[WSIS CS-Plenary] UN at odds over internet's future

[William Drake]

Hi,

As I said at the report presentation Monday, this is an annoying problem, but it is primarily with respect to some "journalists," pundits, bloggers, etc. who are firmly wed to the evil-UN-run-by-dictators-wants-to-control-your-Internet theme; the Srebrenica article I mentioned was simply one of the more appalling examples.  I don't know that the secretariat could have done anything, really, to steer them back to earth, or that it would have been politically smart for it to try.  They were navigating between a lot of government sensibilities throughout this process, and this drove a lot of stuff that might seem weird or ill-considered.

Best,

Bill





-----Original Message-----
From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]On Behalf Of Bertrand de La Chapelle
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 4:33 PM
To: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Subject: Re: [WSIS CS-Plenary] UN at odds over internet's future



  The other approach from the press is basically the UN versus US battle.

  Unfortunately this only reflects the fact that the group did not devote attention to the framing of its public presentation but left the press to define its own understanding from the document itself. No doubt they went to the simplistic presentation. 

  I'm afraid the opportunity has been missed to emphqsize the originality of the group, the approach it took and how it considers its report as a positive outcome.

  Bertrand

   
  On 7/19/05, Jacqueline Morris <jacqueline.morris at gmail.com> wrote: 
    [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people. Your cooperation is highly appreciated] 
    _______________________________________

    Interesting - as a member of the WGIG I thought that group consensus
    since February on providing multiple options in the report to the
    Prepcom to negotiate with was reaching an agreement.... obviously I 
    misunderstood the meaning of the word "agreement"! Seems the only
    meaning for "agreement" is to have only one option available.
    Jacqueline Morris

    On 7/18/05, Robert Guerra < rguerra at lists.privaterra.org> wrote:
    > [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people. Your cooperation is highly appreciated] 
    > _______________________________________
    >
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4692743.stm
    >
    > A UN group charged with deciding how the net should be run has failed 
    > to reach a decision.
    > The group's report suggests four possible futures for net governance
    > that range from no change to complete overhaul.
    > The proposals will go forward to a key UN net and society conference 
    > due to take place in November.
    >
    > The report comes as the US says it plans to keep its role as overseer
    > of the net's core administrative body.
    >
    > [snipped]
    >
    > --
    > Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
    > Managing Director, Privaterra <http://www.privaterra.org>
    >
    > 
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Plenary mailing list
    > Plenary at wsis-cs.org
    > http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
    >


    --
    ______________________
    Jacqueline Morris
    www.carnivalondenet.com
    T&T Music and videos online 
    _______________________________________________
    Plenary mailing list
    Plenary at wsis-cs.org
    http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050720/3b90c476/attachment.html