[governance] IGF relevance?

Fouad Bajwa fouadbajwa at gmail.com
Fri Apr 15 15:38:27 EDT 2011 

Not exactly. As I read through the book, I learn another perspective
and if one would continuously take the stance of neglecting the
diversity of views, there would be nothing interesting to read? So I
like the idea of reading through and learning how this writer
approaches what he is trying to prove and where he heads with it.

I've gone through other books as well on IG and have almost all the
ones out there in my collection and everyone has a perspective of
their own and where they come from takes time to understand. Its good
to see some different material by a non-US or not your typical
Internet issues writer :o)

Now I am getting more interested in this after reading Milton's review
and Charles comment. This guy really does have an interesting edge to
him and I am happy reading some non-US and what the FCC says is the
way content here :o)

-- FoO

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Charles Mok (gmail)
<charlespmok at gmail.com> wrote:
> I concur with Milton. I bought this book by mistake on my Kindle and it is a
> waste of my money.  To me, it is a well-tried tactic of writing an opposite,
> sensationalist view, and it is bound to sell books.  That's all.  For this
> level of flawed arguments, I am actually quite amused by the level of
> attention he got.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Fouad
>> I've reviewed Morozov's flawed arguments in detail here.
>> http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/1/13/4726219.html
>>
>> all I have time to say for now.
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Fouad Bajwa [mailto:fouadbajwa at gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 9:33 AM
>> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Carlos A. Afonso
>> > Cc: Milton L Mueller; cstd at igf-online.net
>> > Subject: Re: [governance] IGF relevance?
>> >
>> > Hi Milton, you give a mixed opinion. By the way this would be of
>> > interest to you:
>> >
>> > The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World
>> > by Evgeny Morozov
>> > http://www.amazon.com/Net-Delusion-How-Liberate-
>> > World/dp/1846143535/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt
>> >
>> > Synopsis: "Does free information mean free people?
>> > At the start of the twenty-first century we were promised that the
>> > internet would liberate the world. We could come together as never
>> > before, and from Iran's 'twitter revolution' to Facebook 'activism',
>> > technological innovation would spread democracy to oppressed peoples
>> > everywhere.
>> >
>> > We couldn't have been more wrong. In The Net Delusion Evgeny Morozov
>> > destroys this myth, arguing that 'internet freedom' is an illusion,
>> > and that technology has failed to help protect people's rights. Not
>> > only that -- in many cases the internet is actually helping
>> > authoritarian regimes.
>> >
>> > From China to Russia to Iran, oppressive governments are using
>> > cyberspace to stifle dissent: planting clandestine propaganda,
>> > employing sophisticated digital censorship and using online
>> > surveillance. We are all being manipulated in more subtle ways too --
>> > becoming pacified by the net, instead of truly engaging.
>> >
>> > This book is a wake-up call. It shows us how our misplaced faith in
>> > cyber-utopia means the West risks missing the real challenges. Morozov
>> > argues that we must look at other ways of promoting democracy abroad,
>> > and forces us -- policymakers and citizens alike -- to recognize that
>> > all our freedoms are at stake."
>> >
>> > I actually bought the book and going through it I must agree to the
>> > fact, network neutral for whom? For us, the developing world or for
>> > the developed world and why? Maybe that is the primary question that
>> > hasn't been answered at all. The debate cannot stop and the clarity
>> > has to be sought!
>> >
>> > -- Fouad
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
>> > > Milton, your argument is killed by your second phrase: "This is an
>> > > issue
>> > > that is being and will be handled by national regulatory authorities."
>> > > Yes, like crime, privacy rights and so on -- aren't so many gov
>> > > decisions on these and other issues done by simple ministerial
>> > > decrees,
>> > > directed at specific or all sectors, which are not really different
>> > > from
>> > > regulatory determinations?
>> > >
>> > > The point is not discarding wksps because the thematic field is one
>> > > regulated by the State. Is to get us (at least non-govs) a space to
>> > > exchange ideas and develop proposals on how precisely to confront
>> > > those
>> > > mechanisms and decisions from above.
>> > >
>> > > My point is that wksps are generally too academic, too
>> > > one-speaks-everyone-else-listens-(or-not), and little is left in terms
>> > > of what many of us defend for the IGF itself -- at least a consensus
>> > > around proposals for action organized in a document. For me this is
>> > > the
>> > > main problem which makes most of them useless (like a stream of
>> > > first-world phds presenting generalist views on "development and ICTs"
>> > > etc etc), not because some of the themes relate to State's regulatory
>> > > mechanisms or because the theme is already well discussed.
>> > >
>> > > frt rgds
>> > >
>> > > --c.a.
>> > >
>> > > On 04/14/2011 12:04 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> I am going to raise some eyebrows and question the decision to do a
>> > >> Network neutrality workshop. This is an issue that is being and will
>> > >> be handled by national regulatory authorities. The positions of the
>> > >> various actors and interest groups are well known and well-aired.
>> > >> Nothing the IGF says or does will have much impact on what happens in
>> > >> this space. The US Congress will probably negate the current FCC
>> > >> rules and the US will have to either pass new legislation or find
>> > >> some other way to pursue those policy goals; the IGF does not enter
>> > >> into the equation. The same can be said for Europe: the EU and
>> > >> national regulatory authorities are actively debating this, and it is
>> > >> the opinions of the nra's, DG INFO, DG MARKT and its competition law
>> > >> that matter, not IGF.
>> > >>
>> > >> On the other hand, there are developments in IP addressing that cry
>> > >> out for a global forum to work out a new policy. For some background,
>> > >> see this recent IGP blog article:
>> > >>
>> > http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/3/25/4778257.html
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > > In facing a controversial issue that seemed to require global policy
>> > > but
>> > > go beyond the mandate of ARIN, the head of ARIN recently asked on a
>> > > public list, sincerely, which venue could be used to discuss the
>> > > issue?
>> > >>
>> > >> It is abundantly clear that on a few key internet governance issues,
>> > >> ranging from Wikileaks to IP addressing there are inadequate
>> > >> globalized institutions.
>> > >>
>> > >> One reason IGF is losing relevance, is that IGF's leadership seems to
>> > >> be utterly blind when it comes to distinguishing between issues where
>> > >> it can be entrepreneurial and fill gaps in the current institutional
>> > >> environment, and issues where it has no real capacity to contribute
>> > >> anything. It seems that IGF always falls prey to the disease of UN
>> > >> organizations, which is to create opportunities for politicians and
>> > >> others who enjoy publicity to intone pleasing platitudes on gigantic
>> > >> problems which it has no capacity to solve, while completely avoiding
>> > >> the hard work of solving smaller, less glamorous problems it can
>> > >> actually do something about.
>> > >>
>> > >> --MM
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list