[WSIS CS-Plenary] U.S. worried about Tunis phase? Perhaps.

[Richard Vincent]

A short but interesting WSIS story has been published in the Washington Post with a 13 October dateline: < http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/12/AR2005101202210.html >. The title is "U.S. May Face World at Internet Governance Summit".

The story states that "the United Nations-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society could be the scene of an international brawl, with some claiming that the core freedoms and integrity of the global network are at risk."  An international brawl?  Reference is to the United States stand on Internet governance and ownership.  The story notes that some countries, particularly those in the South, are objecting to the ongoing U.S. supremacy of the Internet.  The article boldly notes that "the United States is having none of it."

The attributed reason is that the U.S. "suspects that some of these governments want to try to control the Internet to stifle free expression and preserve dictatorial control."  The article adds that "Iran, China, Saudi Arabia and Brazil have been especially vocal." The article adds that the matter became further complicated by the European Union's infuriating endorsement of the idea of international authority last month.

David A. Gross, coordinator of International Communications and Information Policy at the State Department. Gross said "the United States would not accept any other entity taking on oversight of ICANN, no matter what may happen at the conference in Tunisia." "We are firm in our position," he said. "This is not a negotiation."

I find the above article revealing for until now the U.S. press has published virtually no stories on the WSIS.  The New York Times has published just one story since 2001; and the Washington Post has done four, with two of these this October and the month is only half over!  Most other papers, national as well as regional, have published not a single article since 2001.  Given this overall absence of news stories, I find the present Post article interesting, and possibly revealing.  

I wonder if this may reflect a change in strategy on behalf of the State Department where it heretofore has largely ignored the summit.  It may be that the U.S. now feels threatened by what has been going on in the WSIS dialogue and decided to adopt a more aggressive stance during the Tunis phase; at least as far as Internet governance is concerned.  Finally, the allegation that interests wish to "stifle free expression and preserve dictatorial control" is a clear reflection of earlier U.S. rhetoric from the UNESCO sponsored NWICO debate of the 1970s.  In that case, stories and Op Ed pieces were strategically planted in major U.S. papers to stimulate debate and win support of the U.S. news community and other opinion leaders.  Any way, I believe this merits watching since the U.S. delegation was almost nonexistent during the entire 2003 Geneva phase of the summit.

Warm Regards,

Rick Vincent
Department of Communication
Indiana State University



Dr. Richard C. Vincent
Professor 
Department of Communication
Indiana State University
Terre Haute, IN 47809
U.S.A.

email: rvincent at indstate.edu
telephone: +1 812 237-3246
fax: +1 812 237-3217