U.N. Agrees to Examine How Internet Is Governed

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:09:47 -0500 (EST)
From: "John F. McMullen" <observer () westnet com>

(johnmac - The picture that accompanies the following New York Times
article shows three Malaysian female delegates, replete with head scarves,
looking at a computer screen. I don't know if there was editorial intent
behind the picture but my immediate reaction was that I couldn't imagine
these three (and many other non-US delegates) being concerned with the
protection of unresticted political, cultural, and sexual expression on
the Internet. One only has to look no further than the Nicholas Kristof
column on Chinese Chatroom Censorship that I posted a few days ago
(re-posted below) to see the way some other governments "control the
Internet". This would not be accepted here and should not be).

From the New York Times --
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/15/technology/15divide.html

U.N. Agrees to Examine How Internet Is Governed
By JENNIFER L. SCHENKER

GENEVA, Dec. 13 - For the United States and some other industrial nations,
the most significant development at the United Nations conference on the
Internet may have been what did not happen.

In the four-day conference, which ended Friday, the industrialized powers
had feared that developing nations would vote for the United Nations to
take administrative control of the Internet and call for a new pool of
money to help poorer countries go online - money that industrial nations
presumably would be expected to provide.

Instead, the delegates agreed that a United Nations working group should
be set up to examine whether to introduce more international oversight of
the Internet's semiformal administrative bodies. Those bodies include
Icann, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a company
under contract to the United States Commerce Department that coordinates
Internet addresses and some other technical issues.

Another United Nations committee will be set up to review ways of paying
for efforts to connect the world's poor to the Internet.

Industrialized countries pushed for and won an endorsement of intellectual
property rights as well as human rights and media freedom.

The leader of the United States' delegation, David Gross, said the
conference outcome meant that private sector interests would not lose
their stake in how the Internet is governed, although they would have to
make more room at the table for other stakeholders. "We are still
listening, very carefully, about how that might be done," Mr. Gross said.

The United States nonetheless took its lumps at the conference.

"Even if it is not true, there is a perception that the U.S. government is
running the Internet," said Eli M. Noam, who is the head of the Institute
for Tele-Information at Columbia University and was a session moderator at
the conference.

Many public comments were similar to those expressed by Shashi Tharoor,
the United Nations under secretary general for information and
communications, who said in an interview, "Unlike the French Revolution,
the Internet revolution has lots of liberty, some fraternity and no
equality."

According to the International Telecommunications Union, the United
Nations agency that organized the conference, only 1 percent of people in
the world's poorest countries are connected to the Internet. To illustrate
the gap between rich and poor countries, the agency noted that the 450,000
residents of Luxembourg have more Internet capacity than Africa's 760
million people.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/13/opinion/13KRIS.html

OP-ED COLUMNIST
Coffee, Tea or Freedom?
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

BEIJING

Impressed by the boom in Internet chat rooms in China, I conducted an
experiment this week to test the limits of free speech.

On several of these chat rooms I tried to post a message, in Chinese and
seemingly from an ordinary Chinese, declaring, "Why is Prime Minister Wen
Jiabao off in America kowtowing to the imperialists when he should be
solving more important problems at home!"

That was censored. I tried again, posting a more subdued version  and,
again, it was censored. So my third version was milder yet: "Prime
Minister Wen Jiabao's visit to America has been very successful, but I
wonder if perhaps he is wasting too much time abroad instead of focusing
on our own important problems like unemployment."

That turned out to be what Chinese journalists call a cabianqiu, after the
term for a Ping-Pong ball that just nicks the corner of the table: legal
by a whisker. The censors didn't intervene, and I successfully posted that
comment in three chat rooms.

So that's the frontier of free speech in China in the information age, and
it reflects real progress. Sure, the thought police toss Internet
dissidents in prison, with 66 Chinese journalists and Web scribblers
currently behind bars, some facing torture and beatings. Still, this is
pretty much the first time since the 1980's that the Chinese have had
public forums in which they can (very delicately) criticize top national
leaders by name.

China's new emperor, President Hu Jintao, is presiding over this twilight
zone and trying hard  rather successfully  to convince the population that
he's a new kind of leader. Most Chinese I talk to are very impressed by
Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen, who project a humility and compassion very different
from the pomposity of the former emperor, Jiang Zemin. My guess is that
Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen would win a free election if it was offered.

Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen are relentlessly photographed feeling the pain of the
poor and the underdog. Most important, they have begun to address AIDS in
a serious way.

Yet as I travel around China and talk to everyone from peasants to senior
officials, I'm afraid the leaders' strategy will fail and ultimately lead
to upheavals in the coming years. The reason is that China has always
operated to some degree on fear, and that fear is now eroding. Chinese
don't protest when they are most upset, but when they think they can get
away with it: that has been true of every upheaval from the 1956 Hundred
Flowers outpouring of complaints all the way to the Tiananmen Square
democracy movement of 1989.

Ever since the Tiananmen movement was brutally crushed, China has been
fairly stable because its leaders and its citizens have each been a bit
afraid of the other. But the fear has steadily ebbed, and my guess is that
henceforth fewer overtaxed peasants or laid-off workers will suffer in
silence.

"This Mr. Nice Guy approach won't work," a senior government official
warned. "You can't govern by pretending to be nice to everybody. You've
got to make hard choices. You've got to maintain control."

China is not Communist any more. It increasingly resembles the kind of
complex (and corrupt) society that led to turbulence in South Korea and
Taiwan in the 1970's and 1980's. One window into the country's changing
values came this fall when President Hu's daughter, Hu Haiqing, married
one of the country's leading Internet capitalists, Mao Daolin, in Hawaii.

The government is simply losing control of China, which now has 78 million
Internet surfers and 250 million mobile phones. It's true that the middle
class now has a stake in the system and may be wary of Tiananmen-style
mass movements, but there are also deep grievances, especially among
peasants and laborers.

The decline of fear is welcome, of course, but it's also going to mean a
bumpy road ahead. In a city in Manchuria, I stopped in a small restaurant
and ordered a cup of coffee. The waiter asked whether I wanted Nescaf,
Maxim coffee, Swiss coffee, Brazilian coffee, Blue Mountain coffee,
mountain-grown coffee, mocha coffee, iced coffee or Italian cappuccino. I
can't help feeling that when people get multiple choices in ordering a cup
of coffee, it's only a matter of time before they demand choices in
national politics.

So I think that the long calm that followed Tiananmen is ending. Exciting
times are coming to China again.


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use
has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The
'johnmacsgroup' Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a
'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of
the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for
purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

   "When you come to the fork in the road, take it" - L.P. Berra
   "Always make new mistakes" -- Esther Dyson
   "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard
   "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
    -- Arthur C. Clarke
   "Bobby Layne never lost a game. Time just ran out." -- Doak Walker
                          John F. McMullen
   johnmac () acm org johnmac () cyberspace org johnmac () m-net arbornet org
         johnmac () tmail com johnmac () panix com johnmac () echonyc com
              ICQ: 4368412 AIM & Yahoo Messenger: johnmac13
                  http://www.westnet.com/~observer 

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/