[governance] Rights issues in Azerbaijan / What will CS @ Baku do?

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> Is GISWatch2009 a commercial venture, and displaying a poster outside
> it's allocated room?

[Milton L Mueller] Roland,
There is no serious doubt about the fact that China objected to Deibert's book launch because Deibert's work has really put Chinese censorship (and its cyber-espionage) into the spotlight. For example, there was no targeting of or objecting to my book launch, in Vilnius, even though it also contains material critical of China, simply because my stuff hasn't gotten the massive publicity that Deibert's exposure of Ghost net  did. 

To call Deibert's book a "commercial venture" is pretty ridiculous given that it's an academic press and is about dissemination of ideas rather than profit. Of course, you have to pay for books because they cost money, but that does not a commercial venture make, any more than APC's fundraising oriented reception-release of its GIS program is commercial. IGF staff at various levels have all but admitted to me that as an intergovernmental entity the UN is constrained in this way.

> I'm trying hard not to take sides here, but to the extent that I think
> the stated problem was [unapproved] *commercial* banners, and outside
> the room, what happened in both cases could be consistent with that
> rule.

[Milton L Mueller] See above. APC's reception was not in a room, it was in an area that was not enclosed, and thus the banner could be seen by any passerby. ONI simply put their banner outside the room so that people looking for it, or interested in it, would know where it was. This had happened before, it was not until China made an issue of it that a rule was suddenly invented and enforced. (Isn't it ridiculous to be debating this?)

> Do you at least agree it wasn't a "workshop"? I know it sounds pedantic,

[Milton L Mueller] It was a reception with food. And your point is...?

> but attention to details like this can be very important. I recall a
> discussion which went on for days, and was vitally important to several
> stakeholders, about whether a particular ITU resolution should mention
> "members" or "Members" [of the ITU], such is the playing field we work
> on.

[Milton L Mueller] It may be, but it is both unnecessary to make excuses or to invent post-hoc justifications for actions that are clearly intended to suppress the disseminations of critical ideas. 

Look, Roland, the IGF is supposed to be about fostering exchanges of ideas and networking among stakeholders. It is indisputable that the policies and practices you are retroactively inventing justifications for do neither. They are fundamentally at cross-purposes with the mission of the IGF. And if your response is that the UN system must act this way, then let's find a better space for these interactions. 



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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