The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Paris, France, from 12 to 14 November 2018. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the event, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the human rights, gender and youth session. We're going to have an interesting discussion.
For setting the scene phase, to explain the sequence and the dynamics of the work for this afternoon, I would like to pass the floor to MAG member Renata Ribeiro.
>> RENATA AQUINO RIBEIRO: Welcome, everyone. I am doing a quick explanation on how the session will work. You will have the speakers here that will speak in the order that they are here from my right to left and they will each speak three minutes each and then you are the speakers.
This chair is yours. We are going to have a roving mic and we're going to walk around you and we're going to ask you for contributions and insights to this theme. Our theme is human rights, gender and youth as a direct link to Internet governance. So I really hope you feel inspired to become a speaker today and join this amazing team and we have a very fruitful discussion. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Renata. As you know, the IGF has been under severe criticism and a need for more concrete outputs over the past years. The developments that we need in digital policy is particularly important and I think we do have a couple of interesting initiatives where the forum has helped advance important policy and important questions in the realm of gender, of youth and of human rights.
So in this session here, our speakers in their first round, they're going to address three of the questions that are proposed in the panel. First is how do the themes human rights, gender and youth intersect with Internet governance primarily? The second is what has been done so far in this intersection of debate that should be highlighted in terms of policy? And the third item we're addressing is what is urgently lacking in this thematic intersection debate that should be formulated, publicized or adopted as policy. Thank you. You have the floor.
>> I maim is Madeline. We've been tasked with considering policy declarations in the digital space and we've set out sort of three main focus areas. One is that we're going to be looking at values and principles of digital cooperation which, by the way, is really refers to sort of multistakeholder collaboration around digital issues. Two, its methods and mechanisms and, three, we've outlined a series of action areas one which is going to be human rights and human agency.
Although I'm here as a speaker on the panel, my role is primarily to listen because what we're doing in this process of cocreating these policy recommendations is really to engage with stakeholders and where youth and gender really come into our work is that we're really trying to focus on underrepresented groups and making sure that their voices are incorporated into policy debates.
I'll maybe just outline a few themes that have been emerging from our consultations and from what we've been hearing. One is to focus on human rights but to pay attention to human agency as well. That means we might talk about things like access but what's really important is that we ask what kind of agency do we have to capitalize on that access? What kind of control do we have over the content we see, the way that we use digital technologies?
Two, there's a clear avoidance of tech solutionism. Making sure we talk about how we can leverage tech for good. And three, a return to analog structures of the need ‑ the protection of human rights and really needing to kind of strengthen those, to bear the digital load.
So, yeah, as I said, the important thing that I want to emphasize here is our outreach strategy and making sure that we're reaching out to underrepresented groups, in making sure that women's voices, that are traditionally marginalised are included and engaging with young people as well.
>> MODERATOR: You're addressing by those dimensions the hardest issues in multistakeholder in general and in the forum in particular.
Next for this introductory talk, I will call for John Carr. John is a researcher in child abuse and you have the floor.
>> JOHN CARR: So I'm, for those of you who weren't in the previous panel, or the previous meeting in this room, I'm representing ECPA international which is a global NGO based in Bangkok in Thailand. We have member organizations in around 120 different countries on each of the continents and have our title, our title is End Child Pornography, Child Prostitution and Child Trafficking. Some of the issues our organizations are dealing with in different countries are some of the most nitty‑gritty and darker bits of some of the most horrible things that can happen to children anywhere on or off the Internet.
Obviously, therefore, child protection, child safety, the welfare of children are a predominant concern of ECPA International and the work our members do, it would be a mistake, and it's a mistake that's often made, to assume that therefore we see the Internet only as a threat, only as a source of danger to children and young people. Quite the contrary.
We see the tremendous, positive possibilities that the technology can present to children, particularly children in underrepresented groups and marginal groups. This might be the only way in which, for example, they can access information about their rights, the only way in which they can assert those rights, gain information about health, opportunities, a whole range of things.
So we absolutely get the positive dimension of what the Internet can present to children and young people around the world.
We have as our kind of corner stone, the touchstone as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The most widely convention adopted in UN history. That charter speaks unequivocally about children's rights to access information from whatever media or from whatever source and also speaks about children's rights of assembly, rights of Association and children's rights to express themselves through whatever media might be available. We regard those rights of children to be of paramount importance. Not subordinate to, not distinct from, but of paramount importance but of course those rights only mean something if children can enjoy them meaningfully and that's only possible if the environment is as safe as it possible can be which is why we do tend to focus some of our work on aspects of protectionism and so on.
But we always try to ensure that it's in balance because you could protect children from every single potential risk in perpetuity by locking them in the living room and never letting them out of the house. That's an impractical and stupid approach and we try to reflect this by bringing a sense of balance to the work that we do.
Now I just want to talk a little bit about the Internet governance issue because that's part of what this agenda is about.
So just very quickly, I mean you might have gathered from the description of the organization, ECPA International, that some of our members are working in some very dangerous and difficult parts of the world, in some very dangerous and difficult situations. But let me talk about some of our members in Europe, for example.
Some of our member organizations in Europe, every single penny, every single dime, pound, whatever it might be, that they raise comes from the public. And when the public give this money to children's organizations, some of them get no money at all from government, when they get this money from members of the public it's because members of the public want to help these organizations to help children. Some of our members, for example, are working almost exclusively with children in refugee camps, children that have come out of Syria and the Middle East and so onto escape the war zones, who have come over the Mediterranean, many died in the attempt and are now living in terrible conditions in all kinds of danger and so on.
So our member groups are raising money to go and work with those children in those camps. It's very, very hard to tell those organizations, well actually, if you can just stop spending money on that sort of work and send John to Brazil or Australia or San Diego or wherever it might be to talk to Google and talk to Microsoft and talk to the United Nations about how the Internet should be made better for children, it just doesn't fly. It's not reasonable. It's not realistic to expect children's organizations to be able to divert resources from that type of work, or helping a child that's being sexually abused with psychotherapy, doing a class with teachers and yet that's the reality of the questions it comes down to when it comes to Internet governance.
I live in London, I'm British, getting to Paris, no big deal. But you cannot participate in many of the Internet governance structures if you don't have the money to pay the airfares, the accommodation and so on.
I know the IGF and ICANN and all of these things have scholarship schemes, but children's organizations in Britain, France, Germany, and so on, they're not equipped, they don't have the resource base to enable them to participant in many of these Internet Governance Forums. All the importance we've heard attached to this it hasn't materialized. What that says is it's not a priority because if it was a priority it would have happened.
My final illustration of this point, the statement that came out of Netmudiou. For those of you who have been around the IGF long enough, there's normally one a year but in 2014 they had an extra one and it was in Sao Paulo in Brazil. We had one budget to go to one IGF a year, we didn't have the budget to go to two. We didn't go to Sao Paolo. The statement that came out, everybody who I know in the Internet governance space says fantastic statement. The best distillation, the best expression of Internet governance principles ever to have emerged from human endeavor.
Guess what? What is the one word that is missing from that statement? Child, or children, youth, young. None of those four words appear anywhere in the statement. Why? Because there were no children's organizations or there weren't enough children's organizations in the room speaking up about it.
Now, it doesn't mean that the people who attended were bad people who didn't care about children. Of course not. But what it does mean is that the people who were there had their own agenda, their own things to do, their bosses, their companies, their organizations had sent them there with quite specific things to achieve and they achieved them, or I assume they achieved them. But nobody was there in the room concerned and focussing on children's voices, children's rights and that's why they were completely missed out.
The rights of people with disabilities were mentioned, the rights of people in underserved regions were mentioned, and I'm glad that they were. This is not a competition between disadvantaged groups. But children were not even mentioned in the statement. And that's really a serious failing on everybody's parts, I guess.
What Gerry said in the thing, nothing about us without us. I like that. I'm going to use that. That's very, very good. You need to have the voices in the room or else the voices are overlooked.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, John. Thank you very much for the effort in bringing the delicate of this balance of having access enough to inform children and that access does not jeopardize their development. Also for this very complete tackling of two of our main issues in the session which is how does the theme you work with relate to Internet governance and what is missing, what are things are missing.
Next we have Marianne Franklin from Giganet.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, I'll be speaking in English. I'll try to take it easy. I'm here and very honored to be here on the youth panel. I'm representing the global Internet governance academic network as an educator.
The first thing I want to say is intersectionality is not an academic term but what it means is we start with complexity and we do not sheer away from complexity and that's the challenge that we've been issued. I believe it's only by embracing complexity that we will move forward.
Simplicity is a tool of the dominant.
The second thing I would like to say is that there are enormous transformations happening in the higher education sector in high schools and primary schools and kindergartens and a lot of this is technology push, a lot of it is marketing, a lot of it is based on selling tools and platforms to overworked, underresourced managements to a generation that is used to going online as a matter of course.
So there are advantages to this but there's an assumption that students have a certain level of literacy, a certain level of critical skills as if these things in themselves are one size fits all. So I'm always challenged in my own classroom to figure out what students think they know, what they do know and what they are able to find out more about just in terms of operating some of these devices in ways that are not default settings.
This transformation is happening in terms of content. As the child of human rights and principles for the Internet also says, the right to education is also about the right to education on and about whatever the Internet is and what it will be. But also this is linked to our article 11 which is the right to culture and access to knowledge, which is more and more based online, much more scholarship is happening online in realtime than it used to and then it flows straight into, of course, the rights of children in online environments which my colleague will speak to.
So we can't disconnect the offline from the online and sort of silo these two ways of being in the world.
So the other thing I would like to comment on is that the IGF is a meeting, along with UNESCO meetings, ICANN meetings, ITEF meetings you name it. The archives that are being built and archived and channels are now things people want to find more about. So an extraordinary array of methodologies are being applied to the very words I'm now speaking using digital tools, using discourse analysis, using critical gender‑based discourse analysis, looking at our demographics on this panel and asking where are the children under 15, asking where are the students. Are there enough of them?
So this is now an object of research and we should be conscious of this as we meet.
So the next generation is already looking at this generation. I would like to keep within the three minutes, I horribly am not but my last comment is I would like to commend the Internet Governance Forum, the MAG and secretariat for the hard work over the last 10 years to make participation possible through use of technologies. I know WebEx, the platform we use has come under criticism for a number of reasons.
I have my students signed on. People are able to participate who cannot afford the plane fair. There's still a long way to go. There's still a long way of levels that we can include that participation on. This is the one UN hosted meeting where it's taken seriously to deploy technologies to allow and enhance access and participation in very real ways. So I would just like to commend everyone here.
But let's at the end of the day let people make their own minds up, whether they're 3, whether they're 13, whether they're 23, whether they're 93. Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Marianne, for the strong inclusion message.
Next we have Minda Moreira from the Dynamic Coalition on Internet Rights and Principles. Minda, once again relation with ‑ how does it relate to Internet governance? What has been done? What is yet to do? Thank you very much, you have the floor.
>> MINDA MOREIRA: Thank you, and I'm representing the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition which is part of the IGF, so Internet Governance Forum. This is an open network of individual and organizations which are committed to make human rights and principles work for the online environment.
Our main document, Marianne has referred and is the charter of human rights and principles for the Internet. It was published in 2011 and is now translated into ten languages, I think, yes, ten languages including my own language which is Portuguese.
We are pleased to see the human rights, gender and youth main session finally here at IGF. These are very important issues that our coalition and others within the IGF community have been discussing over the last decade. Gender equality and children youth rights resonate as well with the work that we have been doing and this takes me to a young person that I know called Ava.
She can't read or write and she can't count past 10 or 20. She doesn't fully grasp concepts of good and bad and if you tell her she's a human she will possibly deny because she's only big girl. But she can unlock a smart device to look at pictures, listen to songs or to visit YouTube to see her favourite Peppa Pig character and she's 3 years old.
My point here is smarter network technologies are natural environment for all the young generations and digital natives.
Safe and protected environment should go hand in hand with empowerment. I think that empowering young people is a very important focus and that's my main point here as well. It's important that the rights to access information is fully enabled and that they are able to have a voice and to share ideas in the online environment and that this is free from hate speech, bullying and disproportionate data collection.
In article 12, the rights of children and the Internet, and we have the right to benefit from the Internet, the freedom from exploitation and child abuse, the rights to have the views heard and finally, the best interests of the child.
So I think these are all important issues and as Ava grows into adulthood, I hope that our work in promoting gender equality through the charter will enable Ava, as a young woman, to be able to fully participate in the online environment as per our article 2 on the right to nondiscrimination and Internet access use and governance and gender equality. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Minda. That was a really strong thread of messages towards the protection of child and youth. In the end for the past two speakers resolve into an instrument which is a concrete output of government measures. Moving onto Lilian Nalwoga.
>> LILIAN NALWOGA: Bringing more women online, I think I have more questions than answers, and my questions is how do we get more women online? How do we get more women into policy discussions?
When I was before coming here, I received several requests from different session organizers to, you know, comment to them. Speakers, mainly speakers from Africa but gender who can speak on issues of security and that sort of thing and really struggled to get these names. Whichever name that would come across was a man. So there's still a huge challenge.
When I look at the theme of this year's IGF we are looking at the Internet and trust but we're looking as women, do we trust the Internet. There's a lot of gender‑based violence online and it hasn't been addressed to the level to which we want it to be addressed.
The other issue is I'd like to recommend that in March there was an online activity where there was a Wiki Loves Women, a movement trying to profile women, prominent women. We need to build to provide models, we need to provide women who can provide hope to the young girls who are bringing onto the Internet to feel safe but to enjoy the true benefits of the Internet.
My message is the Internet Governance Forum have provided a platform for some of us women who are already empowered but we need to find strategies to bring more women online, not just as engaging in policies but also practical steps to ensuring our safety and meaningful participation.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you again, Lilian. Next it is my pleasure to introduce you to Viviane Vinagre from Brazil. You have been benefitting from some of the spaces, some of the still rare spaces that Internet governance creates and fosters. Sadly it's not an extensive space yet but I think we could hear from your experience, how has it been happening? You connect your life and your objectives with Internet governance, what do you think has been done so far and what do you think is missing in this scenario? Thank you very much. You have the floor.
>>VIVIANE VINAGRE: Thank you, Claudio. So, when I was invited to be here I was told I would have to share my views regarding the summit in Canada last year and about the work that the Internet society, and the human rights issues.
So first of all, North America's summit is a forum, just like IGF, with multistakeholder system that has the idea at the core to debate about how we engage, how we include women and girls into science, into research, into technological areas and Internet.
I can't see, because I'm from Brazil, Latin America, that the experience and debates between Canada, United States, Europe, it was very different. Like the problems women face to be included, to be engaged at Internet ‑ OK, sorry ‑ to engage at Internet was different.
So it was a very good experience to see how organizations, how summits can be important to engage women and girls into technology and at Internet.
Since 2015 we do work to try to include youth and debate on Internet governance. So we always go to schools. We have lecturers in schools, we try to teach them about rights in order that they can fight for them. We try to talk about cyber bullying, hate speech, freedom of expression and a lot of other subjects that are so important for our community.
It's very interesting to see how they lack information, principally in Brazil, how there is certain places that they have no idea of how important the Internet is. So we try to show them that they have the power with Internet and they can be anything that they want and they can grow with it.
So in order to do that, in the whole Latin America we also do the live IGF event and right now we are global, we are now global, not only Latin America anymore and we have a lot of projects and I think to engage youth, to engage women we have to have projects specifically towards them. Like every region, every group they have needs, they have problems and it's the responsibility of the organizations to find the best way to get in and to include them to interenet ecosystem or even the science academy. That's my considerations. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: I would like to start encouraging you to think of a question, an intervention, an issue that you would like to point out at the table. There's going to be an open position here for all the forum.
Next we're going to Nidhi Goyal. She's an actist for young women in India. How do you relate your work with Internet governance? What has been done? What is yet to do?
>> NIDHI GOYAL: Thank you so much for inviting me on this panel. It's been a very interesting journey to hear the diverse perspectives and I might echo some of the concerns, some of the principles or some of the points brought out here.
We all know that when we talk about Internet governance it's a broader approach than the basic infrastructure. We're talking about addressing the legal, the developmental, the socioeconomic and cultural issues along with the physical infrastructure of the Internet.
Keeping that in mind, if we look at the intersectionality that we're addressing today of human rights, gender, youth and if we add layers in that talking particularly about gender and disability, about youth with disabilities, there are some of the perspectives.
If you break this down and think of intersectionality as a whole f you look at human rights of people with disabilities, the immediate name like for our children, the convention on the rights of the child comes up, the main convention of human rights that comes up when you think about people with disabilities and the Conventional Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
Within that the key principles have been so we make those connections between the human rights for disability and gender and youth with the Internet principles that we have.
Enabling environment, universal access, nondiscrimination, reasonable accommodation, these are really the pillars of the CRPD, as we call it. We have articles specifically on gender and disability. We have articles on access in terms of access to justice, in terms of access to information, in terms of right to be an equal part of the community and if you just think of the community as an online and offline community we will be able to take the discussion further.
In millennium development goals, disability found no place but in sustainable development goals, disability has specific mention including in goal 5 which talks about gender. Although the sustainable development goals talk about leaving no‑one behind and the rights of persons, specific inclusions are really, really important when we particularly want to address rights of marginal ized groups.
What's important is I want to lay out a little bit of a landscape of the global south, to think about women with disabilities, even within gender, we will be talking about women with disabilities and youth with disabilities in these places. We will talk about Access to information. Access to information is really restricted. Students are still using very basic materials, many, many youth with disabilities are behind their peers by four or five years because of this lack of access.
Physical infrastructure is not up to the mark so there is lack of making connections, access to health services and justice systems are not possible. We are talking about social security gaps of government assistance and support is missing which ends up that women and youth with disabilities do not have full participation, social, economic and political activities.
Isolation and stigma is huge. Now what the Internet can do for them is it's providing the platform to connect. It's providing their independence so we're going to a step further from thinking about the social and cultural access and looking at how independence and agency comes back when we're talking about a lot of women and young women and their right to express particularly in communities and cultural setups where women are not allowed to speak freely and we see that Internet and online spaces give them that opportunity, provides them the platform to voice their identity and thoughts.
It's the same with people with disabilities who could literally or figuretively do not have the speech, but do not have thoughts, have the sight but do not have vision.
The biggest thing that Internet does, or online spaces do, is it challenges infantalization of women and youth with disabilities and gives them their agency back. That is why the idea that we need the Internet to be ‑ or the Internet governance principles to be inclusive, to think about providing security and privacy and everything else that we think for everyone for even women and youth with disabilities in order to have access for everyone.
We always talk about principles and standards and we were in an earlier session today and we heard a cospeaker says that principles of these guidelines, they're there, standards are the tools that get us there. The key thing is to develop these standards and to ensure implementation of these policies and standards.
We have laws, for example, in India, we have the recent right of persons with disabilities acts, all private and public establishments need to go accessible by 2019 and people haven't started work with their physical and einfrastructure. Countries are going digital more and more but access to digital spaces and there is a huge digital divide in terms of social and infrastructure access as well.
What we need to think is when we talk about the principles and norms and the shared principles of Internet governance, they won't be successful until we don't understand or realize that inclusion has to become the norm. Sensitivity in the shared principles is really important. To include gender, youth, but also all the intersections within. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Nidhi. I guess we could hardly have a more complete landscape, not only of the interest that you originally brought to the table but to the larger Internet governance. Thank you very much for the messages and for the issues that you present.
Next it is my pleasure to introduce you to Olga Cavalli. Olga, you were a technologist that has embedded human rights long ago. You are a realizer in education and capacity building for the region and you are not only a promoter but also you, yourself, are a role model for Latin‑American girls and young women. You name it, how are you going to address this?
>> OLGA CAVALLI: You see, he is my friend. Thank you for the invitation. I must say that Nidhi said everything I somehow wanted to say, she has said it really, really nicely and very well explained. Just let me tell you that we organized the training program in Latin America called the south school of Internet governance. We have just issued a book about Internet governance in Latin America. It's at the moment in Spanish, but it will be soon translated into English and Portuguese. If you follow us on social networks you will find the versions soon.
About your questions, I myself find mainly a positive impact of the Internet in society in general. So there are negative aspects that people are raising these days but I think in general it's also ‑ it's usually very, very positive.
What we have achieved, I think that we have achieved new voices, ways of people that can express their ideas, their voices, new revolutions that happen through social networks, through the Internet. That didn't happen before. It was more difficult.
When I tell my students that I went to university and I had no Internet, they look at me and say "How did you do it? How did you communicate? How did you coordinate with your teacher and your mates? How did you learn from other regions? " Well, we did, but I think that that is ‑ we have freedom, freedom to communicate, freedom to learn, freedom to speak. Access to information that we didn't have before.
I agree not everyone can participate, it's difficult. But we have remote participation. We have programs to bring young people. We have achieved a lot. Of course there is a lot to be done but I would say that what has to be done is we have still talking too much, for example, about women inclusion. We talk too much. I don't think we have achieved that much.
I thought about a sense a while ago and said going from declaration to action, I have seen that some people have copied it, which I love. I love that they have copied the concept. It's because I think we talk a lot about inclusion of women and their positions, inclusion of women in Internet access and it's too much talking. I don't see that much results as the talk. So that we have to work on that.
I have talked many times about perhaps thinking about quotas for leadership position, I'm not saying it's good or bad, let's think about it.
So we have more access, more visibility of this issue, that is true. So governments and regulators have that information brought from the Internet, the networks from the specialist. Now we still have a way forward to go, one step ahead and go from declaration to action.
I would just like to mention about the age thing. In the school we organized this year, we started with the Argentina School of Internet Governance. We had like 30 high school students. They were boys and girls about 17 years old. That was very nice. I have not heard anybody talking about older people. The difficulties that older people have to access devices, software platforms. My mom is 86, she's on Facebook but she has some problems to access whatever we access at home. Thank you very much.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Olga. And thanks for one more example of an interesting initiative.
I believe we have a remote intervention.
>> Hello everyone. We're a youth initiative that wants to increase digital citizenships in local communities and we are in 36 countries at the moment. We have a booth at the IGF. Feel free to visit it.
I am moderating the online interventions and I would like to tell the online listeners if you're joining from different countries fill free to join in when questions and comments are going Onoda ground session. So we'd like to hear your insights, we want it to be as interactive as possible. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Do you already have any remote intervention or can we open the mic?
>> We can open the mic as they type.
>> MODERATOR: It seems we already have a first intervention from the floor. We have one over there. Would you like to take a seat here? That's the spirit. Thank you very much, welcome.
>> AUDIENCE: Hello, everyone. My name is Liza, I'm 22 years old and I'm a Brazilian. I'm here with the youth IGF. I would like to ask Marianne what types of structural changes in the IGF construction she would suggest to allow more youth in gender discussions and I believe that question extends also to Olga. More participation by youth and women in panels or other forms of presentations that may be introduced. Also I would like to ask John Carr if he had been there, what would he choose to put in the declaration if he had only one principle in which you could mention youth. And I would like to congratulate you all for an amazing panel. One of the best I've seen yet. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. That's a pretty good beginning, isn't it? Marianne or Olga.
>> Thank you for your question, it's very good. Let me tell you something, we organize several events. Having panels with equal number of women and men is not easy. Why? Because you invite a company or an organization and you don't have control of who they will send. You may do a recommendation but you are are not sure and just let me tell you an anecdote.
In ICANN, with a friend of mine, she was a member of the board of ICANN, we used to organize panels to analyze the lack of women in leadership positions in ICANN. We expressly invited men to do a specific men panel to talk about because they were leading this organization, supporting organizations within ICANN.
They all sent women because they thought it was a panel about gender. So it is extremely challenging. What we do as a hard rule, when we organize the school of Internet Governance, half and half are women and men, that's the rule. They criticize but let me tell you it's challenging and some other things are challenging that we may talk after that. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Marianne, please.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Great question. I think the architect of a room affects what happens. We're in a very formal setting, a historical formal setting. It's not very hospitable although the 3‑year‑old Ava has done very well. I think we need to allow children access. We need to think about different modalities, more informal, low‑fi, paper‑based analog forms of participation.
I think we need to think about deepening the technical practicalities of access so we can use a range of platforms. The knowledge is there to combine these technologies so it's not related to one particular large platform that can be hard to use.
I think our different formats, we try, we do our best. I think today is a great example to break the architecture, to disrupt the rigidity of the chairs, to move the microphones around, to dance. This allows children to feel part of this but at the end of the day, this room is not designed for young people. It is not. So I think if we can start to redesign the architecture we have and create a space we might to be able within the live meetings to do something. But I'm all for different modalities and different formats around the main meetings to include children.
Children have been here. Really young people, high school students, I think, there needs to be resources to fund that kind of effort because it takes a lot of overheads and commitment. So let's find the resources to fund these initiatives.
How about just to finish off, not have this necessarily, if I may, with all due respect, necessarily have to be a training ground for the next generation of diplomats. Let it be simply an open forum where the children and the young people and the older people can say what they wish in the ways that work for them, in a respectful way, so that we can listen to a diversity of idioms within just the one language. Different ways to talk about the same thing. I hope that helps and I hope that answers your question.
>> MODERATOR: What about the what if question? If you were there.
>> JOHN CARR: So first of all, herding children into a room and asking them to say what they think about the Internet in general is not child participation. It's the worst kind of tokenism. I've seen too much of it and it doesn't contribute a great deal. Maybe the organizers of the event can tick a box, yes, we've listened to children. They were there, you can see them, they were there. They were young, and young and unruly. That's tokenism. It discredits the whole idea of children participation.
I've got a lot of adult friends that I think would have difficulty engaging with the concepts of Internet governance and some of stuff we talk about at these events.
What matters is the way you formulate questions and the depth and sincerity and honesty in the research you do in making sure children's voices are heard. That would be the point I make.
I've been coming to ‑ the only IGF I missed was the first one in Athens. Every other one I've been to since, apart from Netmundiou. That's the one we missed because we didn't have the money. I've been trying to think of any improvement that's happened since 2006. I can't think of one immediately.
I can think of the way that Google and Microsoft and Facebook and Snapchat and a whole range of Internet companies have changed their businesses and the way in which the reality of the Internet has actually changed, but I can't think of any substantial change in anything that impacts on young people's lives that could be reflected in Internet governance because we expressly don't make decisions about anything. We just come here.
It's a great event. I love the IGF. It's the best networking event of its kind for people like me who are interested in Internet policy and particular aspects of it.
If I had one thing to say, it would be that we need the companies to explain what they're doing about Internet governance and how they are discharging their obligations to young people who are their service users. We now have this embodied in law within the European Union in an instrument called the GDPR, the general data protection regulation. There are lots of things you could say about that. But one thing that is fantastic about the GDPR is that it requires every company that provides a service to do a risk assessment of the service that it's providing and that means in relation to children, if children are users, and by the way, child here means anybody under the age of 18, they have to work out what actually is happening to children who use their service.
Many good companies are already doing this. Many companies were not doing it and I would like to see that as a principle of Internet governance. If you're an Internet company you need to think about who your users are and what the impact of your service is on those users.
It's a a rather long and complicated principle and it's not expressed in diplomatic language but I hope you get the idea.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We have one more intervention here from Gerry Ellis. Thank you, Gerry.
>> GERRY ELLIS: Hello, hi, Gerry Ellis here. I'm here the IGF representing the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability but I was only asked five minutes before the session to speak I will just talk on my own behalf.
Nidhi said a lot of things that I would like to say but maybe I want to talk a little bit about disability from a different point of view and how we got to a human rights approach. I myself am blind.
It's appropriate because we're only two days beyond the day, the 100 year centenary of the signing of the armistice and at the end of the First World War, the United Nations was set up. The first meetings were in Paris. The treaty was signed just outside of Paris. The first congress took place in Paris before the headquarterers moved to Geneva. The first output was the declaration of rights and a lot of our rights run from that.
If you look at the way disability was seen in the early days, the World Health Organization held sway and they had a view of disability that we were sick and we needed to be fixed, we were broken and needed to be fixed. So the way that the WHO talked about disability was very much a medical model.
As we came through the International Year of Disability in the early '80s, through the decade of disability from '82. My impairment is I'm blind, and the interaction with their environment and they still used word handicap a lot.
It came to the full fruition on the Convention of the Rights of persons with Disabilities with 50 articles. It talked about impairment being the person's own disability, or the impairment, medical condition, that we could traditionally see as disability.
But disability is seen as the environment failure to meet those needs and that's very important distinction and I keep telling a story which I don't have time to tell here.
But what I wanted to get to the point of was the solution and the way that people with disability offer solutions. People with disability often have a double disadvantage. Like we heard about WebEx and you said people couldn't afford to fly here and they were given WebEx and they could contribute. Blind people couldn't because the interface is inaccessible. I tried to present last year and I wouldn't because it wasn't accessible. The only way a blind person could contribute today was when a sighted person sat beside them.
The same is true with education in the poorer countries. You will find the paper‑based system is not accessible for some people. The chalk in someplaces may not be accessible. Or the technology may not be accessible.
If education comes to the rest of the society people with disabilities are often still excluded.
So we come up with solutions and the main one that I've been mentioning today is universal design. Universal design is an approach that says we try to accommodate the need of most. It's not a one solution fits all, it's a one solution fits one. You try to say you make systems adaptability not needs of the person.
An example, and this is my last point, an example we were given today was subtitling. If you think of subtitling for our meeting today, there are 11 other meetings going on. So you can go home tonight and read about all the other meetings that you didn't attend.
We were talking to a professor who said they've taken subtitles from the previous 12 IGFs to see data mining on how often was gender mentioned and using a lot of different ways to get information.
I'll leave it at that. Our solutions are not just for people with disability. Accessibility is just good design.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Gerry. It's time for us to try and go for the remote cue with Catalina.
>> Eileen from Portugal is asking a question. Eileen is from Digital Grass Roots and she wants to ask about the GDPR. She wants to ask do you think all companies will be eventually implemented and if it's the best solution to protect the privacy of data users
>> MODERATOR: Can anyone in the panel take it? I was thinking about the people from the queue.
>> Oh, OK.
>> MODERATOR: I was hoping Catalina if she's still there and available, or Shahoul to bring in their views
>> There's an intervention online from WebEx. An intervention online from Kenya. He wants to know, the question is to all. He wants to know what do you think needs to be done to improve access for the older people online? What needs to change to improve this? Are they human rights they are missing out on such as rights to access information due not to being able to use the Internet fully?
>> MODERATOR: Right. I will pass the question to the panel. I will kindly ask you to keep your answers, interventions as short and brief as possible so we can get more participation.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Different technologies should remain on the market. The stuff you will be using now, you will be used to using when you're 80 and that stuff will look old to the children in whatever. So we need a range of a retro modern, easy to use, disability and accessibility coded. We need to keep them on the market so that we do not have upgrades that are actually obsolescence by design and that's the first way we keep people of all generations able to keep communicating with each other in the ways they're used to.
So old‑fashioned dumb phones, for a start, keep them going.
>> MODERATOR: We can have another intervention here from the floor.
>> AUDIENCE: Good afternoon. Hi name is Annabella, I'm from Guatemala. At my age in general we tend to tell stories so I would like to tell you a story. A good practice that's occurring in Central America.
A cooperative in Costa Rica started a very successful project a few years ago to train girls and young women the Internet and different aspects of ICT. With the support of Google we invited some Central American organizations that were working on freedom of expression and working with the youth and we managed to bring together a group called Tikas, the voice of the young people of Central America.
For girls, for young people, for Indigenous women, women in the countryside of Guatemala, that program has been very important. I agree with many of the concerns that many of you have expressed but I would like to say that this program represented a space for hope for girls. It gave them access to not just technology but basically to personal development in their own lives. Indigenous, rural girls and women in Guatemala are learning technology and they, in fact, won the third prize in a hackathon organized by UNESCO in my country involving children from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.
This project has a very strong component in preventing violence and preventing racism and fighting against racism and discrimination. It's been very successful for the other countries of Central America too.
We are now facing the challenge that these young people be leave the program and will go back to their Indigenous communities, and continue to work in agriculture or making tortillas to eat. We know nonetheless the seeds of hope have been sewn in their lives and in the future we'll probably have Nicaraguan, Costa Rican, Guatamalan women who will celebrate the fact that can benefit from that project.
I'm optimistic to the IGF's work in Central America.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you for your interesting information. I would like to go back to Nidhi concerning the last question.
>> NIDHI GOYAL: Sorry, I just wanted to give some quick thoughts on the previous two comments that ‑ the previous two questions that were brought about for elderly persons and the inclusion of children and genders, etc.
I just want to bring this point that for elderly persons, when we're talking about youths and when we see universal access, it's the ease of design. Easy to ‑ we always say in disability language when we create material, if you create an easy‑to‑read material it's the best because it addresses people across different capacities and ease of design addresses across abilities, across age, etc. So really keeping that while engaging with infrastructure and design.
The second thing, speaking about children and other diversities, to also think that when we say disability it's not a homogeneous group. When we say children it will also not be a homogeneous group. Beyond the diversity of culture, geography, we have to understand that disability does not remain with youth or women, it is with children. You may have children who are autistic. And we learnt a lot today in AI sessions for how much the Internet is being used in education and social interaction for people living with invisible disabilities.
For children that might be a consideration for thinking about the invisible disability issues we might have. People living with anxiety, so multiple modalities of engagement like Marianne mentioned would be very important. And the most important thing is we have a panel and we're discussing about gender.
To really think about the spectrum of gender, and to think about inclusion in terms of persons who identify a fluid gender identities because Internet governance for them becomes very important because they face a lot of isolation in physical communities and there have been many articles written in personal narratives and research papers that this is the space where they rediscover themselves and can reengage with the world.
To think about further diversities, make it holistically inclusive. Going back to the slogan that has been quoted here, there's nothing without us. We are trying to create research papers and knowledge production to include the people we're talking about or we want to bring solutions for. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Let's make it more interactive.
>> One of the roaming moderators you've seen on the floor, the space is yours too. You can make your intervention from here. Now we have a very interesting intervention from the coordinator of the DC in Small Island Developing States, Tracy Hackshaw. Please, Tracy, take a seat among our speakers.
I also remember everyone who is on queue, I will pick you up in a second. You can also come here on the stage. Thank you. Keep to one minute please so everybody has a chance to speak.
>> MODERATOR: Thanks, Tracy, a pleasure. You have the floor.
>> TRACY HACKSHAW: Coming from a small island developing State, it's important to realize that there are levels of, I guess, separation you have to consider. So not only do you have youth, physically challenged, elderly but there is also regions, so there's another layer. How do you treat those issues? How do you ensure the accessibility issues are solved? How do you bring them to a forum like this to have their voices heard? That's something we need to work on as well so it's not only about the gender, youth, physically challenged broadly but also that other layer in isolated regions and rural areas and so on. So I make that point and have that addressed in some ways.
>> MODERATOR: Any comment from our panelists from this perspective that Tracy just bought? Viviane.
>>VIVIANE VINAGRE: I had a thing to say about the last intervention. When I think about gender inclusion, about youth inclusion, I think about two projects. About gender, it reminds me of the project of DNS women, where it helps women to have the right and they have jobs and everything. In terms of inclusion of youth, it reminds me of the Shepporton project made last year where we did a lot of training of inclusion in projects in order that we can recalibrate children and the youth and try to include them in Internet governance issues.
I think also, in order to have a better inclusion in the ecosystem, we projects like the gender into the reports is very important. I think that's my consideration for the moment. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. So we do have a speaking queue that is still composed of Catalina. If we have a way to bring them in according to the queue otherwise I think we have Valentina here as another intervention. Could you please come in. Thanks a lot. You have the floor.
>> AUDIENCE: So I got inspired by the color. Maybe it's purple, blue, green, so I thought ‑ I think if human rights, gender and youth, for me it was difficult to crack. For a moment I fear was the usual container. But there is a thing about the Internet. It is the freedom of experimenting and discovering your own identity or identities and sexuality, it's about this.
If we talk about youth, it's a moment of experimentation, of fluidity, and it's really important. And so who we really want to have here because it's not talking, it's also at the beginning people are asking for women from the global south was not a token. But are we able to offer the space for all diversity to play and to call and to say. Are we going to out those people because the Internet is also a place where diversity is punished but it's a place of pleasure and we need to remind this to each and every one.
So I think if we talk about human rights, yes, they should define everything but we really need to articulate diversity and when we talk about youth and young, it's really about all the colors that we want to bring and all the differences and it's not about empowerment, it's about giving power, this power. This is power. The power to speak. I can continue to talk. This is power. And there is discipline and solidarity. Thanks a lot.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. I would ask now for ‑
(Applause)
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. It might not seem that the time has passed but we only have over ten minutes until the end of the session. I would like to hear another and then pass to the comment. One other and that's all the time we have. Thank you very much, you have the floor.
>> AUDIENCE: My name is Nicole Patterson, I'm with She Leads It in the Caribbean and an international NGO focused on women's issues.
What I would like to point out is that I've heard a lot here this week on a lot of initiatives that are taking place in the gender space with ICTs. I was very happy and one of the reasons I'm down here also is that I can find the lady from Guatemala who was speaking a while ago about the initiative that they are doing in Central America because that's the very type of thing we're trying to do. We've done it two years so far, girls in ICT, the hackathon reaching girls in five countries. However, what we want to do is take advantage of best practices.
I also attended the best practices forum earlier today. What I would like to put forward is if there is an opportunity through IGF and through sessions such as this that we can have an interactive platform that shares actual information on different initiatives that are taking place, so that we can make those connections. Get to the end result that we want for SDG fly faster.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Would you give us the pleasure of finalizing the interventions.
>> Thank you very much. Sebastian. I'm an activist working on diversity. The rest of the work I do is not very relevant for today's session.
I didn't prepare a statement but I did want to make a couple of points in light of what we heard today. Of course the room we're in today is not fit for purpose. We're trying to include young people, youngsters, men, women, older persons, it's not tailored to our purposes. So if one day we decide to reflect on how we can improve the IGF, it might be to stop convening the forum in rooms which are not fit for purpose and this will make our exchanges much more fluid. That's the first thing.
The second, of course we can all dream about everyone ending up in the same room one day but I think the tool that can be used to achieve that is the Internet. Getting 6 billion people online, getting them connected, developing a tool kit that would allow them to take part in discussions, I think that's the way forward because if we tried to cram 6 billion people into the room we're not going to get anywhere.
Therefore, it's very important to bring children, young people onboard, also older persons and I think I fall in that category. I'm not that old but I am quite seasoned.
Furthermore, it must be said that we're all unique individuals. We all have our differences. For instance, it must be said that in Burgundy, where I'm from, you have to drive several kilometers to get connection. It's not just a developing issue, it also affects parts of France.
We're all very diverse and we need to pool that diversity to come up with collective solutions but we're not going to cram 6 billion people into the room. Thank you to all the panelists and participants today. Welcome to France.
>> MODERATOR: Again, interesting call for action. We have Heather Corbin listed as a speaker but she has connectivity issues. We have time for one more participant's views. You have the floor.
>> AUDIENCE: A human rights lawyer, who is part of the initiative dedication to IGF. My question could be twofold. One, it's good talking about youth participation within the context of peace but we have people, youth, women and children what are locked up in war, in Yemen, in Somalia, in the Congo, and in other war regions. What strategy does IGF have for them? What is their place in all of this Internet governance? We must address that situation and ensure that we use these Internet resources to expose abuses against women, children who bear most of the brunt of this. Discussing now, there's a lot of shutdowns that go on. Increasing rate in Africa, in my own country, there is attacks on the social media users and who are affected are the youth and of course the women. We need to have recommendations and engagement and communication with especially government but returning taxes, to laws and other seemingly ‑ again freedom of expression, especially online freedom of expression.
I think those are some of the things I would want IGF to discuss because I know we have only a few minutes, how can we discuss them?
>> MODERATOR: That's a very issue. The IGF has been discussing, at least reporting the latest developments. I'm not so sure about best practice about those and the first problem you mentioned on a series of other serious issues that we have. Thank you very much for your participation.
Our time, in fact, has finished but we are going to go through our panelists again for a last round of closing remarks and thank you very much for your patience and for your rich participation. Madeleine.
>> I just wanted to say thank you for everyone who has spoken, whether or not you've been up here or down in the audience. This has been very helpful. I've been taking copus notes.
One of the things that I just wanted to point out that I really appreciate and I think this conversation has brought in a lot of nuance to a lot of these conversations that's often lacking from a lot of the sort of mainstream narratives on these topics and I think that's really important and just something as simple as, you know, one of my colleagues up here bringing up the idea of when we're talking about the protection of rights for women and children being sure, you know, that we're not infantalizing at the same time.
Bringing the nuance to these conversations is critical. I would say thank you to everyone who has brought that level of nuance. Let's keep that in mind as well that these issues are not binary, they're not simple and it's really important to allow for that kind of complexity.
When we talk, for instance, to the right to education, it's also the right to education that will prepare the next generation for the digital age. So it's not just, you know, these rights to access to education, but really taking that step further and asking those difficult questions. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. John.
>> JOHN CARR: Well, there's one thing I would like to mention and just as a preface I have never voted conservative in my life and I cannot imagine any circumstances in which I would, but the conservative prime minister initiated a review in what he called the commercialization and sexualization of childhood, carried out by a very distinguished scholar, Reg Bailey. I think if you get a chance to look at it, Google it and have a look at that report because what that documented in a very serious way, I think it was well received, critically received in lots of quarters, was the way in which aspects of what the Internet had brought to the modern world are undermining, particularly the self‑confidence of young girls and creating certain sorts of ideas and images about what the perfect girl looks like and being projected again and repeated through social media and so on.
So we need to think about that aspect of what the Internet is doing and think about responses to it.
One of the things that flowed in part from that report, for example, is that we, in the United Kingdom, we're going to try to restrict access to legal adult pornography only to adults so at least children, and by this I'm including a group that's it's very, very difficult to imagine participating, 7‑year‑olds, 8‑year‑olds, limit the possibility of young children being exposed to images on the Internet which cannot possibly be doing them any good and cannot be helping them shape their ideas about what sex and relationships and so on is about.
I mention it because if you hadn't heard of that report before, commercialization, and sexualization of childhood, it would be an interesting thing maybe for you to have a look at.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you for your reference.
>>
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I'd like to note that 65 million people are displaced through climate change and civil strife military interventions, namely war. The most important nonfood item for many of those displaced persons is their phone.
The second thing I would like ‑ and that phone is often taken away from them when they reach a particular destination point. I'll let you think about that.
Secondly, when we're talking about diversity, let's get beyond diversity, let's keep working on the demographic diversity but could we also add diversity of technologies, diversity of platforms, diversity of application across different generations so that there are many, many sorts of technological applications, platforms, tools that allow people to interact in different ways.
The market concentration of access, design, terms of use is becoming quite alarming and it's completely countering any understanding of diversity in a techno cultural understanding which the Internet is supposed to be.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Marianne. Minda.
>> MINDA MOREIRA: Thank you, I would like to finish my intervention by saying that Internet Rights and Principles Coalition we think we have a lot of work to do and we will continue to work to ensure that human rights frameworks are applied to the existing and emerging technologies by design.
I think this would enable all the conversations that we have been having here on gender and youth, such as gender equality, the right to access the Internet, the right to nondiscrimination on the Internet access, use and governance and which would also enable everyone to have their voices heard.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Lilian, you have been kind enough to hold that comment to have more participation. Let's hear that comment.
>> LILIAN NALWOGA: When we initially started I had more questions than answers. As I listen to everyone from the interventions on the floor and the rest of the panelists, there's one thing I think is missing which is the issue of online responsibility. We're pushing for more women to come online, we are pushing for the youth to come and use these tools but there's the issue of the responsible use of the Internet. It cannot be just you come use and get abused without you having that sort of responsibility and before I joined the session, there was a session organized by NESCO. There's a lot of work being done to prevent youth from online
How do we make sure youth and women who are mainly targeted through these online schemes, do get the chance to use and appreciate the benefits of the Internet without being pushed into this extreme activities that are happening online?
As we go back, yes, there's the security, there's the access to information but the issue of responsible use. The Internet can be used as a tool for good and also for bad. That is one of the things that we need to keep in mind. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much. I think you had another voice and stress those issues. Viviane.
>>VIVIANE VINAGRE: I share with the concerns of my colleague here because we know that Internet can be not a good environment for youth and women in general. I think the BPF gender, the report of 2015 about abuse online and I also think that we must include but we must also teach, we must also protect these people, these women, people with disability that we are including on the Internet. So I want to thank you, your organizations, that deals with human rights on Internet, gender and youth and say that you make our Internet more inclusive and diverse. Thank you all.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Nidhi, thanks if your participation and sharing your final words.
>> NIDHI GOYAL: Thanks, everyone. It was really a stimulating discussion here.
I think I want to continue in one line, the pieces that my fellow panelists have been talking about, that we need to be very conscious of the online and offline congruence and some of the issues and barriers that offline presents of women's safety, of harassment, etc, and accept that a lot happens online and use maybe some of the offline solutions and built solutions together that spans the online and offline lives of people.
The second thing, and I want to leave it on a slightly positive note, that for many of us, for youth, for women, for people with disabilities, that a lot of diversity, Internet has been a site for liberation, of freedom, site of really having a voice, of amplifying voices, and I think that's a very positive experience that someone can have.
For many, many it's a site where an enabling environment is created, where people can exist and be and grow. That is why for us to have inclusive frameworks and principles and shared principles becomes even more important because when an enabling feature becomes a barrier, a site of so many positivities, if we face barriers or problems or access issues within these you feel like the world is moving forward and you're stepping back.
So, again, that inclusion should be the norm and not just ‑ and shared principles have to be through nothing about us without us. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: And once again, our appreciation, Nidhi. Olga, thank you very much.
>> OLGA CAVALLI: Just a final word about what I said before. We all have different focuses and we all aim for inclusion and better treatment of different groups within the Internet. As I said, I'm very positive. I think as Nidhi said, I think Internet has been a great tool for our life and our freedom.
I would repeat what I said before. If we have an idea, let's move from the declaration to action. When we knew ten years ago there were a few people from Latin‑American participation, we thought about the school. The school has trained more than 3,000 face‑to‑face fellows and thousands more remote.
When we thought there was no book about Internet governance in Latin America we did the book. So let's move from declaration to action. If you're doing something try to enhance it, make it bigger, or if you think there's something to be done do it. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you to all the panelists. Were a couple of hands raised. As the theme mounts and discussion builds things get more interesting but we still have the constraints of time.
Thank you for your time, your patience and your engagement.
>> I want to on a final note ask everyone to come up to the stage if you want to take a picture here of our speakers because this is our idea of the IGF, an IGF that should truly participate, that you are part of setting the stage, you are part of setting the agenda. So if you want, please come, everyone, let's take a picture of all the audience and thanks for our remote speakers, our MAG organizer, please. Come. And I'm sorry for those who didn't get a chance to do an intervention but we still have this moment crystalized here for everyone who wants to join us and come on stage.
Going to give a couple of minutes or so for those at the back as well. Thank you very much for all the amazing interventions. Please join our speakers and once more, sorry for the remote participants that had connectivity issues and our remote presenter as with well. So please, join us here on stage.
Thank you so much for joining us and remember you set the agenda of the IGF. If you like this format remember to discuss it on our taking stock session. It's important for us to have more interactivity in the sessions so join us, please. I'm going to give a few more seconds just for everybody to arrive. And get ready to take your picture.
OK, everyone, this is it, 1, 2, 3. Now, IGF, come on. Thank you very much. Thank you, everyone.