<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Thanks Gene, the framing that I did was to point to specific identified "stakeholders" in the multi-stakeholder process… I don't think/see "experts" or "academics' as "experts" or "academics" as being specific stakeholders i.e. as having a specific "stake" separate from any of the existing group of stakeholders… Rather I see them as advisors/contributors to the activities/positioning of the other identified stakeholders--governments, the private sector, civil society, the technical community--each of whom I understand as having interests/values which are specific to them and their grouping…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>But others might disagree…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Gene Kimmelman [mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, December 23, 2012 5:46 PM<br><b>To:</b> michael gurstein<br><b>Cc:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits@lists.igcaucus.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [bestbits] Multi-stakeholderim, Civil Society and Astroturfing/Stakeholder Capture<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>This is a very helpful framing Michael. All of these issues related to legitimacy of various types of groups, transparency of funding, and refinement of multi-stakeholder definitions are most welcome. But I'm curious that you leave out so-called "experts" and "academics" who also have historically played a significant role in these discussions, but may not have been subject to the same rigorous vetting that you're suggesting for organizations. My sense is that these categories of civil society participation are subject to the exact same financial and political forces you describe for other elements of civil society.<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Dec 23, 2012, at 5:39 PM, michael gurstein wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>One, among the many thoughts that arise from listening to the ISOC/USG post-mortem is the role and significance of multi-stakeholderism in Internet governance. This was mentioned by all of the discussants--the US Ambassador, ISOC and someone who identified themselves as speaking from civil society.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Both in this discussion and more broadly, as the significance of the WCIT is<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/wcit-lots-of-losers-but-guess-who-won/">discussed and blogged</a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>there is emerging the broad understanding of the central role that Civil Society of necessity plays in multi-stakeholderism--i.e. that without an active, engaged Civil Society there can be no "multi-stakeholderism".<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>There is also emerging a further recognition of the central role (through multi-stakeholderism) that CS has going forward in overall global Internet governance. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>As everyone knows there are huge, even overwhelming financial (and other, for example, security) interests involved in these global Internet governance processes and their outcomes.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>The experience has been that where such interests/outcomes are involved there are likely to be attempts by various parties to influence these processes and their participants in both legitimate and illegitimate ways. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>One of the illegitimate ways for exerting such influence, that has fairly recently found a name is what is being called "astroturfing" defined as "apparently grassroots-based citizen groups or coalitions that are primarily conceived, created and/or funded by corporations, industry trade associations, political interests or public relations firms".<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Astroturf">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Astroturf</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Another such process is called "regulatory capture" -- although in this instance it might be renamed as "stakeholder capture". This is defined: "Regulatory (stakeholder) capture occurs when a regulatory (stakeholder) agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or special concerns of interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. Regulatory (stakeholder) capture is a form of government (multi-stakeholder governance) failure... "<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>I think that it is quite likely that CS will become a venue for such astroturfing and attempted "capture" (if this hasn't already been occuring) and including by governments who will look to create or enable what appear to be CS stakeholder organizations but which in fact, function rather as non-formal spokespersons for national and/or corporate interests.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>For multi-stakeholderism and particularly for CS to have an effect and role in independently representing the public interest some effective means will need to be established (and quickly) to ensure that participants in these processes purporting to "be" or to "represent" Civil Society are neither captured nor astroturfed. In the absence of this, the much praised "multi-stakeholder global Internet governance model" will die stillborn, lacking any form of credibility or legitimacy.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black'>Mike<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>