huge independent investigation, just at that time, the leaked phone calls were released. What happened? One of the biggest papers in Mexico ran a spread for two days straight op their home page about this scandal. It was picked up across the news. The trolls went crazy on on Twitter and at the time when we should have been talking about this case, it was a huge distraction tactic which took away from his team's ability to do their work, to do their advocacy around the case. In the press conference, people only wanted to talk about the scandal and I think that kind of defamation every day, and it is every day in Mexico. Not just Mexico. In Russia, Turkey. I think in the last few weeks we've seen similar -- not the same, because they're not yet, the Trump election. Orchestrated ky famations where o online and social media are no longer independent spaces. Huge chilling effect and it's a trend we've yet to really grasp. I want to stop there because I don't want to speak too long and Alberto is going to show you how the trolls work no Mexico and then pass on to Paulina. We forgot to mention we hoped there was simultaneous translation and there isn't, so we'll have to do an on the cuff thing. >> ALBERTO GUTIERREZ: We will try. I'm going to tell a little story about why there's so much techno censorship and where these practices are in Mexico. This is the battle between the pot ticks of the techno politics and techno censorship, what he's calling a battle. -- oh, great. Oh, Okay. People have been organizing since 2009, which began with an -- and since then, mobilizations and organizations online and media platforms are becoming and have been crucial. The last that had at least 8 million followers, it was -- it's a hashtag that was assigned to a public official investigating the case in Mexico. They have to be a really important mobilizing force because the internet was the main way that there were protests organized. Behind our story of how they were using the internet in a positive way was another story, the dark side. So the response of certain interests in Mexico really began to fight back and claim the spaces starting in 2012 where 30,000 bots suddenly appeared on the network. Thief r -- they've evolved their tactics using very complex tactics now. Basically, they appear more like real people instead of spam bots. So then in 2014 -- did you say 2014? Mexico, obviously, becomes very well known for buying fin Fisher and taking back control of the social networks. And then when he thought it couldn't get any worse, we see another third stage using massive attacks on social media. Your phone would be ringing 200 times with updates showing images of dead people with death threats going viral. Every year they've evolved their tactics. I've just come back from a period in Spain and I don't want to imagine what is going to come next for 2017 and how these tactics are going to keep evolving. We're going to see these tactics -- Ashley, can you translate? I didn't get it quite right. >> Okay, what is happening in Mexico, Alberto said that it is something that's going to evolve and happen all around the world now that with Trump's victory and Russia involved in all these technology on elections because in 2,017 and 2,018 receive will have presidential elections in Mexico. It's not just an issue on the anybody. These have real examples in real world, and these going to show examples. The president of Mexico visits London in 2,013. The center is the activists and journalists recovering his journey to London and protesting it. The red belt around the edge is how many -- 20,000 bots who were basically trying to sabotage the protests, the organic protest that was happening on the network and suppress it. So now they're using a mixture of the bots. This is the next example, which was already mentioned, this is the wave of protests that handicapped in 2014 against -- now they're not just spam bots. I'll just add one thing. Spam bots are just empty tweets. Somebody running a lot of accounts sending empty tweets in order to kind of block the channel of the protesters, just to push out and suppress information, get things pushed out because Twitter then blocks them. They've now evolved their tactics in 2014 using a mixture of the bots with these kind of controls which are real people, which are much harder to block. That's 65,000 bots. So that center bit is where the battle is happening between the bots which are the green bit and the protests who are just organic social movements using the hashtag llamecanse. So the collective intelligence of the organic network, the people who are just protesting, realize what was happening when they were being flooded with this huge orchestrated attack, so they adapted. They created llamecansedos, a new hashtag. This was in 2014 when we still thought we could win the battles by adapting. But last year, there was another evolution in 2015. They moved from the internet into the street starting with threats online and then became physical threats. She's a journalist. She received 2,000 death threats through Twitter. Receiving them on the streets, and people coming to her house, following her. Of course, we're going to keep on adapting and looking for ways to express ourselves online. But, we need everybody to know about this and for there to be a force around the world in order to try and address it because at the moment, we are using the -- losing the battle. I'll finish with this little -- Okay, he's asking, I'm calling the international community to put their eye on Mexico and how this is happening and it's going to happen all around the world and he's very thankful for letting him talk in this panel (applause) >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I will now ask Paulina to take the floor on Article 19. >> PAULINA GUTIERREZ: Thank you. I also want to thank very much to the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition, Tanya, for letting us talk here because Mexican Civil Society, not only Article 19 as a Mexican office have not had therapy opportunity to talk at IGF so we're really thankful for that and thank you for listening. And I would like to begin mentioning the first paragraph of a public statement that we did these Mexican Civil Society organizations. We want to maximize Human Rights first with violation of women and the murder of 99 journalists. This year, we had the most high number of journalists murdered, we have ten journalists and happening in total and complete impunity and when impunity rules is when online becomes crucial. In such context, online and offline are connected and in Mexico we're seeing a growing number of additional effects, not only these covering that traditional media is not covering and grass roots. Also online threats against journalists, Human Rights defenders, and this is actually an attempt to restrict democracy. We have documented 30 cases in 2015 of attacks. There are malware offenses, attempts to attack journalists and Human Rights defenders. This has become a category of new norms of violence against these actors, particularly affecting women where physical and integrate violence are interrelated and interchangeable. So these threats that Alberto just exposed are the most common aggressions against journalists and women today. This year, we are documenting them and we are aware that this is a real challenge because as Civil Society, we need to build a technical capacity because big teams commonly come to us and wish to know what the IP address of the people and they are also attacking their anonymity and it's not that anonymity is a bad thing but also we need the prosecution tore effective and if we're in a country where impunity is the rule, how are we going to manage this. And actually. What we have is where persecutors think that -- prosecutors think that online attacks are not important. So we really believe in article 19 that a death threat or a rape threat that is becoming viral online cannot be less than any other crime that happens in the offline world and that is something that we have been pushing and trying to raise awareness of. So I would like to end with n, and thank you a lot again for sharing the panel. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. We're not going to turn to Amalia. Thank you. And I'll give her this roaming Mike. >> Good morning and thank you for inviting me to this panel. Are you listening to me? Yes? Okay. Just a few things we share with Mexico is Human Rights crisis as well in Columbia. High rates of impunities and what is different is we have been -- for 50 years so this situation makes us different than Mexico although we share all of these. This has undermined Human Rights very deeply and one thing are big cities and other thing is where the conflict is still alive, where people really feel the country. So additionally to this context, we have to make clear that internet connection is very different from depending from where you are in the country. So that's made a huge difference with Mexico in terms of we haven't identified this harassment campaign. That goes beyond using bots. However, in the last presidential election, we suspect that one of the candidates use a service of hacker to influence through bots and fake accounts on social media the public opinion. So in a matter of maybe a few months, we're probably going to see stuff like the ones we ahead here from our colleagues here. I'm pretty sure, because whatever is identified in one Latin American country is going to happen or is already happening in the other countries so I'm pretty sure we're very soon going to identify these trends. But, you know, they are in conflict is affecting especially Human Rights activists and journalists, but now we are seeing happening in Mexico is increasing, that is totally different thing that is happening now in Columbia. This year, more than 60 Human Rights defenders has been killed. The reason on that of human rights violence, on Human Rights defenders has increased while adjournists is decreasing. While we think here is that you cannot say that their activism online is not affecting or not putting more pressure on these groups because it is. But the thing is that as I say, internet connection is different when you go to these difficult places in Columbia. Where you are in an area that is directly affected by the armed conflict, the penetration is very low so activists are not necessarily, we cannot put the fault in a way to internet because not necessarily. They are not using and grass roots organizations are not necessarily using technology and the internet as a way of doing activism, but those that are doing it are not aware of the risks so they are more vulnerable an those that are not using it. But in addition, we have identified in Charisma in the work we have done with journalists, with women journalists, that the threats for them are way more higher than the ones for male or men journalists and the discourse or the narrative is because they are not only journalists, but they are a woman. So they are getting more threats that are related with their personal relationship, with their appearance, with their supposedly lack of capacity, for being woman. And when someone, when a woman is being very critical to any subject of interest in the country, she is going to be slotterred, basically, online -- slaughtered, basically, online. But we still haven't identified a campaign online just to attack a person or organization, but I'm pretty sure that it's a matter of time that this is happening because it's already -- we have the suspect and this hasn't been proved completely but this election as I say was using these of kind of services so we've seen this is going to happen and we have to join forces so look for solutions to this. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Okay thank you very much. Let us turn to our panelist Marcel Leonardi from Google. Thank you very much. >> MARCEL LEONARDI: Thank you for inviting me. It's very good to be on a panel that is so diverse. It's rare where men are the minority, so thank you for putting that together, as well. Sadly. Now one thing about public policy. I work for public policy in Brazil and sadly the situation is not that different. You may have heard reports of journalists being murdered, websites being taken down and all of the campaigns against specific public Twitter. But we do believe that technology can help a little bit. Not sure how many of you are familiar with a project that we launch in Latin America called Project Shoot. If you haven't visited that, the website, projectshoot.withgoogle..com. Basically it's a program that allows journalists and website users to use Google technology to protect their sites from the DOS attacks. Basically one tactic we have seen rather than reports or any kind of profit systems we actually see powerful figure trying to censor blogger and websites in general using DOS attack. I specifically remember one case in Brazil where a prominent figure wanted to censor a specific website against his views, his ideals. Essentially, he asked several lawyers how much it would cost, and then suddenly nobody heard from him again. What happened was he actually found a couple of people to actually attack the site with the DOS attacks and he was even caught on press saying, yeah, it was cheaper than that than to go through the legal process. It's a real problem. Anyone can apply as long as you qualify as news or blogger or news organization, harder to identify these days. Something they're willing to identify that exists for people. The second example from Brazil which we noted addressed the point that was addressed earlier was the issue of self-censor ship. Basically, a lot of people were afraid for their lives as was mentioned here so people not only just leave social media, they abandon YouTube channels. They stop publishing. You think, what happened to them? Maybe they got tired of publishing. No. They got threats. The threats can be of several different consequences. What I mean by that is what we see is lots of lawsuits being filed by several different people against its same blogger, journalist, Twitter account. And what ends up happening is obviously that person is buried under the cost of the legal proceedings. Basically, he or she cannot really have the means to fight back in Court so we're starting giving support to organizations in the region as well that are able to fight back and actually cover the costs of those legal proceedings for some of these folks as well. So this is something I wanted to highlight real quickly. I know people want to go into the debate so thanks for having me. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. So we can now open to the floor. Do people have comments or questions from the floor to our panelists or anything that would like to add to the information we're sharing here? Yes thank you. Could you just say your name for the record? >> My name is Marcel. I work for -- actually, what Amalia was saying right now was just recently at the peace agreement elections. The campaign spread a lot of misinformation. For example, they said that they get picture where president Santos was with the leader and they put a fake message and that image became viral. Also, with the internet, the low internet penetration, they really know what we're doing because in the towns like, they spread like different message according to the regions. In some regions, they say, oh, we're going to become same as Venezuela and using the accent, and also targeting for example, if the internet penetration were low, they were using like radio stations, local radio stations to spread mi misinformation. So we are also seeing that happening very recently in Columbia with the peace agreement. And they won. They won with a lot of misinformation. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks very much. So a very strong theme that is coming out is how sophisticated these strategies and tools are becoming and they're in fact using a commercial approach called localization to be very aware -- globalization to be very aware of global differences and very targeted and very clever. Are there any more comments or examples from the floor? I think it would be very useful today to gather information for the official transcript. Thank you. Please your name for the record, and where you're from. >> Yeah, it's Hasman from Nepal. I'm an executive board member of Freedom Forum so what I am thinking of is, we have lots of access and lots of technology with internet but when, like a journalist, I am a political journalist, so now we are very scared to spread real news because everybody is threatening us and we have kind of self-censorship. The self-censorship gives you a very sad story that they are able to give a real story, real news. Because of the, all the penetration and all the impunity activities throughout the journalism practices. Thank you. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. Very important point. So this also is happening in Nepal. Any other comments? Thank you from the floor. >> Hi, my name is -- I'm in Glascow, Scotland, but now in the center of policy. Some of the thinking has the panelists highlighted a fact that cyber space is no lopinger a separate space as it used to be perceived. It's very much a part of the real world and what makes it even more difficult from a Human Rights perspective is the control. Actually, 24 hour activity. So just to give an example, bullying is not new. Children have always been bullied at schools but that used to stop, before the internet, when the child came back home. But this now carries into the bedroom. The examples you were talking about from Mexico, that the 24 hour onslaught makes it even more challenging to address and I'm completely with you on the Human Rights implications but the basic point I was trying to make is I think it's time we stop looking at cyber space as a virtual space. It needs to be seen as part of the real world. >> Thanks very much. Important point. Is my mic on? No, my mic is not on. Hello? Hello? Moderator needs her mic. Okay. Does anyone else from the floor? >> Yeah, we have another one. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. >> Hello, I'm Que Cesaro from Mexico. I'm a librarian myself. The first thing is, thank you for sharing that information. In many case, it's new to me. I would like to make comments. One, it would be great for you to prepare outlines for average citizens on how to identify these attacks because for people like computer specialists, it happens in my own state and from those from Mexico, you know, the situations with the state is going through. So that's the first comment. The second one in regard to journalists in freedom of expression, I guess the greatest challenge that Mexico is facing is the drug cartels. They are the ones killing most of the journalists. In they dare to speak, they do, they usually in great danger. I think in the case of the government, there are legal things to do and count act whatever a government does, but in the case of the drug cartels, I don't see any solution to really confront them or to find a solution. So, conclusion, thank you for doing the job. It would be great if you could educate us on how to identify this. Thank you. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Just yes, go ahead. >> Okay, is this? No. Okay. Can I use this one? Yeah. Okay so -- >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Does this work? >> Our table mic is not working. >> We can just talk loudly. >> Okay. It's working now. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Okay, thanks. >> Well, yeah. I just want to add something to what you mentioned about drug cartels. I think we need to also realize in a country as Mexico you cannot find a clear difference between public officials and drug cartels. I mean, if they are operating, it's because they are being allowed to operate. I mean, that's why impunity and prosecution has been so difficult in Mexico and as journalists and linking it with the online world is how are we going to control it? I think it's not that we don't have the measures to control it. It's just rule of law that is not being current in Mexico. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Which is segue, I think we need to consider for the rest of the this discussion for this roundtable is what next, next steps in light of who is legally accountable and who is in effect accountable so the tension between what really is happening on the ground. I think we've had one suggestion about guidelines. Let's hold that and come back to it but before we look at practical solutions to help support and also call to account both the private sector and public sector and to see how the private sector can help, I would like to ask Hanane Boujemi if she has anything to add because we are now considering issues around the world. Do you have any points you want to make? >> HANANE BOUJEMI: Not exactly. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: If you don't mind turning around so people can see you. The camera. >> HANANE BOUJEMI: Thank you very much to the panelists and Marianne for organizing this session and our colleague Linda who is not here with us today. She's in the UK at the moment. I think you bring a bleak picture about how the internet is being used at the moment for various reasons and I think what we try to do in our Dynamic Coalition is to highlight the importance of principles. That's why we have a booklet that we produce with the charter that is translated to different languages, but the charter and the principles are black and white. How can we make them more concrete and how can they be more practically used by different policy makers and organizations in the field. The situation in the Middle East is a little different. We do not have drug cartels, for example, as you have here. We do not have trolling Human Rights defenders on Twitter and deploying bots to make some noise, you know, on these channels where freedom of speech is being kind of Trotted. We do have other issues with ISIS, for example, with violence, extremism, civil war in Syria and so on and intersection between regions but I cannot really relate to the problems that you have highlighting here. And it's good that aware here in Mexico in the context where we can have a completely different overview of what's at stake in this region. From what we've heard so far, there's a lot at stake. It affects professional journalists, women, Human Rights defenders and we should do something about that and definitely principles are there. They can help us set a framework, but to what extent you are in a position to influence policy makers and that's where the bulk work actually is needed. The media is doing its job at a local level but these issues are not really visible at the international agenda and we're very happy that the Dynamic Coalition on internet rights and principles is in a position to speak about these had beens. The solution is along my objective or a long shot, as we say, in Europe, but definitely we should start somewhere so we do have these principles which can help us set a framework. We try to do a lot of work to put them in context. For example, in the Middle East, we led a campaign called click rights. It basically transformed the principles into concepts that people, citizens, you know, people in the Middle East would actually understand and are able to digest. Now, let's be honest. Knowledge about internet rights is not widespread, so we really have to do a lot of work, background work, to bring people to the picture beyond Human Rights defenders and journalists and so on so you need to have a platform where you can have this course with people who actually understand what you're talking about and that's where the bulk of the work that we've been doing is just engagement and bridging the knowledge gap about internet and internet principles and rights and so on. So I think we are on the right track. I'm glad that this IGF for the first time, I mean, going through all IGFs since 2006, this is the first time I hear a lot of people actually wanting to have a multistakeholder dialogue. You know? If you go back to the transcripts of the IGF in 2006, the first one I've been to, you will see how the discussion evolved. Now it's really good that we managed to get a lot of people from different backgrounds and platforms who are here and we need to start talking about these things. Now the next step is to get the elephant, you know? Where is the elephant? It's not in the room at the moment, the government. So we need to bring that stakeholder so we can have a candid conversation about what needs to be done practically to solve all these issues. We're very happy that Google accepted to come here so we have very important stakeholder and that is the private sector, and now the work is how to get who is not here in the room to listen to what's going on so we can address these issues more practically. Thank you, Marianne. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much, Hanane. So just to -- do we have a comment from the floor? Two comments? And then in order to keep us focused after that on what next because as Hanane has said you have to start somewhere and also because she's tools are so sophisticated, then our responses need to be nuanced, sophisticated and diverse. And never say never. So before we round up, we will do that. I have three more comments from the floor. Have I got that right? One, two, three, then the panel can quickly respond and then we'll do a brainstorm for our about next steps, possible steps and ideas. Is that clear? So in turn, the speakers from the floor then the panel's quick response. Is that okay? We'll manage. Can happen. So go. Please, your name for the record. >> Yes, I'm from Localization. Just to add a quick comment to Hanane, there is an account of -- of a seven year-old girl whose mother manages her account. Her account got shut down. For two weeks, everyone was wondering, did she die? Did she get killed? She's putting out images and giving stories of life inside Alepo that are really important. She seems to be okay, but she's been hacked and trolled and attacked and actually, I have, too. Any time I repost something from white helmets or any news in Alepo. I didn't realize you could get so many tweets with my face, and random information on it in one hour. And it's scary, and it shuts me up and I don't want to talk about it anymore. But yeah, exactly. While it's not cartels, it's a different problem all together. And I'm going to guess by the Russian Syrian flag in the logo, it was probably a Russo-syrian hacker doing that. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Important point about people as human rights dependers without necessarily doing as such. The girl in red at the front -- no, that's okay. We'll go to you. Go ahead, please. >> I'm journalist from Thailand. I would like to update some situation in Thailand right now. I think the most important issue in Thailand related to internet right is about citizen being restricted to access for information by censorship. Firstly, the people enjoy the freedom of expression online and then we got backlash, like the slap back into like the legal allegation. Lastly, the level of the sensor is going to -- if you just click like or to some influence on the social media, the police can come to visit you and have some kind of like interrogation so it's already outlawed by the government. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks to remind us that even clicking "like" can be life threatening. >> Hello, I'm from Africa. Back home, we don't really have this situation at this scale, but social media has been used, obviously, to organize and bring about social awareness in terms of political issues. However, what we're facing right now is a government which is trying to regulate the internet. So, with this type of issue, at one hand, you want to protect freedom of expression, but, at the same time, limit it. So then in terms of going forward, how do we balance the 2n so, because these people look legit, how do we -- it's a very fine line to even a discussion back home, the government wants to regulate. So what does it mean really? So in this context as well, going forward, how do we approach that? As the speaker said, it's much more nuanced than just saying cut these people out whereas it's also limiting free freedom of expression. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. Good point. Anyone from the floor? One more from the floor. Our panelists have some responses, really. >> Hello, I'm from the digital counsel. I have open questions. You were mentioning the accountability of some actors and I was wondering if the platforms used by these abilitiors should be more -- actors should be more accountable. More traditional way is to say they can block some votes but more generally, what is the responsibility of the business models which they are built. For example, Facebook, you clearly see how the content is regulated, the emergence of troll farms, they are also benefiting. So I think a symmetrical way of organizing this context where the -- content where the users have not much power on what they see but where it is only based on private markets is also in a way triggering these kind of deviations. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. Very important point. I think we will turn to our Google representatives. Marcel, we're not asking to you speak for every provider but it is a burning question about the business itself so just to let them have every mic. >> MARCEL LEONARDI: That's an excellent question, especially, as you said, the business model is based on advertising in general. So, as you said, I cannot, obviously, speak for other companies in the private sector but what Google has done, for example, with the whole fake news cycle that you may have seen is exactly that. Just as was mentioned, it is a commercial enterprise for some people to create these troll, these bot accounts, it's also a commercial enterprise that happens to organize all these fake news websites so what Google has done is actually change the way that advertising can be shown on these fake news websites, which means they will not. Basically, the ad revenue has been cut off from these websites which basically since they live off of click, essentially in f there's no way to advertise there, there's no way to continue making money based on fake news so that's one way technology can address this. Of course I see most of the issues have been raised by Twitter. Probably couldn't be here for some reason -- not sure if they were invited. Don't want to get into that. My point being it's obviously not a one stop solution. Essentially, there's no magical bullet that technology can create and pretty much improve everything. Obviously, without the help from Civil Society to identify these things, companies cannot tweak their algorithms or change things the way they work. Google, for example, does that all the time. Not sure if people with aware of this but on any given year, Google makes changes. People trying to move up and bad results and things like that and the company trying to identify these things but obviously whoever is involved in any given issue will have a much quicker response. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much so in a sense, we have a very clear -- one clear solution is Google not to allow these click farms to gain access and get revenue. So that's a very concrete, thank you very much. We also had another NG Os how to be careful online if you are a Human Rights activists or journalist but possibly some guidelines on those areas. I'm going to ask the panelists to make a response and if possible to add to those solutions. We're brainstorming at this point so I think that's a powerful moment for us right now. I think, Tanya, you wanted to respond and then each one of you in turn. >> TANYA O'CARROLL: I think you summed it up very well in terms of this trade off. When we first started looking into this problem we felt very clear that Twitter should be doing a lot more and had a responsibility to doa lot more in terms of changing its algorithm to block the spam bots. Of course that works when they're spam bots. Not when they're trolls. They're quite clear they don't want to be the judges and I agree with that, that would be very problematic if they were to be the judges of what is legitimate expression and who is a troll in a country like Mexico with such a complex ecosystem of actors. Alberto spends his time literally trolling through -- wrong use of word -- thousands and thousands of these tweets. You have an incredible expertise, but could Twitter ever have that expertise? I think it's an interesting question. In terms of solution, one thing that has to be done is putting in more resources in terms of investigating because it's clear there's got to be a regulatory response. It's clear that governments have to respond to this as well. Not only for the actual companies and platforms themselves, and to do that, we need information. Trying to investigate these actors, it has been so difficult because we have such an impartial view and visibility of the network and it comes to questions about, you've had the same thing trying to report cases but IP actors, we can infer things. When you have all of the data you can infer a lot and we need access to that data. Unfortunately, we can't see the activity and actually expose. I think that's got to be something they can do together. I think it was quite interesting yesterday, I don't know how I feel about it yet, but the recent Google Facebook Twitter combine on ISIS and creating content that in a big database that they agree this video is bad so it can't be reshared afterwards and I think similar strategies that involve multiple companies working together plus governments plus obviously us as actors constantly pushing for this and exposing human rights issues behind. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. Amalia and Paulina and perhaps Alberto, any comments? >> When we are talking about public policy and legislation, I think we need to work on how to close the gap between narrative or how to build a new narrative where the positions or point of view of the freedom of expression advocates do not clash with the victims, and the same way, you know, and the other way around. Because we need to make positions to legislators that can put together, I don't know. Sometimes freedom of expression is like, don't touch freedom of expression, but we need a solution for these where acts visits and human rights defenders are a victim of this so we need to go to the middle point on this. I think that's important. And the other thing, one thing that we have identified at least in Columbia with some other Latin American techies is that they are not thinking that the war has to do with Human Rights. We're trying to raise awareness on them and we have to come to discussion, we need you in discussion because you are the ones developing all the algorithms and if you are not thinking on Human Rights, we are not going to find a solution so that's another thing that I wanted to share. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. Paulina? >> PAULINA GUTIERREZ: Yeah, and I think we also need to recognize a complexity of this ecosystem. I mean, we need to recognize that we all speak different languages and I'm not talking about Spanish or English. I'm talking about how engineers at ICANN or ITF, they are trying to develop things and we also need to go to them and explain why Human Rights are important in their work. The same as private sector. If they are approaching to us and they want to know, but how can we help because our business models want limits and we are also liable for human rights obligations and protections. But we need to keep and maintain these kind of discussions at IGF, too. I know that this year, the framework was enabling the betterment and under the sustainable developmental goals, but freedom of expression is one of the main topics that needs to be still under discussion at IGF. So, thank you again for letting us. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you, in Alberto. >> HANANE BOUJEMI: Two things in Spanish. Responding to this gentleman here, how do you detect the behavior of on the networks. In 2012, it was really easy because they were repetitive message and it was easy to detect them. Every time they change, now, it's getting more complicated. They change, Twitter adjusts the algorithms, and they adapt again. The only way we've been able to have a strategy to kind of advance is to -- the people how they can respond in the face of these kinds of attacks and that's been where we can advance. In 2014 rearing, we developed this guide. I'm going to put it in front of the camera. Ten steps of how to defend yourself against an attack by bots or trolls. We could develop these kinds of things, basically. And what did you say -- >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Okay. This has been, I think, an extraordinary, amazing panel. Just a somber, the dark side of what we do every day but I'm finding it also inspiring. This is the work of the internet rights and principles Coalition. Also other Coalitions in the Internet Governance Forum. We have the charter of Human Rights and Principles and to move forward with real life solutions. We're just going to segue now into our meeting. But before you go, the meeting will be like this -- to let you know what we're doing in the next two days, Hanane Boujemi will be telling us about the main presentation from the IRP Coalition, a very impressive development in terms of the study guide. We also have a lightning session at 10:00 to 2:00 -- 13 hours 50, ten to two tomorrow in the space. And this is the work we've been doing through the European Internet Governance, again, around the charter work but starting a new conversation about the connection between internet access and design and terms of use and the policy decisions made with respect to refugees, minors, and new populations. So please join us. The question is, what does Internet Governance have to do with refugees? Twenty minutes lightning session. You have one minute to answer that question. Please join us. It will be very interesting. Thank you for being here today. Please, if you feel comfortable, please stay so we can move into our business meeting, and you'll learn more about the IRP Coalition. I'd like to extend my heart felt thanks to our wonderful panelists and wish them strength in their work. Thank you very much, everyone. ( (silence) >> Hello. Okay. Thanks everyone for staying. Business meetings are like this. Please bear with us. >> I was going to give the floor for people to discuss a little more. I can see that the conversation is really interesting. Sorry, I have a very short bandwidth as well. I'm losing my voice, almost. >> HUGH: Hi, every. My name is Hanane Boujemi. I'm a co-chair of the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition. Thank you for staying. This meeting is going to take us almost maybe 15 minutes. I think it will be very important to maybe address some of the questions that you have about the Coalition and just to brief you very quickly the IGF now includes a number of Coalitions which work on specific topics. IRPC happens to be up with of the oldest ones so it started a couple years back. I think it was 2009 so a little bit head ahead. These are the other Dynamic Coalition recently formed about emerging issues, like Internet of Things or blockchain. You will see in the program, there are so many dynamic Coalitions. I think 16 or 17, but briefly we have a main session now for the Dynamic Coalitions, and that is, I think on Friday. Thursday? Oh, okay. It's tomorrow. So we are meeting with all the Dynamic Coalitions and I encourage you to go to the session because we'll be briefing the UN IGF and all the Dynamic Coalitions about the work we've been doing this year. The main highlight this year is that we had a group of students from University so they review, well, it's not in a different language but as you know, certain concepts evolve and these principles were formed back in 2,009. These students took the lead from lawsuit to produce a guide and put the highlight on emerging issues but also, they code the language of the charter from the legal perspective to give a completely different view on the principles from a perspective. The point is to invite others in the world to feed into the work we're doing. Because what is relevant in Latin America as we could see earlier is probably not relevant to the Middle East, so it's very important to be able to incorporate all point of views from all around the world so we can all agree on what are really the internet principles that we want on the internet. Because the internet is a network. A network is global. It doesn't translate into specific culture or language. It's a global network. So we would like to have principles that we know reflect the global nature of the b internet. Now, very quickly, the Dynamic Coalition is -- we have a group of members. Some of them will have to step down. It is very important to have a group of motivated people who are willing to donate their time to some of the work we're doing throughout the year and that includes our role as an observer in a committee for the council of Europe so we do give advice on all issues related to internet. The charter happens to be also a point of reference for policy makers. A lot of the work that is produced in the charter is being reflected in key international documents. We contributed in many, many processes. If you look at the website, actually, of the Coalition, which is internet rights and principles, you will see all our achievements. A lot of the work being done in countries, mainly New Zealand, Spain, Italy. Some of the laws are actually inspired from this charter so we do have some kind of under the influence on policy making document all around like in different parts of the world. It would be good to take this experience to other regions, and that's why we're here in Mexico. So our work has a global nature. We've done a lot of work as well in the Middle East whereas I said earlier, we're trying to reach out to the grass roots to build their capacity and knowledge about the issues that are speech to internet rights. So, now we're at the stage where we have to have elections because we have a structure where we have two co-chairs to help each other do the work. One of us will be going out, and that's Catherine. So I'm staying for another term, another year. So we need a new co-chair. Please, the first thing you should do is subscribe to our mailing list. Unfortunately, we can't display that on our website on the screen here but if you know anybody who is interested in this kind of W and would like to be nominated as a chair, please do. We also need new steering committee members and it's good to have fresh blood because it helps us keep our objective sharp and keep our work a little bit more scattered. I would like as a co-chair to bring people from different regions. For example, we have one person from the Far East but we would like to have more perspectives because the more regions represented in this kind of work globally, the more we hear about those specific issues so you would be representing your, of course, but also representing your region. You would feed into the discussion. As you see now when we learn at the the global level we always learn something new about what's going on in another part of the world and maybe your experience would be very relevant to people here in Mexico. So if you are interested in our work, please do subscribe first to the mailing list and then nominate yourself or anybody that you know can be of help to the work that we're doing either globally or maybe even regionally and locally. Now, the charter is already translated to so many different languages. I think we could do with more languages if we have more volunteers. It's all done by volunteers, by the way. It's been revised and edited by volunteers. Printed by volunteers. So most of our work as well is actually very noble, we have very noble objectives to make sure that the knowledge is scaled and whatever we do is of benefit to everybody. So if you have any questions, we have maybe five minutes and I hope we can address them. Otherwise, if you have any other recommendations or things that can help us do our work better, it would be great to hear you. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: And just to underscore Hanane's point, if you want to contribute by being a steering committee member, there will also be positions there available. So. Yeah. Most of the work is actually online. We do organize activities whenever it's possible because financially sometimes working an IG has a lot of problems -- but our main meeting point is the IGF so most of the members will meet at the IGF. So this is our official kind of DC meeting, but most of the interaction happens on the mailing list. And the activities vary. Like we contribute consistently in the European dialogue on the internet governance. We organize different workshops. If you come tomorrow to the lightning session, you will hear about the work we do in Europe because the refugee crisis in Europe is quite a topic at the moment and we try to customize the issues we cover according to the regions. Of course we'll be very happy to do activities in other parts of the world and the network of people working in the Dynamic Coalition are well versed and exposed to other environments as well. If their work can contribute to something, we always consider events. We do a lot of events at University, I organize a lot of events related to the program of managing the Middle East so each member actually take the lead locally. We have members in India also doing activities locally and they take the work of the Coalition there, but we don't organize like global events because we do not have funding for that but the IGF is our meeting point. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: And also just to add to the developed point that Hanane brought up, a very important aspect to the governmental portion of our work is not only the fact that the chart is being referred to and used in conversations within governments for national initiatives on digital rights. It referred quite complicitily to the charter, but also in the -- explicitly to the charter but also in the Council of Europe made up of 47 neighbor states, the IRPC is made up of specific observes. We are there to observe, get access to -- this is very important at the governmental level and the Council of Europe are doing very good work in that respect, so just to outline it. >> HANANE BOUJEMI: Okay so if we don't have anymore questions, I'd like to thank you for being here. Until next time. If you come to the next IGF, which we still don't know where it's going to be, we'll be glad to see you there. Every year we have a workshop like this where we give a slot to people who don't have a platform to voice their concern, we always do a thematic area. If you don't have any questions, I'll be happy to address them in the hall or over lunch so feel free to reach out to me or Marianne who is also a steering committee member. And I'd like to wish you a great IGF and I'll see you around. >> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: And sign up internetrightsand Principles.org. Thank you very much. (applause) (Session was concluded at 12:12 p.m. CST) ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** Services Provided By: Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 www.captionfirst.com ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM 2016 ENABLING INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH JALISCO, MEXICO 7 DECEMBER 2016 OF44 ACCESS NOW (speaking non English language) (speaking non English language) >> PETER MICEK: I am a global policy and legal counsel at Access Now and we are at Access Now and we're happy to tell you about our services and to see how we may work with you. I can talk about our origin, where we come from and I can pass to other members about my team to see where we are in the world and how we're organized. Just in time is our Executive Director Brett Solomon who would probably to the best job talking about the origins of Access Now. But I won't put him on the spot. Yeah? Sure. Is there a mic we can pass? That would be great. >> BRETT SOLOMON: Hi. Sorry I'm late. >> PETER MICEK: No worries. >> BRETT SOLOMON: So the history of Access Now. If it's of interest to people, I'll just briefly. So, who here remembers the 2009 Iranian election, is was probably the first time we started to see citizens using mobile phones to be able to record video. I think when we look at the media now, like every news story, essentially, has mobile phone recording. But back in 2009 was the first time we really started to see people using mobile technology to record, in this instance, protests. So we started to see the news agency, which is the Iranian agency issue press releases saying there was a hundred people protesting in the main square of Iran and we were receiving videos of 100,000 people in the streets. I was working for an organization called AVAS which some of you might know, which is an organization that tries to use new technology to mobleize citizens. When I saw what was happening in Iran and also prior to that I had worked with a few organizations, Amnesty International and Get Up Australia and recognizing from my perspective that, hey, this internet thing is actually extremely important to political activity, to human rights enjoyment and so on. And at the same time, it's at risk. So, how about setting up an international NGO, an international non-profit that would focus on protecting the open internet and defending the digital rights of its users? It started off as a concept. Myself, as one of the co-found errs. There are three other co-founders who are no longer with the organization, two Iranian fellows and a young woman from Viet Nam. Over the years, that was several years ago, in 2009. And now in 2016, we have 40 staff all around the world and we do and maybe Pete can talk about some of the thinking that's we do, but that's essentially the history. So, from a concept to some periods of bumpy roads along the way, to working with an extraordinary team of experts, some of whom are sitting here. >> PETER MICEK: Great. So yeah. As Brett mentioned, from our start, we've had a few different roles and part that have is providing a direct technical support to users at risk around the world. We went through our mission statement, but it is flashing on the screen. That's our site, in case you're wondering. So our organization has provided direct technical support, increasing capacity, security, and hardening communications. I work on our policy teams. I'm a lawyer who had training and based on the New York office, I lead our organization with international organizations and multinational organizations like telecoms. I try to promote norms, build norms, promote policies and practices that will help prevent and mate mitigate the sort of harms my colleagues on the tech team field from around the world each day. And some of those, lately, have been things like internet shut downs. We're getting users writing to us at an encrypted email address, shutdowns@accessnow. Org. When they hear rumor, that is a pressing problem, something we saw early on in 2011, in Egypt, took the world by surprise. Now, it's unfortunately becoming common place and that's the sort of thing that I will look to build norms around and fight back against. I will pass this to my colleagues to talk about our regional work and some of the other teams. >> DREW MITNICK: Yeah, sure. So my -- >> DANIEL ARROYO: Yeah, sure. So my name is Daniel. I'm based in the Costa Rica office. As you can see we're located in different places it's because we're a global organization. I'm based in the Costa Rica office and I work at the help line team. As Peter was saying, in the beginning, we started providing technical support and we kind of evolved that idea into what we have today that is called the digital security help line. Basically, it's a service for Civil Society to provide support on digital security. So, we work mostly on the active scenarios, whenever someone is facing an emergency, someone's account has been compromised. Someone's website is being attacked, someone is being censored online and they need immediate assistance, we are able to provide response yeah 24 hour period because we have 24/7 capacity. Right now, we have support in eight different languages, and we have three different offices. One, as I said, in Costa Rica. Another in Tunisia and a slightly different model in Asia but we also have some capacity in that region. Also, I'm talking a bit more about that reactive side of the help line but we also provide a lot of support about before dintses actually occur. So ideally, we would want incidents not to occur, but unfortunately, it's not what we have today. So we try to build competence in organizations. We try to provide individual assistance, direct assistance, real time support whenever someone either is facing an emergency or just wants to get a better understanding of their context, of their model and how to increase their digital security. One of my colleagues from the help line is here so I'm going to pass it on to you to talk about what you do at the help line. >> Hi, so I'm part of the preventive work. I will teach classes, organize secure for organizations that are taking the next step up for their digital practices. Yeah, so, I also provide documentation for our help line, and you know, I try to create booklets and trainings for other organizations to, you know, just expand the support. >> DANIEL ARROYO: And maybe just another quick point on the help line is actually here at IGF, we have a booth and we have what we call a digital security clinic. It's models we have implemented in different countries. The idea is to bring the help line closer to individuals that actually require support so actually in IGF, we have put faces to many people we have assisted and we want to increase and expand the community that we work with. So we have this digital security clinic where we are trying to provide direct support on site, so we understand, we're not going to be able to resolve all the needs right now, right here, but it's a good way to start discussing about digital security, provide some good tips, and then start a relationship from there. Trust, it's absolutely the most important aspect for us and the people we work with. We want to develop that and these channels that we have here are super important for that. So if any of you need assistance or know people in the countries that might benefit from the support of the help line, please feel free to direct them to our booth. We would be happy to start the conversation and take it from there. >> So, thanks. I wanted to sort of underline in terms of the organizational model because what you're seeing here is like Pete, which is, who's on the policy team who is literally looking at policy issues in real time. So things like countering violet extreme itch, how do we actually have a Human Rights approach to that policy con un drum? Or on internet shut down, what is it and how is it considered? But Daniel is from the health line and Kim are from the help line so they're technologists working in real time directly with Civil Society actors on the ground. The reason we understand an issue like encryption or shut down is because we have the technical understanding and the real time connection with users who are experience b those issues and that technical unless and rail time analysis enables us to draw up and develop policy based on that real time experience. So it's not just academic. It's not just philosophical. It's actually a Human Rights-based approach connected to the ground in real time that then Pete can go and lobby at the united Nations. I wouldn't mind if we could thread questions or comments and then move, because otherwise it's just four or five people talking at you. >> PETER MICEK: And there's a mic, if you want to circulate it. We don't have too many people. If you want to just introduce yourself self, that would be fine, too. >> She's busy tweeting. >> You can send questions on her Twitter. >> Quick introduction? Hi, my name is Bea. I'm from Brazil from a Civil Society company that's called enter voices. We have just started a partnership with access new through Javier to do research on net neutrality through Columbia, Brazil, Mexico and Chile. So with this support from Access Now, we're doing this investigation with the -- in Brazil. Thank you. >> Everyone? Okay. I'm Jon, also from Brazil. I was in the Brazilian government in the Ministry until May and now I'm doing some work to overcome a Latin American that deals with regulation and convergence. >> Hello. My name is Hamma -- I'm a chair of Japan computer access for empowerment. We are NGO which supports other NGOs to utilize new internet and we are involved in many issues in information society such as privacy, IPO, and so on. Thank you. >> Hi. I'm Sam Jones. I'm a researcher at American democracy for Human Rights in Bahrain. We're an organization that works with the Bahrain to advocate for Human Rights in DC and on the international floor. If we're pausing for questions, just to be indulgent, I'd love to hear more about your work in the gulf and things like that. >> I'm the coordinator for the University of San Andreas. We will run internet law and Internet Governance and we are currently researching about a digital economy transparency on takedowns, content internet takedowns, and with Javier, we were working on different tools to strengthen freedom of expression and to promote freedom of expression standards in the country. >> Hello, everybody. My name is Yusjab. I am from Mongolia. I work for global international center. We are working for promoting freedom of expression in freedom in the country. >> Hi, I'm Daphne Keller. I'm with the center for Internet Society at Stanford lawsuit. I direct the liability there, I actually had a question so I'll say it now and maybe we can get to it at the end. I think a lot of us are doing our agenda setting for the next year, and a lot of us are doing it in the context of sudden regime change in the countries we come from and I'm curious what your agendas are, what are the top priorities you guys see over the next year and in particular the ones that connect toate mediary liability. -- to intermediary liability. >> Hi, everybody. My name is Keith. I work at Cyphon in Toronto. That's it. >> So maybe I can respond to the first question about work in the intermediary region. I think for the help line it has been its most active region of all the places we work. The first official help line office we had was the office we had in Tunis so we were able to develop relationships with partners and individuals and advocates underground. As I was saying before, trust is really important to the work we do at the help line so at the beginning establishing the office was one thing but then connecting with the community was another. So, for example, just as an example we start the help line. A lot of them come from that region in particular. Now a couple of months ago, we had the biggest number of cases with almost a hundred cases on the help line in one month. Most of them were actually from the region. Particularly in Bahrain, we have partners and the assistance we provide is quite a few so each case is different, and that's why I think that individual support that we provide is super important. So obviously, we try to collaborate but understanding the work you do with your particular model it's really important for us to provide that assistance. And the regional office idea has also different benefits like the fact that we have an office in Tunisia helps that all our handlers in that office understand the context of the region pretty well. Obviously, each country has its own particularities but it's like a main hub for the region and we're able to work with partners that also collaborate with O on the ground that maybe we can't do. So I'd be more than happy to chat about where we can connect. But yeah, just as general thought, Mina has been our most active work. There's repressive situations that do not contribute to the freedom online it's clear that our work is to support communities and access and groups that unfortunately are being tread on every day. -- threned online every day. >> Can I just add that we hired a policy analyst for the first time in our Tunis office as well, not just for our tech lines. Also glad to say I've worked with your colleague in Geneva quite a bit strategizing so it's really good to have you here. >> BRETT SOLOMON: And I might just jump in on one of the first policy issues we've worked on for a while is in specific the national ID system being proposed in Tunisia and I think this also relates, Daphne, to your question about what we're seeing as relevant and important next year, these bills being proposed from India to Tunisia and what are the Human Rights implications of that and maybe Javier and Pete can talk to that for a minute. >> JAVIER PALLERO: Yeah, you mean about the biometrics? Yeah, actually, some other -- one of the good things that Access Now has in the way we work is that we build the priorities bottom up. So each one of the regions are people like me who are dealing with the regional policy priorities contribute with our take on what the priorities are so my priorities from Latin America are a little bit different from my colleagues in middle region or South Africa or the guys in the U.S. and Brussels. In any case, Peter can help me to try to set up an answer to that. Several really talked about in cases, for instance, one of the things is online and solutions proposed to do that and actually we have been working on setting up policy positions that try to channel these discussions and frame it in a Human Rights perspective. Actually we have brought physical copies of those positions and you can find them online on our site but that's one of the things we think are going to be big issues globally. Another one of those is government hacking where we have a paper about that. And in the case of Latin America, for instance, one of the things that I've been focusing the most is around OTPs. What is the concept of OTPs and how this idea of OTTs is going to be used to try to regulate content over the internet. And this is where telecommunications overlaps with cultural University, even, telecommunications, all of that stuff that is somewhat a little bit related thanks to the convergence of technologies. Another thing that is also of interest in the regions of Latin America is the data protection reforms that are being discussed in different countries. We have discussions in Brazil that is going to enstate the law they even have but also the reforms are going on in Argentina, discussions in other places like Chile as well and also an effort to try to come up with a new data protection law in Bolivia and also in paraguay. As you can see, there's a lot of issues going around the whole team and I think this bottom up approach is something useful and interesting and actually having the opportunity to discuss this with people who are working and different context and who have different formation because we also work in interoperability of legal standards because we are all educated in different legal standards and even legal practices and Democratic arbitrations and political contexts. So, we also have to work in that concept of interoperability of our own ideas and the way which we present them. And we use, of course, human rights as the common denominator in order to do that. And speaking of that, there's our colleague from South Africa. I think that kind of answers the questions a bit. >> PETER MICEK: Yeah, so I'm in the New York office but definitely not immune from the DC gravity. I can say that we had hoped to look toward a further surveillance reform in the U.S. next year and specifically looking at section 702 amendment act and it's authorization on non-U.S. perps. Clearly the way the -- persons. Clearly the way the election has gone is not a good boost for that reform effort so we are working very diligently with our colleagues there to see what might still be possible if there are still threads that we can pull. In the meantime, as I said, the election has put other issues on the table like the regulatory regime. The U.S. does not have a data protection law. It's made fits and starts and 14s toward broadband privacy in the last year and protecting the privacy toward IP users but really the whole regulatory regime is, in some question, in some peril. So we may need to recharge our efforts just to preserve the net neutrality rulings, open internet rulings that we've won in the last few years. And looking a little bit more internationally, I think, as I mentioned, internet shut downs is a very pressing problem. There with the edge providers and content and social media apps as sort of the recipients of the pain and their role of intermediaries talk as our lock down with licensing agreement but we've made a lot of progress in the last few years in getting them to, A recognize that they do impact human rights. Whether or not they're just following government orders, and B, that so they need to take steps to be more transparent, first of all, and to work publicly and privately to assert the rights of their users and the interest of their business in a lot of cases. So shut downs is another one we're working on. Our advocacy team is not technically here because they're advocating. We're delivering a campaign with people 46,000 people around the world asking leaders to keep the internet on and resist the urge to shut down and block the anybody so we're delivering that to the Freedom Online Coalition and I think we can open it up a little more to regional stuff. >> Yes. Thank you for coming. Talking about advocating, just from that support our team there. We have been trying to deliver the petition to the FOC. So for me, I work from Sub-Saharan Africa. Internet shut downs is really personal to me because it started happening around a few years back affecting my friends in Burundi, Ethiopia, people who he know, it affects their work and you take it personally because it affects their rights and it might affect you. Kenya, we're going to have elections next year and there's been talk about whether that should be shut down or not but that's still a debate. So. About my region specifically, working on issues, some of the issues we discuss here at an international level are too technical at the national level, issues of access and connectivity. I'm sure they've talked about issues of Human Rights are really important, the principles we are currently working on with partners because that's the level we are. I traveled almost a month and week ago to Gambia where even when you talk about those internet shut downs during elections, when we are there for an African meet you can learn the access, Whats App, GMail, but connecting through a VPN, it wasn't possible. It would say, the internet has been restored. I look at the percentage online, Ethiopia had an internet shut down. Last year, the government allowed the internet to be back on fully less than 5 percent of Ethiopians are on regular anybody. So, yes we still talk about the work on Human Rights. We still need to go back to the business. But someone says, yes, the work you talk about is important but then not all of us are connected so that's something we need to still keep talking about so that this benefit of the internet can be reached by the next 1 billion years because still, that's connectivity level and that's my biggest thing I wake up with every morning. What is the best way for us to connect, the cheapest and still respecting human rights. Thank you. >> Just jump in on the connectivity issue because the original conception of the organization was not actually about access even though the organization's name is access, or Access Now. And that over the last year, it's become clear, an again -- and I'm sorry, not to be able to sort of prioritize she's issues because there are just so many issues and we try to be not like, here's our strategic plan for the year and if it doesn't fit in our strategic plan, we won't do if. It's like, how to we as a nimble, flexible organization respond to issues as they occur. So, on the connectivity issue over the last year, I think as many of you know, there's been a real investment by many different players in trying to connect those not yet connected from Facebook, all of their initiatives under internet.org and free basics to global connect. The way in which to role out the internet in a manner, the concern that we have, and kind of, I mean things as mentioned with respect to the new president in the U.S., so I'm like, how do we ensure that the internet that comes is the open interopperrable rights respecting internet as opposed to the surveilled, monitored, militarized network. I think those building world bank and so, how do you roll the internet out in a rights respecting way to ensure that people aren't just connected but connected in a way that enables them to have privacy, to feel confident that they can communicate and express without recripple nation, and so on. -- recrimination and so on. >> Yeah so probably some of you were in the session we had this morning linking Human Rights and development. We're still getting input. Showing kind of the indispensable interdependent nature and relationships between efforts to grow the digital economy to maintain openness and security to where all of these are online in 2020, which is the sustainable goal. Which is incredibly ambitious so we have urge work to do. Not only is it urgent but we want to do it in a way that prevents a lot of the harm we see. How do you build a new infrastructure that's redundant that's not susceptible to shut downs and blocking. How do you make sure the privacy is respected by designs? Those are some of the questions we're asking and we're looking for new fields and new partners and new stakeholders like the finance Ministries to help us finance those. >> I would like to do a small parenthesis from the question by Daphne, most of our work is reactive and that's a challenge and that shows a lot. Actually, that's one of the most interesting challenges we have because doing policy in Latin America is hard in the sense that you don't really know where the next threat is coming from, sometimes. And we have here a very valuable partner from Brazil. They can tell that you you can have like 12 or 13 dangerous bills coming up from one month to the other and you just didn't see -- yes. Yes. And you don't know where those things come from. In some cases, we have laws that get discussed and passed in record times and sometimes governments use other public distracting episodes, for instance, football matches in order to pass a bill without public attention because everyone is looking at the match. There is stuff that's sur reel going on and surveillance is sur real and there are a lot of threats that are surreal and sometimes we have to react, the other thing is about what Brett mentioned of the mandate. For reasons we have been doing access as part of our work but it's becoming part of our work because of Human Rights threats that are tied to access. One of the things like that is one of the last companies we were working on was in voting in Argentina or something. We don't actually have an issue related to e-voting machines, but now there is an issue in the U.S. now, okay. But this is an issue in Argentina now because the proposed regulation in Argentina that we collaborated in a campaign to bring it down was that digital security researchers who were willing to inspection the machines were going to be imprisoned and there were penalties that were stated there in the bills for everyone who tried to know what the machine was doing. That's one way for protecting digital security researchers and the other thing is about what is the really close relationships between speech and access to information under freedom of expression, expressing information, of accessing it in order to be able to participate in public space and the access to code and the right to know what a machine is doing, especially if that machine is mediating between you and a political right. So this Frontier is expanding all the time and we are presented with the challenge of reacting unexpectedly and also expanding our mandates, not really clear in the beginning. >> Anyone else? >> Yeah. Please. (inaudible) >> So there's a question about what we can do to provide digital security in Mexico, to prevent against attacks including blocking of websites. >> All right, sure. So we have actually worked with journalists and media workers in Mexico. Something to consider is, as you maybe are aware, Mexico can one of the most surveilled countries. So if you remember that the hacking team leak and the information that came out to the public, Mexico was one of the number one -- one of the top buyers of that technology and we still see Mexican activists, media workers being targeted online. So, what you can do to protect yourself depends a lot on your context. So unfortunately, I mean, we could provide some general guidelines but the best thing we could do is actually work together through the help line to provide assistance. The problem is giving general recommendations is security, unfortunately, is not the same for everyone. It depends on what type of work you do, how do you communicate with your colleagues? What is the work you do. Do you go about valuable information? How do you share that information with your colleagues? How do you protect your sources? So there's a lot of different aspects involved. That's why to do these one on one communications to be able to guide you into what in your context, in your environment, in your day-to- day, what is applicable. Otherwise we might get into recommendations that maybe are increasing the risk for you. So it's super important to keep in mind that security is something unique to your position. It's unique to your threat model. To your threat analysis. So, yeah. Exactly. Help@accessnow.org and we would be happy to start that conversation and give some guidance, information about it. >> So, I think one of the things to note is we've worked on digital security for a long time now for close to seven years, and obviously the threats change and have changed and so has the response as well. I keep turning to Kim because she's actually responsible for the documentation of the advice that we provide and one of the -- the reason why this is so important is because as a client comes to us like somebody who is working in the media in Mexico, we develop some standard responses or responses that are tailored to that individual which can then be added to and grown and then deployed to somebody else so maybe you could talk to that for a sec because I think it's relevant. >> So one of the most important things we do is always learn. The information we get from clients about what is going on informs our next response to clients later. One of the back lets that I produced for this comps is a first look at digital security. You can pick it up at our booth, but that is like made from many of the different profiles that we've seen over the years and this booklet shows different types of people, an activist, a journalist, an NGO. It just shows a general profile. It can't be more specific because as Daniel said, you have to rook look at the individual to understand what threats you're facing but it can give you the language to start talking about the threats you're facing so you can access questions that make it a little more sense to both of us so we know we're on the same page. >> Yeah. Another question or -- >> I'd just add on the hacking team example, I can add how we looked at that from the policy side. Expert controls are -- export controls are really complicated tools but in this case hacking team based in Italy lost its general license to export its products, its software around the world in part due to its use for sort of unlawful surveillance and we gave an award to the Italian official, the minister who was responsible for revoking its license so it was a nice victory of sorts. >> I might add a couple other things on our agenda. One is rights con which has been mentioned by Pete, I think. So rightsion is an event that brings together, like the IGF, but kind of better. No, I'm kidding. It's a different -- I wonder if my connection just got cut then. It's a Civil Society owned elaborate as opposed to a -- event as opposed to a government owned event so organizations who are inviting companies into our space. It's the sixth year of our conference coming up. It's going to be in Brussels, the 29th to 31st of March. Has anyone here been to RightsCon already over the past couple of years? A couple. And has anyone submitted a session proposal for Brussels coming up? Excellent. That's really good. So we, just to give you some figures which might scare you a little bit because they certainly scared me because the rights couldn't, so on Friday night, we had a hundred submissions and the deadline was the night before last on Monday night so on Tuesday morning we had 400 submissions for sessions which was just real exciting. Obviously a need for RightsCon to happen. I think it's an opportunity for individuals and organizations an companies and champions within governments to actually talk about these issues in a way that is strategically important in the way that it can actually advance that issue so a thousand people, generally, from 85 countries, specifically designed for all the different stakeholders to work together how can we move forward from this to hacking to digital liability so anyone not aware of this information here, we definitely encourage you to come and the other thing I wanted to mention -- hi -- is Access Now grants which is being touched on maybe Pete? >> PETER MICEK: I think they have some recipients here. >> Who here is a recipient of Access Now grant? >> There's at least two organizations -- three, actually. Access Now grants. So maybe we can check too, guys, but just to give you the framework, the Swedish government granted Access Now basically a million dollars a year, which was more when the exchange rate was to our advantage, but to regrant so we've set up a whole program within the organization and we're a Civil Society organization ourselves so we're looking for money and also giving money away which is kind of a new evolution in the organization, which is exciting. I think the Swedish government provided us with that money because we're a lot closer to the ground and we know who we think is doing good work and what the landscape is. We have an independent advisory board, so it's not up to us to decide, which is important bough otherwise it creates a kind of complicate of interest. So the people here, these 38 members of the team around the world who are kind of like outposts who are able to kind of advise and support and encourage applications or at least tend to be able to identify who might be eligible so if there are individuals here, organizations who are interested in talking, can talk to me afterwards. >> And a small addition to the idea of the access grants is that actually they cover a need for organizations which don't have the legal or organizational structure that may allow them to apply for themselves to international funding so sometimes they don't have this legal board that you need and all the accounting needs and stuff like that. So, the access grants has a really -- this is our friends from Lush Cosmetics partnering with us in the Keep it On campaign with their amazing product which is a bath bomb helping us to raise money, here our friend, global advocacy manager, he's going to explain about that. But just to close on the Access Now grant stuff, I just want to say is the idea is for it to be flexible so it can be available for people who don't necessarily have a structure behind them that's going to allow them to apply the funds for them sell. >> Thank you, Javier, and apologies for disrupting this event. As Javier mentioned, we -- did we already discuss the Keep it On Coalition? Okay. The Keep it On Coalition has over 100 organizations from nearly 50 countries and we're all dedicated to fighting internet shut downs which happens when governments disrupt the internet. And what Javier has in his hands is a petition signed by almost 46,000 people calling on world governments to publicly commit to keep the internet on, which is important. We don't want them just to internally, we want them to actually say it and make a statement so we can all hold them accountable to keep the internet flowing. We've seen internet shut downs harm human rights. They harm economies and as Javier mentioned, we had the great fortunate to partner with Lush who are here in the audience today to raise awareness about this issue and the proceeds from the sale of a special bath product which is called error 404 bath bomb. We all know Error 404 and none of us likes it. We'll go to a digital funds. It will be slightly different from our grants program and we'll be sharing details about that, opportunities for rights groups and Civil Society groups to apply very soon. Here, we can just hold one up for the camera. Lush on black Friday, November 25th, worldwide Lush blacked out their websites in order to raise awareness about the issue and when people went to the website to buy something, they saw this screen. They were urged to take action and purchase a bath bomb if they wanted to. So we've been really pleased and grateful for the collaboration. This worked. Fighting shut downs is a team effort. It's a campaign that required in depth policies, expertise, from Peter Micek who you've already heard from and technical teams on our help line. So it's a multistakeholder probable. It's very complex, but the solution is simple. Keep it on. All you have to do is keep it on. So thanks. Happy to answer any question and this is the Error 404 bath bomb which you can still get, unfortunately not in Mexico. But, can you still get it today? >> Yes. >> Oh, okay. You can still get it today. Great investment in human rights. So. >> And you'll smell better. (laughter) >> JAVIER PALLERO: Actually, our booth in the village is the best smelling booth of all because we have all of this there. >> So I think unless there's anything else, we could probably let you go to lunch but we'd love to see you come by our booth, see our digital security clearance, check us out online where you can sign up for our really excellent newsletter, weekly newsletter. The express. Just come to the website. It should be one of these easy ways to give us your e-mail address then keep us up-to-date on the hashtag keep it on Coalition as well as the range of work we do. >> JAVIER PALLERO: And we have hard copies as well on policy positions on different issues and also of our new info graphics we have done on the back about human rights standards for freedom of expression. It's in Spanish so far, but it's an amazing work we've been doing and I invite you to just share and read all of that materials. Thanks. >> Yeah, and lastly, we also have help line contact information so if anyone is interested in knowing more about how to reach out to the help line, we have fliers in different languages so just stop by after we wrap up or just walk it our booth and we'll be happy to provide more information. >> Thanks. >> Thanks (applause) (Session was concluded at 1:22 p.m. CST) ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** Services Provided By: Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 www.captionfirst.com ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM 2016 ENABLING INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH JALISCO, MEXICO 7 DECEMBER 2016 WORKSHOP 204 COMPETITION IN THE DIGITAL AGE: BETWEEN STATUS-QUO AND UNKNOWN 3:00 P.M. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? DOES IT WORK? >> Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. >> All right. Good afternoon. Welcome to this workshop on competition in the digital age. Let me introduce myself. I'm Vincenzo Spiezia from the OACD and I'm one of the organizers with Deepak Mishra at World Bank when unfortunately could not be here today. Before I introduce the panelists, let me just say a few words about the background of this workshop. The background is basically, the large, fast increase of a number of new business by research technologies and that provides traditional services in new ways. In particular, you might be familiar with digital platforms like Uber, like Safaricome like Alibaba. You have two competing, some of offline, traditional enterprises and more of the online enterprise that use the internet and technologies as a way to shape their business. and the regulation is struggling to adapt to this new situation. To phrase this in a simple way, I can say that there is a majority view which is by no way a consensus that there is a potential here in this platform and new business in terms of innovation and growth. There is also strong disagreement about two issues. The first one is whether and to what extent you need to change or give up on existing regulations and the second issue is whether you need new regulations to face new risks in terms of concentration and lower competition that some of these platforms may eventually drive the market to. And to make things more difficult, is not just a specific set of regulations that we are talking about but different sets of them. You can think of regulation related to competitions or those sort of regulations related to consumer protections, to employment so for instance, actors like Uber that clear these regulations. So, from our perspective at OACD, the debate seems to be a bit trapped into two opposite positions. One is that of those claiming that regulation is hampering notification so we should drastically -- innovation so we should drastically reduce it. On the other side, you have those that claim that the presence of platforms of new entrants may lead to situation of winner takes all. Again, we don't need to be stuck in dikotomiy and one -- dichotomy, on the one hand, there are people saying that statute may hamper innovation by preventing the entry of new businesses. And that's precisely one side of the coin. Now, the issues, I think whether we are, to what extent the benefits from innovation. So growth, we lost sight of the loss in terms of consumer protection in employment that are not in place. I think the answer is not clear, and it's also likely to be different among economic activities. Also believe that the should not be different from the one we use in the past. And probably will have a different view. In the past, to strike a balance between different legitimate and potentially conflicting objectives of interest. Those of new interests and incumbents, those of consumers and producers and those of employers and employees being aware that some individuals are also different perspectives, for example, the same person as a consumer and worker. On the other pole of this dichotomy, there's also the view that competition as it's shaped right now cannot prevent the emergence of digital technology. These digital actors try to be in a way that escapes the traditional regulations. They rely much more on network economies. On business work, for instance, the services might be for free and the values are generating data and other activities which are not at the heart -- they are not regulated by the competition law. There is also final thing that cut across these questions which is whether the better information we can get to the internet, transaction with better internet can then to address some of the incomplete information, some information asymmetries that the situation has been designed for. I think ratings of the users and suppliers, also more broadly of the big data on better observation on the transaction that take place of the internet, on the price of the service, provider quality and so on. The thing is, there is a lot of room for developing new tools and those for thinking in a different way that exist in the regulation. These are all very difficult questions and I don't have an answer so I'm very pleased that we have around this table some expert that might help us to address these issues. Let me start with Megan Richards which is the director for communication and technology, with the European commissions. I will just introduce all of you and then I will -- >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Oh, okay. >> We have Sonia Jorge is Executive Director of the Aliance for Affordable Internet. Eli Noam is the professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School. Joseph Alhadeff is chief policy officer for Oracle. I know many of you have the precise title. We organize this around four questions, two for each speaker and then we have opportunity, two rounds of questions. In between each round, we'll have the opportunity for you to intervene and make comments and ask questions. I will invite the speaker, if possible, to speak to -- give their remarks no more than five minutes in response to each question and then at the end try to wrap up the outcomes of the conversation to the extent I'll manage. So, first question, just to warm up is, I'm asking to Joseph, first, and then to Eli, what is your take about the current regulation, the status of the regulation. The regulation that defeats the purpose -- do you think the regulation defeats the purpose and what is your view on how things evolve? Joseph, maybe you want to start. >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: The short answer is, yes, and it depends. The question is really, it depends upon the regular laying. You pointed out there are a number of regulations. I would add data protection as well as one of the regulations that would be around that, and I think one of the things you have to think about with a regulation is, what is its implementation? What is its flexibility in its implementation because you don't want just to look at checklists when you look at regulation. You want regulations that can keep with the times and also be somewhat flexible. You also have to think what its context is and is it appropriate for implementation in the circumstances it's being used for. What we find is over time, someone may be using a regulation that is no longer fit for purpose and you have to think about how you implement it. The standard you're implementing may still be the correct standard but how implement it may be something you think about which changes with the new technology and then lastly the level at which the regulation is written. Regulations written with principle are often more applicable over time than regulations more detailed and descriptive so again the nature of what you're trying to accomplish needs to guide the regulation to make it appropriate for its use. I think you were getting at this in your opening comments but there's a knee jerk reaction that every time there's a new technology or business model, someone wants to create a new regulation. Whereas most regulations that exist actually can be applied to the new technology or business model, you just have to think about how to do it. So I think we need to get away from thinking that everything needs something new but actually thinking how the things that already exist apply and how we can make them applicable. One of the things that's missing, however, when we look at the need for regulation is that I don't think we necessarily factor what the role or benefit and the positive impact of the information may deliver. If you don't do that then you have a tendency to eliminate all risk or potential risk and then you may limit the innovative potential of the technology being used so I think we have to figure out ways in which we can understand that we're protecting the fundamental nature of user rights in the implementation of these technology while still gaining the societial benefit their application. There I'm thinking of health research and things of that nature where the receipt sense risk -- reticence risk prevents people from using technology that could make a societal difference. We have to look at the regulation that fits the situation and that's difficult because policy makers by definition are trying to find a regulation that's broad and across the board. The question of how to implement them at the contextual level becomes very difficult. And I think we're going to have to grapple with those issues whether it's in a competitive marketplace, how you apply the standards of privacy, whether it's how you consider all the fundamental rights, not just one of them. Those are all issues we have to come to terms with doing a better job of what we're doing than we are today. >> ELI NOAM: Thank you very much. First, I want to thank you for inviting me and the audience, I thank you for finding the place and enduring the heat. You obviously in some natural selectivity are some of the smartest and most resilient people around. This is my fourth IGF, and my role seems to be to cast some skepticism. So about 80 years ago, I was talking about why the internet was bad for democracy. See what happened. And two years ago, I was skeptical about jobs. So let me then have my personally -- ten minutes, you said, with five observations. The first one is, libertarianism is out, and interventionism is in. And the Trump election would show that so here we are four weeks after an election in the United States. I believe the internet caused, indirectly, Donald Trump to be elected. I would be happy to elaborate that. We hear business as usual attitude which is a little bit of whining that the internet is too regulated and regulated by the wrong people, by people who don't get it. If they only knew what we knew, they would be much smarter and leave us alone, except our competitors and ISBs which should not be left alone and the Chinese, et cetera. But the realities is that the forces unleashed by the digital transformation have led to a backlash in which the forces of Republicanism both on the republic and Democratic side essentially lost so neoliberalism got defended, but not from the left, from the right. So what does this mean? Will we then get to rely on the market? Probably not. Because the second observation is that market forces here have not -- kind of are working in a weird way but in a short-term way, in an entryway, but entry level, entry barriers way with they're lowered but then there are also fundamental economics of economy of scale and network effects that are, have kind of assert themselves with a greater capital intensity of up front investment, higher fixed cost, low marginal cost, low distance sensitivity, and they all lead predictively to oligarchialistic type markets. In that sense, internet based activities can be called a natural oligarchy and sometimes worse than that, so therefore, competitive forces will work only so well, but not really in many instances because of the large scale operations that will exist. Which brings us, then, to regulatory interventions. Sorry to observe that. But. So here people say, regulation, I have great sense with Uber and Air BNB and being harassed and sometimes pushed around by local regulators all over the world. But, there are probably three major factors for underlying regulation. The first one is that the self-interest -- the protectionism of incumbents. And the second one is the self-interest of regulators who like to regulate. And the third one is, though, the public interest. And people who kind of talk about against regulation often focus on the first two and disregard the third one but the third one really is the most important one because in a way, it enables the other two. So, therefore, people, for example, think of taking video that video regulation exists because there's a scarsity of spectrum. Therefore, we have to license. Therefore, the only few competitors there, therefore we have to regulate them. Now comes to the internet. Spectrum becomes irrelevant therefore we don't have to regulate these video activities, right? Well, wrong because in many ways the digital activities are regulated for a variety of societal reasons. The spectrum licensing is only the nexus of regulation but the real reason for it are that different societies have different values, for better or for worse. So the Saudi Arabians have their values and the Swedes have others and the Americans have others and the Thais don't like their royal family to be den egg rated, and the German -- denigrateed and its Germans don't like swastikas, et cetera, et cetera. So that's what's going to happen. Regulation will simply be modified and you can see Brussels approach of extending the broadcast in these timid steps, we just do this. Next year, we just do that. The ratcheting up in the directives and now we're kind of talking about national quotas for OTC services and local domestic production requirements and interventions and how these programs are going to be listed on the internet. So, there is a clearly slippery slope that is emerging here but basically where it's going to, the slippery slope, is towards applying the rules and regulations of existing broadcasting to the internet environment the not totally but b kind of that's the direction. Okay. So running out of time here. So, my fourth observation is, that governments will delegate regulation to Cloud providers and to other intermediaries and the reason is that it is too difficult and too complicated for governments themselves to run after all these providers of services and goods and what have you. It is much easier, more efficient to go after the intermediaries who are few in numbers. You can find them. They don't disappear. You can go after them. So kind of the Googles, the YouTube, the Amazons, the Facebooks, et cetera. Who, by the way, happen to be conveniently American. That certainly doesn't hurt in establishing national or regional regulations. So I would expect that this regulation of new activities that videos, taxicabs, financials, whatever will shift from a regulation to the regulation of the intermediaries and also include a healthy dose of self-regulation, like regulating self-regulation of some sort and that will be the future model. Observation number five is everybody talks about we need consistent and predictable regulations. Forget it. You won't get them. And why should you? Nothing in this environment is predictable and consistent and why should regulation be? Regulation is probably going to be the last thing that is consistent and predictable because it is so slow. Everything else moved around with Moore's law except regulations. Always going to be behind curve, inevitably. Anything at the internet is slowing it down because everybody can organize and poz, it becomes more difficult to get anything done so one has to think of this regulatory process as a discovery process, not as a bunch of rules that means that less centralized regulation is better than centralized regulation because it's easier. And inconsistency is actually not bad because it helps in finding the better solution, and the more dynamic solution. So, this circles back to the question of over or under regulation. Should we call it Uber regulation or underregulation. To my mind, the system is overloaded but my expectation is that there will be much more of it and that it will edge to economic and societal of a discovery process, which we should help implement. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: Thank you, Eli. The parts provocative and skeptical, this IGF as well. Maybe I can move to the second question, which is related to the issues of predictability of regulation. It's not working? We can move to another question, which is related to the issues of predictability of the environment regulation. I mentioned before the thought that I've been offline and online competitors change whether the rules are applied, to what extent they're implemented, and some. So the question for Megan, first, and then for Sonia, is whether policy can reduce, to what extent and how can policy reduce regulatory uncertainties in sectors where you have the presence of this type of online and offline businesses. >> It needs regulation. >> There you go. >> You see. Regulation, instant regulation. It works. >> private sector intervention? >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Luckily, that's one of the points I was going to raise. It's a very difficult question, of course, and there's no easy answer. That's absolutely clear. We want to have a dynamic in digital society and economy, at the same time protect consumers, make sure there's a level playing field, all the wonderful things that regulators always say and consumers say and public policy officials say as well. But trying to address that is extraordinarily difficult. What we have done in Europe, and you said that regulations are by definition always out of kilter with reality. One thing we always try to do in Brussels and many others do too is try to make sure that regulation is technology onlyicly neutral. This is not easy. It doesn't mean they're always up-to-date but I just take one example of the e-commerce directive which has been in existence for at least 15 years and maybe a bit more. It has served its time relatively well. It may not be perfect, but it has managed to provide a standardized regulatory base, which has worked so far. Now, there are many other kinds of regulations that needed updating. The copy right directory in Europe, for example, which was more than 20 years old. Hadn't been updated for an online environment because when it was established the online publishing tenant really exist so it's obvious that certain updates and certain priorities have to change. In Europe, and this is perhaps an unfortunate case, legislation is very complex because it is developed by the commission after public consultation, after discussions with expert groups, after review of all the economic and financial and social information available after a full impact assessment, and then, of course, it goes to the council administrators and to the European parliament so it's not something that's easy and things often change as legislation comes through. So trying to make sure that these policies meet all the interest of keeping innovation high, protecting consumers, ensuring that things are technology onlyicly neutral -- technologically neutral. Right now, under the digital market initiative which was already started to a certain degree under the digital agenda for Europe initiative, a whole series of updates of existing legislation or revisions of existing legislation are being introduced to try to bring up-to-date some of the regulatory base that existed to make it better for the online world. That communicate there needs to be new legislation specific for online activities, necessarily. But the online and offline actions, implications are treated in similar ways and I think that's one of the most important aspects. Now just to use the example of Uber that you took. Taxi drivers in some states are among the most regulated sectors. They have extraordinary regulations they have to follow. Licensing fees. Requirements when they have to drive. Safety requirements, et cetera. So a huge series of regulations that they have to meet. So the question, then, is if another group comes in which doesn't face those regulations, doesn't face the labor laws, doesn't have to meet those licensing regulations, et cetera. Is this a level playing field? I'm not making a comment about whether it is or whether it's not. I'm just saying that these kind of issues are so terribly complex. It takes, not just this room, but a will the of work to try to find a really just and good base to make sure that we can move forward. >> SONYA: Can you hear me? >> ELI NOAM: I would agree that it's difficult, but why does this have to be resolved on a Brussels level? I mean, it's taxicabs, for God's sake. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Wait, wait, wait. Brussels doesn't regulate taxicabs, first. And this is not something that's -- well, let's wait and see. And under the European union treaty there are certain things that are regulated by European competition is a competence of the European Union, external action, all sorts of things. A whole series, others that are divided between member states and the European Union so when regulation is developed, you don't want to hear all the horrible stories about how European regulation works but another issue I wanted to raise later is the issue of jurisdiction which in old days, preinternet days, let's say, was relatively simple for regulators to deal with. You looked after after national territories. You applied your law within national territories. In Europe, you were more baud in a sense that we could apply over European territory but it's still limited. The internet has changed that completely so the internet means that jurisdictional limitations have changed as well. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: I think you have to finds your way through, otherwise -- >> SONIA JORGE: I will. So, what I would say is, I'm not going to argue some of the things that Megan and Eli were saying, but there are two things I think are important. First of all, I think it's important to be forward looking with the regulatory frameworks and despite the fact that regulation tends to be a bit behind technology and two things are important. One is it is important to understand the concept of dynamic regulation that you were just mentioning, Eli. I think that is really critical. Something that is very difficult but something that we at A4AI have tried to do, to do what you were talking about, to do what you do, Megan, in the European context change that and move to Africa, to Asia where we work and to a certain extent in Latin American. It's more complex the not more complex because you don't have legislation that will support the system but because there actually isn't any legislation or any framework that actually supports that kind of move of regulation. So we still kind of to a certain extent creating an environment where first of all, there is an understanding of regulation as I always like to say, not of a control system but a system that promotes growth and incentivizes growth and that creates safe guards. And why is that important? Because of another point that you made, Eli, which is that regulation needs to be in the public interest and if we frame regulatory and policy decisions around the public interest outcome it really helps to define how we can go about regulatory decisions. I think that's always important to keep in mind and to kind of go down how it works in practice, I'm going to move beyond some of these high level discussions that are really interesting and giver you an example of something that is happening right now. In Nigeria, we are actually -- I was trying to finish a document in Nigeria, the regulatory agency, the Nigerian communications commission is looking at the possibility of perhaps introducing a new price floor for all data services in the country. The reason why price floors did not exist, as we know, is because we want healthy competition. We want competition to exist in the market. We want prices to be reduced. That's why we work on affordable internet, affordable and equal access. Well, if competition doesn't work very well in some cases, and regulators deem that there is anticompetitive behavior, again, you have a competition commission in Europe. There's no such thing in Nigeria. There is predatory pricing taking place, how do you address that? And is the threat of potential predatory pricing an issue that actually could create problems from a user perspective in the public interest? Are users now going to have to pay for and increased prices because of possible actions from a regulatory perspective, or should the market be completely left alone and decide on its own what the prices should be. It is a complex question. You want from a regulatory perspective to instill a certain level of certainty. You want to make sure that the market and the players in the market can, indeed, understand how they can work. Are there rules that they need to follow? But, there need to be safe guards that when those rules are not working, then you need to intervene. But if intervention is the case, which is where we are right now in this particular case in Nigeria where the commission is conducting an in depth cost study to try to understand what is really the cost of providing data services in the country. What are the kinds of things that we need to consider to have real good outcomes from such studies? And there enters another level of complexity because it's not just having these concepts introduced from a wide level, are we looking from a forward looking perspective. Are we looking at long term incremental cost? Are we looking at appropriate returns on investment inappropriate pay back periods? All these other concepts that come into the decision-making process and that will then help define what the final outcome will be. Should a final outcome from any case be one that consumers are not very happy? How can regulators address that and how can regulators share the message that their job is -- it's about public interest. It's about prices, but it's also about creating a level playing field and a level of certainty that healthy competition can continue to be promoted in the market. So again, it's not easy and I think these are the kind of question that's for me would be great to hear from some of you because we work as the Aliance for Affordable Internet in developing countries where some of these questions are day-to-day concerns and we need to address them. But ultimately, I would say, certainty remains a key important issue in every single market, regardless. The public interest has to be the key common denominator of how we make these decisions but yes, also looking at what is the outcome we want to have from a particular decision. Is the outcome going to be against users? Is it going to be prousers? Is it going to be against, perceived more against the private sector where companies are not? We need to consider all of that. So just to finalize that thought, one of the things that we do as part of our work is that as we look at all of these questions, we have very open public consultations and discussions with all the players because ultimately we want everyone to understand that there's always a level of compromise. No regulatory decision, no policy decision is ever going to make everybody equally happy. So, advertise you were saying, Eli, regulation is here to stay. Yes, but we can make it better. We can make it more predictable and we can make it more open and a result of more participation of all of the stakeholders so that's where we aim at and I'm hoping that during this process, and we've been successful in doing that in many jurisdictions in Africa, for example. I hope that we can learn about thinking of regulation as a tool that can support continuing market growth but at the same time, again, coming up with decisions that are a good balance for all of the stakeholders and not just one versus another, but every single stakeholder. And when I say every single of them, not talking just about the overall perception of private sector or newer companies in the market but all service providers, all users, men and women in the market, men and women in communities r and how they want to use those services for their own benefit so it's very important, again, to go back to the public interest and how that interest determines the way regulations get defined. Do I have -- (Audio cut out) inform some of the colleagues at world bank. In fact, Deepak was the one who was meant to be sitting on this panel. I'm glad we have a better gender balance on the panel since he got sick. A good friend. We were having some discussions on Deepak who was the co-author of the most recent World Bank report on residual dividends, many of you might know. He was suggesting some solutions especially with companies like Uber that you mentioned and others like AirBNB and so forth that have entered the state and companies that are very complicated to realize, what exactly are they? In the Uber case, are they transportation companies? Online companies? Digital service companies? What exactly are they? And one of the things that our colleagues at world bank have tried to start thinking about and really push for is the idea, first of all, let's think about solutions that classify companies based on the services they provide. And the reason why that is the case is because from a regulatory perspective you create these hugely complex systems because should Uber or AirBNB or even Google or Facebook, any kind of company that uses the internet to provide services be regulated by communications regulators? Doesn't make any sense to a certain level. Maybe at some L. maybe not at others. So should we separate the different levels at which these kind of corporates operate? That's one possibility. I think we need to do a lot more thinking and understand what are the implications of having Uber be regulated as a transport company and not be at all affected by any kind of regulation in the communications field, which is in my perspective, in our perspective, in our organization actually quite important because it's not just about the service they provide in the digital space. And I'll finish with that thought for further discussion. What the internet introduced into the service provision equation is things like privacy, data protection, and the kinds of questions that neither of the regulatory environments are actually quite prepared to address. You work on data protection, so maybe you have your view on that, but if there are issues around privacy and data protection from a service provision example where users need to be protected, in fact, by communications regulators, then we need to consider that. That means that regulation not only is going to be here to stay, is going to increase, is going to get more complex but is also going to get more compartmentalized. And that compartmentization, I have to say, and I would love to hear the panelists perspectives, I actually think will be quite scary. Is going to make our jobs in the space much more complex but very difficult and I hope we can start coming up with some of the answers because right now, I don't think we have a lot of answers on how some of these things can be addressed. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: Thank you, Sonia. Maybe the panelists want to react to the different events. Before that, I would like to hear whether there is any comments or questions from the audience. Please. >> Thank you. I'm not speaking on behalf of my employer now so I can be provocative. Thee of you have spoken of the importance of regulation providing a level playing field, and my challenge to you is going to be, what is the virtue in a level playing field? Surely the whole idea of free market competition is to provide a better services, to tilt the services to market share. You've been talking about Uber, as an example. I'll tell you how that looks in my home city of London, which is actually one that's quite open to disruptive things, normally. Nonetheless, the regulator there before they were restrained by the courts had a few ideas for how Uber could be regulated to provide a level playing field. Firstly, they wanted to make sure that Uber couldn't pick you up sooner than five minutes so if it's a minute away, I've got to stand there for another four minutes before I can get into the Uber cab. That was their idea. Great idea. Another idea is that it shouldn't be able to display on the map where the car is coming because clearly it would be unfair that I was allowed to see, oh, it is coming. It will be here soon. That would be unfair. So let's not have that. And the last thing they suggested was to ban ride sharing so even though that would make it cheaper for me to get a ride, even though it would reduce the carbon emissions from the ride and improve the drastically horrible levels of congestion in London, nonetheless, that wouldn't be fair. That wouldn't be a level playing field. And this is London, which is actually quite open. When I go to Brussels, Uber is being completely extinguished, and I get some of the most hostile cab drivers in the world. My experience -- you can share yours later. I frequently come out of your offices, and I'm refused -- illegally, I might say, refused a ride from a licensed taxi driver to get back to London because they want to have the more expensive trip to the airport. And that is the kind of behavior you git when you do not allow the disruptive competition to come in and demand better service for the consumer. I would say that the public interest lies in an improved service for the consumer. Not for the producer. I'd be interested in -- I'm not interested in a level playing field for the producer. I'm interested in the consumer so what is the value of a level playing field? >> ELI NOAM: I would say the examples you gave are quite persuasive and you wonder where this comes from, but level playing field has to have a different answer. For example, you want the driver to be reasonably competent in terms of safety. You want the driver to have insurance in case something goes wrong. You want to have an identification of the driver in the cases you have to go after them. Those, presumably, are part of the requirements on regular taxicabs. And there's nothing wrong with extending them to Uber, too. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: May I just add something as well on the level playing field? The level playing field doesn't mean necessarily that you take existing legislation which is already very heavy and you raise the bar for the new entrants. It may be much better to lower the regulatory provisions for the heavily regulatory areas in view of the new competition. >> ELI NOAM: That's right. But it never happens. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Well, hope springs eternal. And just to clarify something that Malcolm mentioned. Many time people use Brussels as the European union. Many times, when people are aggressive, they say Brussels, not my home country. But in the particular case that Malcolm is speaking, it's the city, just to specify. (laughter) >> So on the level playing field question, as the others said, I understand where you're coming from. Innovation is key. Disrupting markets is important, it's healthy, as long as there is a fair behavior by all of them and I think what happens there, and this is where the level playing field concept is actually quite important to consider is where it comes from is every player should have the same basis to start. And if that is not the case, then you're not creating that playing field. Now, in the case that you were using of Uber, I agree that it's important that everyone plays under the same rules. Otherwise, disruption is not really helping anyone and one thing is that disruption will not ultimately benefit the consumer that's consumer as the consumer is going to be independent on having Uber drivers and other people in the digital space that make fair wages, that are employed, that are paying taxes in their societies, so there's a lot of other linkages it how decisions get made in a particular sub sector of an economy and the implications that it has outside of that. We don't have to go into the externalities of all of those decisions but it is important and actually there has been lots of research from some of the people on this panel and maybe many of you here in the workshop that proves time and time again that healthy competition starting with a level playing field wishes consumers and ultimately -- benefits consumers and ultimately is much, much, much better for the public and for the public interest. And almost never an unlevel playing field will ever benefit. And if there is a hint of benefit, it's only temporary because eventually, it will fall apart. And that is the role of regulators, to not allow that to happen. So regulators have a big responsibility not just to set the rules and policy makers but to ensure to anticipate that such disasters don't happen and I think we've had quite a few in the history of time and I'm a little older than many of you in this room to remember many of those so I won't go into those right away. But I think there's many examples of where lack of competition has proven to not be the right solution so when we think about solutions and predictability and all the different polings and regulatory -- policy and regulatory instruments to create that in the market it's because ultimately and it has proven, it is in the public interest. We all will benefit more in the end if we have that. So if I may, can I give one other example of an area we are working right now which is around infrastructure sharing issues, something that European union has done quite a bit of work on as well in other countries. We're working on infrastructure sharing issues in the Dominican Republic, Ghana, Mozambique, quite a few places. One of the key things to work on policy in countries depending on where they are in the regulatory continuum is precisely because in telecommunications and the wider internet sector there is a tendency for markets to become highly concentrated. We don't have to go into concentration discussions but that is the tendency. When that happens, no one benefits. Only the few that can benefit from that particular concentration can be the beneficiaries, but not the users. If you give me an example of where that kind of trend has resulted in better services for the users, I would love to hear. But I know of none. So infrastructure sharing, for example, is one way where you can create systems and incentives to not only push companies that tramly would not care on the KPAK side, on the traditional side of investment to share more and allow newer pliers and smaller players. Why? Because those don't have the ability to do very heavy capital investments can benefit from wholesale environments, can benefit from other kind of possibilities that in fact regulatory incentives have provided. >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: So I lie somewhere in between Malcolm and Eli's. I'm going to paraphrase and say the framework has to be level. The safety, all of those elements, you shouldn't have a variationment because a person can't make a judgment getting into a car as to whether it's safe or not. You have to guarantee that a taxi is safe but at least they've gone through some inspections and maybe there's been a licensing procedure for the driver so that part is true. But then you get to the business model discussions so right away we say Uber compared to a taxi. But is Uber compared to a taxi or private car service? Because they're not circling around picking up people. They're only in a different model. The only thing is that model didn't used to be competitive with taxis because it was more expensive than a taxi. Uber used that model to make it less expensive. Now, some of the expense savings may have been in terms of work life balance, in terms of the benefit that's a driver may or may not work so there are big societal issues that go beyond the business model issue but we have to start thinking, are we comparing apples with apples or are we putting a societal construct in place that says, is this an issue? Now, what's funny is cab companies in Washington DC which were never forward thinking companies to begin with, all of a sudden, they have these programs where you can call the cab, see where the cab is on the map because they realized that customers thought this was a really useful service so this created a market need because people understood this was an available option and that market need has to be met by cab companies also. In Paris, cab courtesy has gone up because the Uber drivers had been more courteous as a rule. So, these are things where there is a benefit in this competitive dynamic. The question of fairness comes in. But I think, you know, it goes way beyond level playing field because we're looking at societal constructs we're composing arguably in the level of public interest but that goes beyond level playing field. I think level playing field is the framework of issues. After that, we're talking about societal issues. >> SONIA JORGE: Shouldn't they be at the same? At the same levels? How can societies go and be different -- >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: One last thing. Data protection commissioners have never waited for an invitation. They fully believe they can apply themselves to everything that deals with personal data so don't worry about them getting into the picture. They're here. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: We have another recklessness from the floor. >> Preempted a little of my thought but I'd like to go back to the metaphor of level playing field and new entrants. They're not new players. They're playing a different gamement they're not playing the same field. One is playing on a rug by pitch, the other on European soccer pitch and the other on American football pitch. You can't say, oh, they all need to be conformed to the Rugby pitch. We need to be understanding that I think this also goes to the concerns about current GAFA dominance of a few companies that seem to be an oligarchy because I've come through the era of the AOL prodigy compuserve. I've come through the era of the IBM computer dominance that turned into the Microsoft desktop dominance that then turned into the Google. We have to understand that the competition is among technologies and vastly different business models. Rather than saying we have to defend particular investments in companies, we should also recognize that we don't necessarily need to defend legacy industries. Do we need to say that mainframe computer makers need to have a rule that we need to support -- role that we need to support? So, I think this all requires some adjustment in our melt a fors and -- metaphors and thinking. >> There was a lady in yellow. >> There's also another phenomenon we should be considering, and this is traditional service providers whether in telecom or taxi moving to these other platforms and creating competition among platforms. Not only uber, there's Easy taxi. I can count five in Mexico. But I was recently in Chicago and you access Uber platform and then you can choose whether you want an Uber Uber or an Uber taxi. So taxi's union have now -- it's like opening access to the telecom network, well, they have open access to the Uber platform. So this is creating a new form of competition and many traditional paid TV networks are now building their own OTT and video on demand and playing in both platforms for traditional and non traditional. And now, but I see that very different from anticompetitive practices like predatory pricing and I haven't heard much about whether that's the concern, a very important one, then we should also look at exposed measures and that would trigger competition, investigations whether someone is involving in their collusion or anticompetitive such as competitor pricing. But that, I mean, I don't know the specifics in Nigeria. In Mexico, we have preferred to, in those cases, act as competition authority and not with regulation. Or yes, regulate, but only wholesale markets. And sharing infrastructure is an important point. Thank you. A. He I would like to add to the Uber -- >> ELI NOAM: I would like to add to the Uber discussion something that relates to what I started with which is we have been discussing this in the context of producers, providers such as Uber or consumers will get a better service and that's wonderful. But there's also the other side that should not be zero I'ded. Those are the people -- derided. Those are the people driving today and who are also kind of human beings so we really should not forget them because they're the ones who vote as you have seen how they did. So it's not only losing out to new kind of drivers and companies, but also in the near future to self-driving cars and so on. So these are people who actually will be kind of at the losing end of all this. So therefore, this is not an invitation to use regulation to restrict change but rather that all these openings have also to be accompanied by societal programs to deal with people who are getting displaced by these things because otherwise you have backlash and the backlash leads then exactly to those regulations we don't like. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Sorry I just want to add one thing that relates to the public interest outcome. It falls a little on El I and some of the others. The public interest outcome isn't always, is it better for consumers which is always important and we want to have competition improve facilities and choice. No question on that. On the other hand, the public income also includes making sure that people are not making sure people are working slave wages or having to work 24 hours a day. I don't know what all the different possibilities might be. You raised this, too. This forms part of the public interest outcome. There's no question about that, so I won't go on because there are more questions, I'm sure. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: Sorry, maybe somebody can -- >> You have to come get the microphone. >> Good afternoon. From the -- program. In the country where I'm from, the authority of the ICT sector always opens to a public consultation during projects whether they are about user protection, consumer protection, or whether there are about infrastructure and network issues. However, the only participants in this so-called public consultation is the private sector that is traditional contract that implies legitimacy issue around the regulatory dialogue. The only question is, how account other stakeholders can be equalated to the regulatory dialogues in order to establish a legitimate process. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: Sonia, want to try to -- >> SONIA JORGE: Sure. I can tell you only our example, the Aliance for Affordable Internet. We work through national Coalitions that are multistakeholder Coalitions and we make sure that in every single country that we work our Coalitions not only integrate the public sector, and when we say the public sector, it's not just the ministries of communication or science and technology but education health so they also understand the indications of our sector in their own agendas, especially with internet being such an incredible platform for academic growth, understand their roles in those processes, but we include the private sector and again, all different kinds of providers from smaller to bigger and different services, not just mobile operators but some are cables, vendors, ISPs, you name it. And very, very important, civil society. And again, not just Civil Society involved in ICTD projects which tends to be like the group in IGF which is great because they already have the issues or know better how to communicate on those issues but we actually make a specific effort to increase the ability of Civil Society that should be involved in these consumer protections or commissions or units or departments, however different countries call them or others so it's very much a multistakeholder approach. We also include, for example, women's advocates. Different organizations working in spaces that they should be concerned by policy and regulation in our sectorment we think that, again, it's very important for the dialogue to be there but it's also important for people to understand, what is the role of policy and regulation. One of the things that I have to say is that it's really difficult sometimes to express for the most part because of the experience of regulation in many countries, people perceive regulation as controls as kind of purely around either fiscal issues or what have you. Don't think about regulation in this kind of new paradigm we've been working on for years now which is really about incentives. It's a very different way about thinking about regulation. The concept of dynamic regulation as well as the last few years and mentioned is really important but I have to say it's also really difficult to implement in many countries because as we know, it takes working with really strong regulators in some countries, it takes them a long time to go to looking at an issue, investigating and coming up with a decision. When you introduce concepts of dynamic regulation, it means that whatever instruments you have in place they need to be ready to be changed very quickly. Not only regulatory companies need to be in practice, independent, they need to have the capacity to make those decisions quickly and move, and that is something we're working toward in many countries. Even companies that call themselves developed, regulation takes a long time and dynamic regulation in many countries is actually quite a schedule so when you think about it from my perspective and where I work, it's even more complex. But regardless, a multistakeholder approach as we work not only has proven to be effective, has proven to be more impactful, and if you don't do that, we're really never working in the full public interest. We're looking at elite but never in the full public interests. >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: My experience is more in the U.S. I'm going to use that as an example. You have notice of proposed rule making. They'll be in the federal regulator. Everyone is allowed to comment. The people who can get through the notice then go to the proposed rule making. The people who can understand that you can count on one finger of one hand and that then become's self-limiting process even though it's a wide open process. In the interagency process, they've actually come up with a concept to try to address this. It's not going to be for every regulation, but they take some forward looking broadly horizontal topics on mobile computing or other thing has. They convene under the auspices commerce or whoever but then they allow the multistakeholders to shape their opinion themselves being the convener rather than director of the process, and I think that's an interesting process but it's not the process of a level of regulation. It's the process by which you inform the policy makers to the regulation so it's even a better time to get multistakeholder input because you're not reacting to what someone wrote. You're putting in input when someone is thinking about what they are going to write and that's really the best place to have input because that's when the rich breadth of ideas comes to the policy maker who in their response to the consultation will only get very strict technical comments and not those rich ideas. But you can't do that at the level of regulation. You can do it earlier. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: This is what we also tried to do in Europe, to have a broad regulation to look up before any regulation is absolutely identified or set out as a draft but also the important thing, too, is that representatives of organizations that represent, for example, consumers or whoever it might be are those who primarily respond to these consultations because by definition, every individual 500 million European citizens are not going to respond to these things but representatives of consumers organizations will. Representatives of, I don't know, depending on what the issue is, trademark holders or whoever it might be, they're the ones who have the time and energy and capacity to go into these things in detail. And they, of course, then look to their members and their organizations but we follow a similar process. And then the other thing, too, you mention in the consultation in the countries you're referring to it's primarily the incumbents who respond but we know what the incumbent position is going to be. It's regulate my neighbor or my competitor, so that's something we get all the time. That's not unusual. That goes with the territory. >> SONIA JORGE: I just wanted to add one point that is really important with any kind of multistakeholder approach or process is that you need good information, you need really good advocates for anyone, regardless of who they are, to participate in the process. This is something that we focus a lot on and I see some people here in the room that also work on several elements of monitoring the sector, data collection, data analysis, and research. It's really important. I cannot emphasize enough if you don't have really good evidence to be part of the dialogue, it's really difficult to be part of the dialogue. One of the things we have done and many of our partners is working on not only data sectors to monitor aspectses of development but to make that accessible to those who want to participate. One of the things we do at the alliance through our national Coalitions, not only do we do the research. Bring research to the table. For example, I was mentioning to you the infrastructure cases that we are working on now in many countries with commission and have worked on in depth studies to look at the options for infrastructure sharing in each of those countries and the evidence and all the research is done is open and available. We run workshops so that everyone from a Civil Society stakeholder to a private sector stakeholder to a public sector stakeholder become convert ant about the knowledge and issues that are at stake and then they can have a conversation that is also, again, a more level playing field. So the outcome of that conversation is much more balanced but we need to take responsibility of doing that. Several of the Universitied, including your program, Eli and others, probable from the center is doing a lot of that work here and many others in other countries are doing a lot of work. Our regional partners are doing fantastic research in that area and having the right evidence and data to help policy decisions is critical and we need to continue doing that better, more so that everyone can participate in a much more interesting and powerful way. >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: And just to give a plug to our host, the digital economy outlook is actually a great source for that as well. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: Thank you, Joe, for that. We're actually working to release the new one in 2017 so glad to know that is useful. Michael. >> Mike Nelson. I do global public policy for Cloud fair and I was just at the EC last month and really encouraged by the support that's been given from Mexico. Since we're here in Mexico I'd be curious whether any of you have looked at what's happened to reduce competition. According to the report, there was about a 50 percent reduction in the cost of many basic mobile in three years. Again, giving a plug to the OACD because they helped Mexico with these policies. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Well, one element I'm aware of and I haven't worked at it in detail is that a lot of it is based on the European regulatory telecom framework. That's why it's so good. (laughter) >> Thank you. We certainly look at best practice around the world but I think it's a very unique reform. Both Congress and the new organizational design, we put together combining both competition and bringing investment and also passing asymmetric regulation for incumbents that was badly needed. We've seen investments and a 25 percent reduction of prices, in mobile over 30 percent not out of regulation, but out of competition. There's no roaming charges in North America, Mexico, U.S. and Canada anymore. You could spend maybe in a five day trip a thousand dollars in roaming. Not downloading films. Just emailing and calling out of the U.S. if you were traveling from Mexico, so that's a drap attic change. Now we need to make sure there's more employment of 4G and high speed broadband, and so it took very drap attic legal framework and really in practice autonomous entity of society. >> JOSEPH ALHADEFF: If I can add a very specific question, though, in comparing Mexico to Europe to the U.S., Nelson's metric for judging telecom policy is that good policy reduces the number of billable hours for telecom lawyers and lobbyists. We know that the U.S. advances like net neutrality and the telecom act of 1996 dramatically increased hours. What's happened in Mexico? Are you actually seeing more lawsuits and more billable hours? >> We don't get the bills, thank God. But no, you will never avoid litigation but there was one very specific policy but can you litigate as much as you want against our decisions, but they are not suspended while litigation takes place and that has made a huge difference. Because the public interest was being held back because of ten year litigation to declare an agent incumbent, a dominant player, for instance. It took more than ten years. Litigation is in average, I would say 90 percent of the cases at the federal courts because of when they are well motivated, reasonable, proportionate and evidence-based and we are very transparent and also consulting before regulation. >> Something about Mexico and U.S. to Europe. The roaming charges. See, you cannot go to an event with a European regulator in which it will not be mentioned that the European union reduced roaming charges. >> MEGAN RICHARDS: I didn't say that. >> ELI NOAM: But somebody did. And yet, in North America, it happened by -- correct me if I'm wrong -- but it happened purely by competitive forces and nobody even knows about it. So, it's just kind of happened without kind of much of a regulatory intervention of a sort. So, that's a really good example for market forces doing what kind of regulators believe they're essentially doing. >> It's called the invisible hand for a reason. >> ELI NOAM: Good point. >> VINCENZO SPIEZIA: I just like to move briefly to another point that we had planned. It's a point that has already been mentioned a few times which is the tendency for certain markets, we have offline actors, online actors towards concentration. Maybe we're running out of time, just another one for the four speakers which is whether we're really seeing a rise in the digital markets, whether they have an input and whether policy can do anything to prevent or protect from this policy. Megan, you want to start? >> MEGAN RICHARDS: Well, rise in Monday op olei is always a difficult thing. There's certainly clear evidence that there has been some rise, there's no question to that. In Europe, the laws are that if there is a dominant player the question of whether that's been abuse of dominance is really what is looked at. That's different from the telecom sector where we have a different assessment of dominant market players but I think this is the element that has to be looked at. I think you mentioned earlier IBM dominating, Microsoft dominating, AOL, et cetera, et cetera. I think we go through these hills and valleys of rising companies and today's Google in ten years may be the IBM of 20 years ago. Who knows? There will be new competitors. There will be new innovative companies coming online. One thing I think is an element that worries me and I think some of my European colleagues, too, is the take-up of small innovative companies which are immediately purchased by some of these very large companies. I think there there is an unfortunate less than perfect competitive element because we want those small companies to be competitive and when they're bought up by a very large dominant player, depends on the area, circumstance, et cetera, et cetera, but that can potentially have a less than beneficial impact. Now, some of you may have been following the online platform discussion that took place in the digital single market review and I know that a number of U.S. companies and U.S. government officials were very nervous and they said, the European union is going to start regulating online platforms only in Europe and this is not fair, et cetera. Et cetera. There's no regulation that has been proposed it was a review of the circumstances, what are the terms and conditions. What is the impact of online platforms, level playing field argument, the competitive elements. We looked also at business to business practices and we're still looking at these issues, a communication was issued -- I can't remember exactly when, but in the last recent time on what happened in that assessment. So just because we're looking at issues doesn't mean we are about to regulate or regulation should be feared. It's a question of examining the circumstances, looking at the fact, looking at the potential implications. And of course, we do have some complications that have been brought against large actors in the European sphere. There's no question about that. >> ELI NOAM: So, briefly about the digital Monopolies. We it a study at Columbia and it's available for Oxford University Press, about 1,400 pages and $200 will get you there. It's a real good deal. That shows for 30 countries and for 13 digital and media, more traditional media industries, the trends over the last 20 or so years of concentration. And it clearly shows that the digital industries are in a state of not only of a greater concentration, of a concentration trends but that they're also much more concentrated than other media, advise. So it's this notion that somehow old industries are concentrated because they had more years. Actually, the print media are much less concentrated than traditional electronic media, radio, TV, that kind of stuff. They, in turn, are much less concentrated than the digital online media. Those are just facts. You can ask the questions after you acknowledge the facts. One possibility is basically saying ten years from now, there will be somebody else who will be overcoming it just because IBM isn't the big factor anymore. The second possibility is a structural regulation, and the third one is a behavioral regulation. So what I think one can observe is that structural regulation in this field is becoming difficult, if not impossible. So if Google has a very strong -- and it does, market position around the world for almost everyone for search. What are you going to do about it structurally? Are you going to let them divest of the letters A to G? The vertical stuff, the vertical power is only derivative of the market powers. Therefore, it gets you to behavioral registration and where structural registration has become much more difficult to do relative to industry, behavioral registration is much easier. There you'd to be a time where people thought you cannot -- today we know that maybe a bit is a bit is a bit but a pact is not a packet is a packet. A packet has an address, you can identify it, so in effect, you can have a much more fine tuned regulation. So financial transactions, media transactions, you can actually do a much more fine tuned regulation. I'm not sure if I like that, actually, because on the one hand, financial regulation, you can deal with tax issues, illegal payment type issues and so on. You can monitor the transactions as a regulator almost in real time, but on the either, you could kind of switch off on an Internet of Things. So somehow the department of energy which dims the lights, your particular lights after midnight, it's time to go to sleep. So I'm not so sure if the possibility of its fine tune regulations, oh, I think kind of what I do is we'll observe a shift from the structural industry regulation to behavioral regulation that is enabled by the electronic technology. So, I think I want to take a look at a couple things. One of them, I want to go back a little bit just to the level playing field. I think in the IT space we've seen when regulated players go into non regulated industries, they still Carrie their regulators with them -- carry their regulators with them even though those regulators shouldn't necessarily be in those industries of the knee jerk is, let's regulate everybody else, too, and that's a counter intuitive, counter productive, and counter indication. I this we should all be working towards making sure that a regulated player goes into a space that isn't regulated they shouldn't be burdened by a regulatory structure that is not relevant to the place they're in. The second thing, I want to take a point from the Nigeria example and that example is, there was an opportunity for the market to work and then there was the recognition that perhaps there had been a failure in the market because there wasn't enough players and that there may have been abuse by market players. And that's exactly the time which competition law should take place because you have someone who has abused the relative freedom of the market and I don't think there's any question that that is one of the areas where people come in to do that. Where I have concern is when you have a fear of that before the market even begins to operate and as an antecedent of that, like the Internet of Things. They were suggesting Internet of Things before we had an Internet of Things so I suggested in Europe we would have the internet of fewer things because it would just never grow so I think we have to be careful about when it is appropriate to apply the regulation because you want to allow the dynamism of the market to work. As Eli pointed out, sometimes it works without us even paying attention, and that's the best way is when you don't even notice how to works but I think we have to be care. About not regulating innovation by getting there too early but we do have to make sure that in the public interest both failures of markets, overreaching of players or abuses of power is dealt with in an appropriate fashion. >> Right, thank you for mentioning that and part of that appropriate fashion is exactly having the safe guards in place that should an intervention be required, you're ready for it. You don't start getting ready but you have the system in place to get ready. You have a clear method on how to go about doing that. That's why economic regulation is so big in so many jurisdictions because if you have the rules that are clear, everyone knows what we expect should that intervention be required. Ideally, we would never have to intervene. That's what we want. Regulators don't want that intervention to be required. You want to have the safe guards in place, clear guidance, clear standards, et cetera. But should you you have to intervene, you need to be prepared. In terms of the question that was asked and digital Monopolies, what I would say is that there may be a time and I think the European union is doing that that because of the trend of some players starting to look like digital monopolies and starting to look like dominant players in some markets that there is a need to be prepared for what should be done. The challenge is that, again, that we said earlier in one of your initial questions of the panel was how does the new internet role also change the way we think about firms and what kind of firms they are. So, I would just say to close that the digital economy is far from straight forward. It actually is raising a lot of questions that this is the first time we are considering them. This is the first time we are trying to understand. We need to understand them clearly. We need to share a lot of information, but we also need to make sure that, has the market -- as the markets progress, that there are clear standards across the board. Not just clear standards of behavior, clear standards of operation, and that's for the certainty but also so anyone knows, what is the expectation from a competitive perspective but also from a public interest perspective and issues like interoperability, for example, very important to create those expectations and that costs across different things so not just companies like you mentioned, Google or Uber or Alibaba and all these other big companies across the world that cut across different vectors of the economy, how to address that. Part of it is starting to really be clear on what those rules are and if we have a better understanding of what those rules are, we're not there yet, then we can start knowing how to better address them. The challenge here and I think we all address these. Maybe we have cases from countries that have already addressed these. The challenge is, what are had the next steps? Where are we going to go interest here? How is there, for example, interoperability or other kind of standard that are going to come through in the space. Are they going to increase certainty or facilitate growth of dominant players. Those are the questions we need to ask ourselves, now, tomorrow, and hopefully next time we have some clearances on how to address these. Unfortunately, I don't think we have them yet. >> VALERIE: Thank you very much. I think we should bring this workshop to an end. I'd like to thank all of the participants, the panelists. I'm not trying to summarize any of the discussions. I'd like to make a quick point that is my direct take from discussion. The first one is that we should remind ourselves the regulation is about societal values, I think you mentioned. What objective you want to achieve. We always have to keep that in mind when figuring out to how to implement a regulation, how to make them flexible. The second part has been the number of objectives about regulation that needs to be flexible, needs to adjust. And I like, pretty much the metaphor of a learning process. I think we should also make sure that as things change, as we live in different context, we put in place institutions or rules that facilitate this learning process. And the third point that you want to have all stakeholders in this process. I think there was attention there in how you make things efficient, flexible, and involve people without getting involved in levels of complexity and that's probably a trade off which we need to work on more. But thank you again to all of you (applause) (Session was concluded at 4:30 p.m. CST) ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** Services Provided By: Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 www.captionfirst.com ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM 2016 ENABLING INCLUSIVE AND SUSTAINABLE GROWTH JALISCO, MEXICO 7 DECEMBER 2016 OF21 DIPLO 5:00 P.M. >> Okay. But how do I put it on? Okay. Shall I try this one? I'm not sure the mics are working. I was really hoping to start on time. Where is the button? It's hidden. Does it work? So I was trying to keep the instruction to start on time, and sorry I failed in that. Welcome, everybody to this very friendly open forum of Diplo foundation where we mainly have people that are very close to us and work closely. I would like to check with Maria, our remote operator, what does it look like online? Nobody? Which means we will probably do the session a bit different, I suggest. I don't think it's needed to go through the formal presentation introducing what is Diplo and what is the Geneva Internet Platform and the work we do on the local level. If you agree, we might also use it as an opportunity to make sure we know each other and the stake that we have in this project. Until because manufacture us, I think in this room are close friends, close collaborators, but the others might not be aware of, house is it? What's the interlink? So we can just use it like this and take this bit informally though I will need to speak into the microphone in case some more remote participants join us. So, welcome again. For those who don't know me, my name is Tereza. I have worked with Diplo for over 12 years and my main job is project investment and I've been the lucky one involved in the early planning of the Geneva Internet Platform project which happens to be the major project that we are involved in. It's an initiative supported by the swiss authorities and operated by Diplo foundations, so for those of you that are not aware of what is like the branding difference and the link, so this is -- so the Geneva Internet Platform is a project, but a brand that we are implementing with the kind of support of the Swiss government. So, I am not the one that should be talking most about Geneva Internet Platform project because it's currently coordinated by my colleague who is here with us. So for those of you who don't know, this is Roxanna Radu. She's based in our Geneva office and she's the one that has taken over the given project after I have left sit zero land. So, Roxannea, because people here involved may not be aware of all the details of the project, just explain briefly what the project is about, why do we do this? >> Is it working? Oh, perfect. At the Geneva Internet Platform we are providing an inclusive and neutral space for debates. And this is our main aim to have this platform that allows everyone to be engaged, to have a space for information exchange and whenever possible we try to facilitate the involvement of a multitude of stakeholders. In Geneva, quita few things are happening. 50 percent of debates are debated there and are negotiated in Geneva. From the experience we have seen so far, it is becoming increasingly more difficult to cope with the development. Small and developing countries, in particular, also have a limitation in having the resources to follow everything that is happening and this is where we are jumping in to help with providing this space. Our platform has three different pillars. The first one is the physical platform where people can meet, come to our offices and have discussions there. Then we also have an online platform that I will talk more about. It is an observe tory. Monitoring developments on digital policy and the third one is innovation lab and here we understand innovation more as an innovative approach to government issues rather than having the tech type in the room. We are also trying to bring the discussions of Geneva outside, going beyond the small impact. Also fostering the participation and inclusion of new comers, this is where the global initiative is playing a key role and I think I'll stop here for the moment. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: It's great. Thank you very much, Roxannea. So it works, you hear me, right? So this is in a nutshell what is the context of the Geneva project and I with like to ask briefly two organizations that are absolutely key in supporting the work that we are doing. I would first kindly like to ask Gorge from the swiss authorities that tell us what made you start thinking about an initiative of this kind and then I would briefly like to ask Constance Bommelaer from the society which is our very exciting partner supporting the online pillar that Roxannea was introducing to explain also why ISOC is part of this. >> This is Jorge from the swiss office of communications. Nice to be here, to be part of this intimate session and while I think in a way we feel as part of a team, perhaps, we are not in the day-to-day business of a GIP. But, we participate, of course, in the meetings of the steering committee and we were at the beginning of this story. I personally was not there, because I joined the team like two years ago, but of course, there was a gap in bringing the information in a meaningful manner to all the diplomats, all the policy makers who are dealing with digital policy. There was a gap in a way in this field. And I think the Geneva Internet Platform really fills up that gap in a very creative manner, in a very fast evolving manner. We are very server satisfied with the work which is being done by the GIP. We think that this brings a contribution in capacity building and giving meaningful information context, rich information to all people who are dealing with these issues. I, myself am a practitioner in this field mostly of IGF setting or Euro date settings, everything which is national and Internet Governance is part of my job, especially in ICANN. And I can use the tools of the Geneva Internet Platform. They are very useful to me and whenever I see the chance, I recommend it to other not because of a marketing objective but because I think they are really there to be used and they give a very good added value. I could spend hours and hours talking about what I find so good about the work of the Geneva Internet Platform, but especially we've been following from our office because this is a effort between our -- joint effort between federal relations. We follow more the GIP Digital Watch which is a project in partnership, especially with ISOC, and the website of the Digital Watch is something, if you don't know it, please go there and use it because it gives you very good value. Be it on more generic, more abstract topics like the relationship between SDGs and the WSIS process,al bait, very specific processes. It gives you an overview that is really hard to find in other places and the information is always contextually rich with a lot of metadata which allows you to find whatever you need even the search engine, which is something very difficult to get right is working very, very well. And, it doesn't give you irrelevant information. It gives you the quality information you need. So we are very satisfied with the work of the Geneva internet platform and we feel part of this work. So, I leave it by that and if you have any questions on how the swiss authorities are participating here, I'm happy to answer. Thank you. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you very much, Jorge. You have mentioned also for your department the online filler of the work is quite important and this is where we partnered with the intent society so for those of you who are not aware of this tool, we are running an online observatory which is a one stop shop about the description, who are the politicals involved, of what the events you should be missed? Should you be following this field? You are stressing the practical value of the work we are doing and the online observatory is one of the examples where we are trying to work in direction. Constance, can I ask you to say a few words from your perspective? Constance Bommelaer from the Internet Society. >> CONSTANCE BOMMELAER: Thank you for the invitation to say a few words about this project, which is very important. At the Internet Society, we have a mission in terms of education, capacity building infrastructure development, but of course we focus on advocacy so for us it was really a natural partnership, the Geneva Internet Platform, DiploFoundation to partner with them on this very important project. From where we stand discussions we see at the end of the day always boils down to participation, always boils down to being on an equal footing in terms of having the right resources to be able to participate in these discussions in a meaningful way, whether it's the future of the IGF, whether it's the transition for any governmental official Civil Society activists, students, simple citizen who has a stake ledge the matily in all these issues, -- legitimately in all these issues, it felt it was really the appropriate tool, as Tereza said, the one stop shop to be equipped or to have information on where to have additional information if you want to dive deep in the various topics. I know, from experience, many missions in Geneva aren't very large. Sometimes it's one person covering four or five topics and we know from experience that especially for those delegates, it's extremely precious to have this tool so the proud to be part of this initiative with sit zero land, of course, and we -- Switzerland, of course. And we encourage you to share with whatever your stakeholder might be, it really is a resource that can be used from simple citizens to top level government dealing with Internet Governance. Thank you. >> This is coming to the core of why we wanted to put this session together. It has been resonating, Constance has been saying, Jorge, Roxanna as well about the useful or practical element of the work we are doing. One thing we have realized that on the global level, the discussion, the priorities may be a little bit different than the needs on the local level. That's where we started experimenting and that's where we will get to the colleagues that are sitting with me here in front. As you know, we are trying kind of to help everybody navigate better through the complex field of digital policy and internet governance. We do it through various ways. The online observatory is one example under the kind of Digital Watch umbrella, and if I may ask you to put a slide up, we are also doing it through the newsletter that we publish every month trying to help you understand what are the main trends that have happened in internet governance in the previous month and may be able to hook out for in the month ahead. The newsletter will be here. Please grab your copy after the session. That's one way. One channel. The other way we do it is we organize these monthly briefings on Internet Governance, we call it. This is something we started from the very beginning of the Geneva Internet Platform project and the way it worked practically is every last Tuesday of the month at 1:00 secretary rational European time we meet in Geneva and with online participation to provide this kind of short summary. Thirty minutes expose usually delivered by our director who apologizes that he's missing this IGF, and we try to provide you, as I call it, on a silver plate an overview of everything that has mattered in Internet Governance. Because we have this online participation element, we realized that there are many people joining us from all corners of the world but for them the issues that the people may be joining us in Geneva in the room, the priorities are maybe a bit different. Privacy discussed in the European context will probably be quite different to privacy discussed in the Asian context. Again, it's important to have this gobble context but at the same time, the discussion comes down to the local level. Then, as I said, we started experimenting. We started playing around and we have played around with this idea of establishing so-called hubs worldwide. This is an exercise we decided to do only with trusted partners, with organizations we have already worked with. We launched -- at this moment, we have four hubs that are active. One of them is represented here by -- from indonnisha in Jacarta. We also have from the Tunisia hub, working on the menna program. And the first hub, in the Rh he is working on the IGMENA hub. And also in the Rio de Janeiro, it was implemented by -- who was with and is now in Diplo and we are very happy we stole someone from you. And we are obviously a strong base because we have a physical office here. And the way it works is that our hubs join us for the global briefing and either before or after, depending on the time zone, which doesn't always play in our favor, try to use the format of the briefing as an opportunity to bring together the stakeholders that are involved in digital policy discussion at the local level to give it to them as an opportunity to come, to discuss the local implications of the global developments. It works basically quite well. We obviously, as I said, we are experimenting so we have made some mistakes, we have learned from the mistakes, but I think we all share that this is a win/win opportunity. We are super proud, having you on board, and we hope that you find the work useful and we really also try to work with each hub individually to see what is the biggest added value for each hub. Because you will see soon, you will hear from and see as well, you will hear from Cindy Hamza and Fluca -- and Luca that the reasons why they are part of this may actually differ. The reasons might be different. The reasons why to join such an exercise may be different and we are hoping that also through the session, we might encourage you are appearing here or remotely, I hope that we have some people that have joined us to maybe think about using this format in localizing the discussions a little bit more. Cindy, would you mind if we start with you? Please, go ahead. >> Thank you. So, good afternoon, colleagues, I think it's evening already. My name is Cindy Nofitri. I'm from indonesia and currently working with the Ministry of foreign affairs, but also affiliated with the Indonesi awe IGF and I would like it share with us hosting Jacara for several months. So earlier this year, we are proud and honored to have Mr. Johan DiploFoundation for the second time. He visited our capital city of Jakarta and to give some lecture on internet governance but also he shared these very good initiative of the Geneva internet platform and asked to join as Jakarta hub. During that lecture, our minister of communication and IT, Mr. -- also attended the lecture. And he was very eager and keen to accept the invitation. The minister also attended and addressed the briefing that night. It was very meaningful for us. And afterwards, there are several multistakeholders from a private sectors also CSO who, which was hosting the hub, so not only the government, but also the other stakeholders who hosted the Jakarta hub in their premise. And what we have been doing so far in Jakarta hub as Tereza already mentioned before, that we kind of summarize several highlights of the issue and in development of governments in Geneva and we report to Geneva to share our Diplo gobblely and then during the briefing we also host a local discussion in which participants can join in NC2 discussion in one of our premises, and then afterwards, we can discuss so many issues. Mostly local but sometimes we talk about the more global development of Internet Governance. And I think what is -- what has been very meaningful for us that from the government sector, I say the minister, he has been very supportive along the way. All of the business sectors, CSO and technical communities have been engaging very closely with the Jakarta hub and attending the discussion every month and I believe that one of the most valuable experience for Indonesi awhile doing Jakarta hub is this gives us the chance to -- this initiative was founded in 2012 and we also hosted the global IGF in Bali in 2013. However, it has been hibernating for almost two years until the GIP happened so this GIP served as platform for us to meet again and to discuss about how to plan our next national dialogue of IGF. And we were very proud to have our national IGF last month and it was attended by 400 participants, it was highest ever in our national dialogue and I think we couldn't make it unless we join the GIP and the GIP hams and we finally have one participate to see each other every month. I think this is very useful. Demand for the history, I think we in Indonesia we have two key points of reflection from all of our experience during hosting Jakarta hub. First is that is has been served as a platform for us to see each other and discuss and find a common solution on what are we facing in internet governance in Indonesia because local dialogues rarely happens and it serves as a very about platform for us. And I believe -- a very good platform for us. I believe that it also gives us more opportunity to have a more multistakeholder approach in responding so many challenges in Internet Governance in our nation. And the second one is the IGF -- sorry, the GIP briefing itself. I personally find it very fruitful and useful because it has been providing a platform to exchange information on internet governance globally and sometimes during the speed of information, we miss so many development. We miss so many information and this GIP can help us to capture what really matters in the development of internet governance in the global context. And also, in the other way around, Indonesia also have the opportunity to share what is our concerns, what are issues that matters in our local hubs, to a more wider and broader audience in the global GIP hub. And also to our colleagues in other hubs. And I think also one of the important things is that we feel like we need to have a more discussion like this, not only in Indonesia and several hubs. I think some of other country also can joining, not only in the web, also have their hubs, probably. And as a way forward, ID IGF is planning to keep doing Jakarta hub and adding a schedule this Jakarta hub as our monthly discussion and we wish that everyone can join as well and this GIP so that we can broader our perspective and knowledge on the development of policy. And internally, we take note that also there has been some lack of awareness of what GIP is and how this really matters for them so it is perhaps our job in the near future to make sure that our community understand what is GIP, what are the importance of GIP for them, and how does it really matters for them and contextualize the GIP development to our local context so people can join the discussion. Yeah. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you, Cindy, very much for sharing your reasons and also the work that you're doing from the ground and helping us because this is obviously something we wouldn't be able to do had from elsewhere. Over to Hamza in our hub in Tunisia so how did this come about? >> Thank you very much, Tereza for inviting me. Such a great panel. I'm really thrilled to see people in this tiny room and to share my perspective about the IGMENA local hub we have. First of all, ENA region is not Brazil or Tunisia. It has 14 countries so it is so broad so we try with the IGM program that works on IGMENA and gives capacity on local government stakeholders to try to give incentive for people to write about global policies. To try to be informers. So we have one of the biggest structures in the region and you have choose in particular Tunisia because there's a lot of activism and dynamism when it comes to local grass roots people represented by engineers, people from the private sector to come and write about relevant issues when it comes to government so we have content related to online, data protection privacy but we work as well on many other technical issues. I think why the Geneva hub is really relevant for IGMENA because I think it is a decentralized model that really gives incentive for the grass roots communities to talk about relevant policies for them that are not sometimes relevant or heard and seen by the global policy context so what we try to do is try to link the local development to what is happening at the global level or what is happening in Geneva so our approach is to give the chance to our local community. We have one of our community leaders to speak about those relevant topics, about the internet in Tunisia so we don't only folk s on Tunisia, so we focus on other countries in the MENA region. And we try to give the chance for people from the government to come and speak, people from the private sector to come to speak, people from the Civil Society to speak about local issues and I think that has been really successful to try to bridge that linkage when it comes to the global context of policies to the local context. The good thing is that now Tunisia is going on deeply structural changes when it comes to the Internet Governance. And the good thing is that we are doing the hub in the previous center where censorship was deployed so we do it in ATI, Tunisia technical agency that was responsible for censoring the internet in Tunisia which now has an open space for Civil Society actors to come and speak about internet governance issues. So I think we have done 5IGMENA hubs and we talk, for example, about issues that are really relevant to Geneva. We have talked about voice IP and for example, from the Moroccan perspective. From our perspective, we have talked about the cybersecurity dilemma that exists in Tunisia and the cyber billing that being drafted now in ee git and we have been localizing issues that are relevant to the region, giving incentive for people to speak about these issues and linking them to Geneva. We have been talking about if I would link that to the IGF process, I think to see tangible change when it comes to policies at the grass roots level, you have to begin local so that's what we do in the IGF program. We try to target local communities about policies that matter to them at the ground. It's good to be here in the IGF which are networks or foundations that are too centralized. We need to find ways, or I call them intent cooperatives or intent grass roots initiatives like the one you're developing and the 1IGMENA developed to try to get insights and what people need and so I think that diverse fie -- diversified approach. To speak about other topics that are relevant to us, relevant to you, and we thank you very much for believing in th this >> TOM: Thank you very much. That's really kind words from you. If we go, now, to Brazil. Let us say the hub has taken it to let another level because besides having Rio join us regularly every month for the monthly briefing, there was another experiment that we initiated. For the newsletter that we published that I talked about briefly, again, some of our partners remain -- really appreciate this and say, I wish we had something like this available in our local language or I wish we had something that fit more on the main topics we discuss on the local level. So okay, why not translating this? So I'm really happy that this monthly newsletter is for quita few months already is available in Portuguese. I would like to talk about it more as the Portuguese version of the newsletter, we should try to call it as the Brazilian government because again, we are trying to use the space in the newsletter. Provide us additional value that lies not only in the opportunity for the people on the ground to read it in Portuguese but also, again, to get the information about what is happening on the local level and what is of interest. But I will let Luca speak about this a little more. >> LUCA BELLI: Thanks, Tereza. Hello, everyone. I'm Luca Belli, senior research for the center of technology and society in the area of Geneva and I'm currently coordinating the Rio hub that started such a successful partnership that decided to move to Diplo, so thank you, Diplo. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: You're welcome. >> LUCA BELLI: As Tereza was saying, we are not only engaging monthly in the debate. We are also trying to be a sort of interface between the global level and I would say also a regional level talking about digital policies. What we're trying to do is convey the discussion to you very well we are doing in Geneva with the internet platform from a global perspective to the local, let's say, in Brazil, local perspective. But also to the regional one. We also accept contributions from other partners in countries and we also decide to have a regional hub discussion, a live meeting with also some special guests from another country. In the very beginning, we started only having Brazil society or academics or government representative joining us in the hub, hub that we have for the global one and then recently, we have started to have some special guests. Meaning that the very first time was a coincidence. We had two partners from Argentina visiting us and we invited them to speak at the hub and then we realized that it was a very good idea to have these kind of interactions, not only because it made the conversation much more interesting than discussing only Brazilian issues but also because it allowed us to have a sort of comparison with other countries. So we tried to fortunately, or sadly, depending on your point of view. In Brazil, there is a lot of policy proposal going on very frequently, especially in past year of quite turbulent political environment so that allows us to be able to compare local policy and proposal of any type with other people from other countries. So, for instance, last month, we had a quite senior official from Costa Rica that conversations were greater than explained how they regulated Telecom market over past year and what success they had and what failures they had. It was very, very interesting for us to compare it with the current attempt to redefine the general law in Brazil because it was exactly the same topic but from a different perspective. So it has been very useful for us not only to be sort of an interface or gateway between Brazil and rest of the world, but also to convey the best practices that are debated and adopted at the global level into the national level, integrate them. For those who don't know. The center was very key prominent player so it is also very good for us to be able to convey the best practices that we have at the local level of international level. So, it is so far, it has been extremely productive. We are super happy about the partnership. Very happy to keep on having it. The only sad note is that you stole Maurilia so thank you. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: It was not meant like that. It just happens. Luca, thank you very much. You could hear from our speakers here how the contacts in their particular organization work but also the context of the country really shapes and determines what little nuances the hub would take for MENA region and for Latin America, there might be a desire to do this more regional, let's say, community building in a sense as well for Indonesia, the hub naturally developed in a different direction. You were discussing bringing more to the national IGF discussion and this was exactly what we were hoping for to provide a stool that can be used for the work of our partners. So, thank you again for your kind words. It looked like I bribed you to just say nice words, but it wasn't like that. And we really, even on our side, we definitely value the cooperation. I would like, once more, to encourage if you think you might find a value in being part of this experiment because I would still like to call it an experiment, please talk to me. We also have some on what does it take to start a hub? What are the practicality? Because it's not difficult. Even on a technical level, I can assure you, it's not difficult and we try to apply maximum support to our hubs not to have any kind of technical pressure on them and we try to be as supportive as possible and then the kind words that you hear here proved that hopefully, this is paying off. Now, I would just like to say briefly something about this IGF and how we are involved here. Because I am talking too much, Marilia, could I ask you that you could maybe introduce the other experiment and adventure that we are up to here at the IGF? >> Sure. It's my pleasure since y'all mentioned my name so many times, I feel like I need to say something. So, another experiment that we started, the previous IGF which can which is quite an endeavor that involves a lot of engineering and people working all across the globe was the challenge to report IGF sessions. As we know, IGF is a large forum. There are many sessions happening in parallel and it's very hard to follow everything so Diplo has reviewed support from the Internet Society, from to have an mazing supporters that take place in IGF. They are either from the Diplo team, they see the sessions, they summarize what happened in the session from a very neutral standpoint so trying o say what was discussed and the main issues that the speakers raised, the report from each session is available online. But when the IGF finishes at 6:00 and all of us go to our hotel what happens is the Diplo team based in Europe starts to work at midnight. They go through every report, every session in the IGF, and what they do is do not only tell us what happened in each session, they analyze each report and say what happened with the discussions of privacy in the IGF. What happened under the discussions of security in the IGF. So the issues are not summarized session by session, but by trend which gives another perspective with regards to what is being discussed in the event so this team works over night, not only the ones that go through the reports but also the ones that do the proofreading, the designing. This file is sent to us in the morning around 4:00 a.m. Which is, of course, sent to the printer. There is a printing company in the Guadalajara that kindly accepted to wake up early during IGF days and to print and to have everything ready for us to pick up at 7:00 a.m. So at 7:00 a.m., usually you will receive by email if you are in one of our mailing lists. If you are not, please subscribe to the Geneva Internet Platform mailing list or you will receive from one of us in the IGF corridor, one version of the Geneva Internet Platform initiative to do the IGF daily. So, this is quite an endeavor but we are very happy and proud to do it and the feedback we have received is that this is very useful not only to have this pan or amic view with regards to what happened, but also because all of us need to report back to our communities, to our groups, to our organizations, what happened in the IGF? And this is a vehicle that helps everyone that is present in the meeting to report back and to say what happened so we find this is a very interesting, and true element is a resource to all of you and we hope you will continue to find this relevant and that we expand to other spaces as well. We also did it in the WSIS forum so if you go online, you will see the reporting from the WSIS forum so this is something we're trying to do in different spaces when there is a man with very good feedback, so we are proud to have it and please take a copy before you go if we have not approached you yet. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you very much, Marilia. That's great. So, yes, grab a copy at our booth in the morning and then make sure you are subscribed to our mailing list because on Monday after the IGF we are aiming to send out a full summary report of the full Internet Governance. Before I go over to you for any questions, concerns, I would just like to quickly introduce a few people that are sitting around the room and are absolutely crucial for the project. So, Marilia, you know already. Now Glen and Hafath happen to be our two assistant curators for digital observatory, again, another kind of corporation that has evolved through our partnership with ISOC who, again, help us to localize the discussions that help us to contribute to our work whenever there is a context for it so they are both involved in this reporting at the IGF. Thank you for that. I would also like to introduce Serena who joined us full-time as a member of the Diplo team this summer. And she's based in our Malta office, one of the key carators. Last but not least, and I will quickly run across the room because I don't want to forget, is Ida, who is also one of our key curators for the digital observatory and she also happens to have been assigned the reporting from this session. So, what Ida is actually doing now, not looking at me, but she's typing like crazy not to miss a word. Is it you, Serena? You switched? Okay, sorry. So Ida was assigned so within two hours you can find the session report on our website so both Ida and Serena are really key curators. I hope there's no hiding curator here that I forgot to mention. Thank you for your attention. That's it for now. Over to you. If you ask a question, please introduce yourself and if we have any questions from the remote participants, just indicate to me. We have two questions. One in the back then we will go to you. Thank you. >> Hi. My name is Jivan. I'm the head of the Estonian mission in Geneva and sometimes researcher as well. I see there's a great value in what you do in terms of people being informed at any given moment. But I see great value and possibilities in this being a great research tool as well. And especially if you can go back to past IGFs and do the same thing that you've done for this for other IGFs and perhaps connect it with the little tabs and make a little knowledge base around this so that they can see the development of policies and development of positions. I think there was like a very interesting debate that has developed in several different places on looking back and what were the positions of actors and this. What was -- how was this policy presented? Then, this IGF during the WSIS. And I think that we have gaps because perhaps different places have different knowledge and if you're doing this from now on, it's great that you keep doing it. But if it's possible it look at transcripts from past IGF, I know it's a big project, but worth it. Something to throw at you as a possibility. But otherwise great stuff. Really valuable stuff. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you, Jivan. It's a great idea. This is the second IGF we are doing this from and we do hope we will do our best to make this sustainable in ensuring this kind of support for the future IGFs. Digging back sounds great. Maybe over the weekend. (inaudible) Yeah, it is a great idea. I agree with you. Thank you. Can I ask for your question? >> My name is Andrew, school of economics. Thank you for all things you're doing. It's great and amazing, of course. And I believe that after this session you will have much more ups than previously -- help than previously and personally, I will try to do something to support this. Maybe to organize the hub. We will discuss this. Just to say something, thank you very much. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Andre, that's really kind of you. Thank you very much and we would certainly be happy to discuss further the Moscow hub because in rusha -- >> We will discuss it. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you. >> Thank you for this occasion to let us discuss about the differentiation. In fact, I'm impressed about this small -- I can say that working days and night, and I really wanted to see such inspiring, let's say, engine, who is great and a kind of knowledge. And they think that based on the fact that kind of work and the acts of collaboration between north and south for the region, based on the sustainability of SDG number 17, which is collaboration with different, let's say, small cells creating knowledge, you know that we have a big vision, which is knowledge creation. So we still miss content in Ar abic. All the internet, when it comes to content in Arabic so I think it's great to see, how can we collaborate? We know that your resources are limited but you're doing a good job and we see that DiploFoundation is impacting Tunisia in the grass roots. And we hope that in the future, we see, somehow collaboration. I heard today that you are translating the content from English to Portuguese. Why not expand it to Arabic because it's one of the engines that many and many technical staff, academics, et cetera are working on and wishing how to create in the future. Version, a kind of curriculum when it comes to Internet Governance in our University, to help our student with this skills of Internet Governance and depth engine for outreach and to help under small Internet Governance. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you. Thank you, Hafet. Thank you and we certainly would like to discuss how to spill this over. Shita was in Indonesia. >> SHITA LAKSMI: Thank you. Actually, the same from the gentleman. I'm kind of envy that Luca has access to translate the hub into Portuguese. We understand from the next people we're access through the internet are non- native speakers, so I think it would be very nice if the GIP have also been translated into the other languages. I think in Indonesia we have discussion about making it into regional ones, Asia or Asia Pacific because we don't have resources as well to do that. We are so focused on ourselves so not focused on others so it would be nice to start the discussions with dip low whether to spread them out into more bigger countries as well. Thank you. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: This sounds also encouraging. Thank you, and we certainly would like to continue in this conversation. Are there any other questions a the this moment? So, if not, then I suggest you get your agendas out now, and note down Thursday 7:00 p.m. local time in bilateral room 1, that's its biggest bilateral room. So not the workshop room, but the bilateral room. We have a kind of informal gathering of Diplo alumni. Diplo alumni is currently over 5,000 people, but we will not have that many. It's more exclusive meeting unfortunately only for those of us here where we would like to get together. I can promise some wine and refreshments and we will connect it with the launch of the new addition of the introduction to Internet Governance book. Some of you may be familiar with the book which is kind of our signature publication and introductory text on Internet Governance. So, we have worked hard to, certify evenna has really been instrumental in these efforts supporting the main author, Jovan Corbalia, our director in completing the seventh edition of this book in time for the IGF. The book has been up until now translated in ten languages. For this year, we have managed only in English, and by the way, translated in Spanish. So tomorrow, we will be launching it officially. Everybody, unless there are 5,000 people coming, will get a copy of the book. So, please join us tomorrow. Otherwise, just you know, to quickly touch the base on some of the other sessions that we will be part of and here, I will ask my colleagues to compliment, because I know you're speaking in other sessions which I might not be over. But super quickly, tomorrow at 9:00 in the morning we will have a workshop in observatories where we will be discussing with some of the other online observatory initiatives with how we work together and trying to get feedback from the community of what the demands actually are, so it's tomorrow at 9:00. Op Friday, we will be involved -- well, let's stick to Thursday. Mareiia, Roxanna, Serena, any sessions you would like to quickly point out because we have about four minutes left. >> Thank you, sorry, again. Tomorrow, I think from 12 or 1,215. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Any address sessions on Thursday or Friday? >> There is a session tomorrow on cyber norms in the afternoon. I will be speaking and we will discuss how to make a closer connection between security discussions and Internet Governance. How to bridge the gap. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Excellent. Roxanna, there will be two sessions on Friday. One of them will be on how to assure multistakeholder legitimacy. It will be kind of a working type of session, workshop, and I'll be involved in moderating one of the group discussions so join us. It should be quite creative. Last but not least, there is an open forum of Indonesia. Cindy, would you like to say a few words? >> Sure. We are proud to have our first forum on Friday, December 9, 2016 at 1:30 I believe in workshop seven. We will discuss democracy and we are glad to have Riza as one of our panelists and hope to see you there. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: So I hope we haven't forgotten anything. Stay tuned. Sub vibe to our mailing list through that channel, you get all the information because there is a lot going on. Thank you for all the support. If there is anything else -- >> Yeah, I just want to add something. So we have been engaged in the region. Special thanks to Hanane Boujemi who is here with us. Thank you. >> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you very much everybody for spending here the last session on day three, or day 2, actually. But, you know, third day of this very busy week. We really hope to see you all tomorrow. I suggest you also look into Glen's amazing clicker sight for a future photo coveragure of this year's Internet Governance. If you're looking for some nice photos, this is the place to go. Thank you and have a good evening. See you tomorrow. Thank you guys. (Session was concluded at 5:58 p.m. CST) ******** This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. ******** Copyright © 2016 Show/Hide Header