<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=iso-8859-1"><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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Optima;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* 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.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'>I am skeptical of this enterprise for a variety of reasons but even within that skepticism the more or less complete absence of issues/topics in the proposed ToC relating to ICTs and Development—the major point of WSIS after all--is particularly egregious. This and the fact that virtually no one (with the possible exception of Nnenna) commenting on the proposal seems to have noticed, only points to how far CS in IG has regressed from any connection with its roots in a concern for social justice in the context of the Information Society.<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"'> Forum [mailto:forum-bounces@justnetcoalition.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, December 08, 2014 2:20 PM<br><b>To:</b> Governance IGC; Wolfgang Kleinwächter<br><b>Cc:</b> forum Org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [JNC - Forum] [governance] From Confusion to Clarification<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Optima","serif";color:black'>Wolfgang,</span></span><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Optima","serif";color:black'><br><br><br></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Following up on your original idea and suggestion of an e-book, and as you suggested Ian to be the Editor for the project, why not ask Ian to elaborate a bit more about his vision of the work to be done. Ian mentioned the media alliance project and I have been looking into it. It is absolutely fascinating. "New World Information Order" in the 70's with incredible guts! It deserves everyone's respect.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On a very personal note, I would definitely appreciate you encouraging Ian to move on his vision for the suggested project. That could ignite further constructive debate and work from the participants.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>JC<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I cannot refrain to quote this from the Media Alliance <a href="http://www.media-alliance.org/article.php?id=472">website</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>The published results of this UNESCO project became perhaps the most maliciously attacked volume (pre-Rushdie) in the twentieth century. Named for the chairman of the commission, Sean MacBride (founder of Amnesty International, great Irish patriot, son of Maude Gonne, the only person to win both the Lenin and Nobel Peace Prizes, and whose tireless efforts for justice in the world only ended with his death at age 92), </span></span><em><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>The MacBride Report: Many Voices, One World</span></em><span class=apple-style-span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>, dared to propose ways in which other voices could be heard. It saw the essentially "one-way" flow of information as a problem to be reckoned with and contained suggestions for making media production accessible throughout the world.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Le 29 nov. 2014 à 04:11, Ian Peter a écrit :<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>WTF? You want CSCG (JNC, BB, IGC, NCSG APC etc) to write a book on CS perspectives on IG for CSTD in May or perhaps IGF?<br><br>With no acronyms?<br><br>But seriously I think it is a good idea to produce something like this. As long as its a genuine collaborative effort.<br><br>Perhaps it could be called "Many Voices, One World" in memory of the thwarted 1980 attempt to provide alternative perspectives on issues of media and governance in that era.<br><br>(A good summary of the 1980 events - something we should all be aware of - can be found in the first part of the article here <a href="http://www.media-alliance.org/article.php?id=472">http://www.media-alliance.org/article.php?id=472</a> )<br><br>Well there goes any suggestion of my involvement in an editorial role unless you want the work to be banned... but I am happy to support this idea!<br><br><br><br>Ian Peter<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>-----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"<br>Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 6:21 PM<br>To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a> ; michael gurstein ; <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a> ; <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>Subject: [governance] From Confusion to Clarification<br><br>Hi everybody<br><br>After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.<br>This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity.<br><br>Here is a proposal how to move forward: We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.<br><br>I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook”. This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:<br><br>1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)<br>2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)<br>3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)<br>4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)<br><br>Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.<br><br>Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.<br><br>We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process.<br><br>The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.<br><br>Any comment?<br><br>Wolfgang<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, visit:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br>For all other list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a> <br><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, visit:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br>For all other list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>