As Kenyans switched to digital platforms to watch the events of June 25 following the shutdown of television signals by the Communications Authority of Kenya, a global conversation on governing the Internet was taking place in Lillestrom, Norway.
The weeklong Internet Governance Forum, which concludes today, is an annual United Nations event that brings together representatives of government, civil society, technology companies, religious entities and creatives to discuss important issues and priorities for the shared resource.
This year’s theme is: Building digital governance together, and the subthemes focus on digital trust and resilience, sustainable and responsible innovation, universal access and digital rights, and digital cooperation.
The benefits of the Internet are immense. Great innovations and examples of the Internet being put to good use were on display.
But a lot has gone wrong with this space. It calls for a reset, as some of the eminent speakers pointed out during the opening ceremony on Tuesday.
Powerful, captivating speeches from heads of state, civic society leaders. Elephants in the room included artificial intelligence (AI), the dominance and control of the technology value chain by a few powerful companies, and the American government’s opposition to regulation.
Mr Antonio Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General, set the pace by calling for the bridging of the digital divide by expanding affordable and meaningful Internet access and closing the digital skills gap. He asked the international community to counter online hate speech, promote information integrity, tolerance and respect, address the concentration of digital power, and foster diversity, transparency and trust in digital spaces.
The Holy See also sent a representative who spoke strongly about putting the human being at the heart of innovation and deploying technology, particularly AI, ethically.
“We renew the call for the Internet, and all emerging technologies, to be guided by our shared values, common rules and our awareness that the human being is at the centre,” said Father Adrian Ruiz, the Secretary for Dicastery for Communication at the Holy See.
Other speeches, panel discussions, presentations and fireside chats emphasised what needs fixing. Most of the talk was nearly pathological, and rightly so. The sessions focused on the effect of the Internet and allied technology on privacy, safety (mainly of children), security, competition and fair trade. The predictions point to doom and gloom: the Internet is enhancing dependency and exploitation.
The discussion on editorial media dwelt on the dependencies they face in the backbone, platform, web and AI infrastructures of the Internet, delving into issues like how concentrated ownership of the Internet’s infrastructure affects a free and resilient news media.
Concern was raised about the risk of the technology companies prioritising or deprioritising data flows, creating choke points where governments or companies could interfere with the transmission of independent journalism, especially during crises or conflicts, or enable censorship-by-infrastructure by denying media houses access and through bandwidth throttling.
The lack of transparency and accountability by technology platform owners and the potential impact of AI on journalism were tackled. A call for adherence to the principles of public interest, accountability and transparency, and fair pay was made.
Like the media, creatives, represented by Hollywood producer Joseph Gordon-Levitt, highlighted the injustice of technology companies that do not pay individuals for their data.
However, in the middle of all the concerns about the ugly side of the internet, Wednesday’s Gen Z-led protests in more than 20 counties, and the government’s decision to shut down live television coverage, highlighted one of the greatest benefits of the Internet that is rarely discussed.
As the world focuses mainly on the negative impacts of the Internet and technology—never mind the immense opportunities that have been created for innovation and entrepreneurship, networking and knowledge exchange—we risk losing site of how technology is enabling civic liberties and frustrating autocratic decisions.
The decision by the Communication Authority to switch off television signals after station managers defied an unlawful directive to stop live coverage of the protests was from an old and tired playbook. Did they think that shutting down transmission signals would amount to a news blackout? Clearly, someone at the authority did not contemplate the meaning of the switch from analogue to digital television. They might as well employ the Moi regime’s tactic of disabling printing presses or buying newspapers to block access to content.
The government will now have to think twice before it threatens television stations with a shutdown because the impact of the action is negligible, especially in this era of high Internet connectivity.
Kudos to the television station managers who directed their audiences to their digital platforms and continued the live broadcasts. These enabled viewers to see the excesses by the police and the protesters in real time. Where a blackout would have enabled excesses, the live coverage enabled citizens to enjoy their right to information. Journalism prospers where the public has access to information.
Technology has empowered the masses more, and curtailed the State’s powers to deny them access to information. It has proved to be a tool for positive social change.
Granted, myriad challenges abound, and the Internet needs fixing. However, these challenges should be addressed to enhance its benefits. Protecting the public from harm on the Internet should happen simultaneously with improving access and enhancing security.
The role of the Internet in enabling civic space is important. It must foreground conversations on Internet governance. As stakeholders discuss the challenges, they must also find ways to protect the open public spaces, consolidate the gains, and ensure that these are enjoyed by all people across the world, in the spirit of equity.
Contact the Public Editor to raise ethical concerns or request a review of published material. Reach out: [email protected]
