The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. 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, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, everyone. I just want to did a quick sound check with those who are online. We have speakers online as well I just want to check with them. If he lease I can't and Josh who are online, whether you can hear us. If you can maybe give a gesture or speak. That would be great. Felicia. We are unmuting you.
>> I can hear you, great.
>> MODERATOR: Josh we will unmute you as well well. Josh you are still on mute. We will unmuse you. Jobs. I think we have enough people in the room. Good afternoon to you. It's a pleasure to be hosting this evening on Inclusive Multi-stakeholderrism Tack.Ing Internet Shutdowns. I Am Head of the U.K. Commonwealth Development Office. I Will Quickly Go Through and Introduce Our Panel Members.
I Will Say a Few Words and Then Hannover to My Colleagues to Also Say a Few Words. And then we hope we will have an interactive session and please come forward with some questions. We hope that there will be a good half an hour or so available for everyone to actually come in. I will just go and introduce those panel members so I'm please to say that we have got if he lease york Antonio from Access Now the campaign manager. Felicia do you want to say hello to everyone.
>> Hi, everyone. I'm pleased to join you today. Thank you. Fleas.
>> MODERATOR: We have Joss White from the instance Tuesday duty in the U.K. Joss would you like to say hello.
>> Hello, pleased to be here. And we have Andrea Wald en. Over to you.
>> Perfect. Hi, thank you for inviting us to be a part of the questions today.
I'm Alex Wald en. I lead human rights at Google.
>> MODERATOR: Beautiful. And last but not least we have Scott from OHL.
>> Scott Campbell leading the work on tech and human right at the UN office based in Geneva.
>> MODERATOR: To start the session off, I will say a few remarks. If there is anything I hope do you take away from our session, there are three main messages from me. One is to emphasize the importance of the multi-stakeholder approach. And second is just to talk about the importance of trying to stop internet shutdowns and finally just a word on some of the ways in which we can try and prevent shutdowns and the impact that they may have. First I'm in a room where you are all more involved. You have one end which may be classified as a technical shutdown where you can have no access at all to the internet. But then there are a number of other measures in place as well. Folks you can have efforts which are aimed at throttling the internet whereby you can have almost some sort of access but follow all intents and purposes that access deprives you of thible to be online. From our perspective, that type of activity is a significant impediment to a free and open interoperatable
internet but also had has a significant real world impact on the lives of people across the world. And all of can you imagine -- and I'm sure all of you know what type of impact this could have. It could effect what you might categorize as farmers in the developing world who need access to climb data to ensure that she have the best information available to maximize the yields that they are trying to extract. It with effect a citizen who want to partake in a democratic process and is unable to express their views online tmight affect a business who needs the ability to access their financial services online quickly. And they can't do that. Or it might affect an individual who needs to charge up their electronic car and they can't do that. So all of those type of impacts can have real world impediment to thible of people to actually carry out their lives.
Unfortunately internet shutdowns are increasing in their prefer lesson. We are seeing more and more countries with internet shutdowns. There is a 40% rise of internet shutdowns from 2022. From a U.K.'s perspective we have been championing the policy change whereby states no longer shut the internet down. We are arraigning this not Omahas an impact on democratic process but in most recently in Bangladesh, it was reported that a shutdown there in the summer resulted in almost $300 million loss of GDP. So we have been using our G7 presence in 2021 to arraigning that this is an important issue and states should refrain from doing. So we are proud to be chairing the task force internet shutdowns from the free them online coalition. And we have been using that for the last two years to come one a number of measures to highlight the importance of this issue. In particular we have come one a statement through the FOC on the importance of keeping the internet
on in the context of elections. We also with UNESCO, on the last year's Issue Day for Universal Information We Came Up with the Oxford Statement Which Underlined Connectivity to Both Issues Around Development but Also Democracy and last but not least we are using our platform here at the IGF as task force shutdowns to highlight this issue. My final comment on all of this is that clearly this is a significant issue. But most importantly all the measures I've just described, they couldn't have happened without the multi-stakeholder approach. Through the FOC, we are proud that we have colleagues that represented from act deem york private sector and government, civil society coming together. Through the drafting of the elections statements on shutdowns, we brought together the multi-stakeholder community. And I know from first hand experience that diversity of use made that final product much more effective. And also when we went about the Oxford Statement we had
representatives from over 630 to 80 different organizations all part of that multi-stakeholder approach who were able to highlight the importance of this. So a few framing comments from me but let me hand it over to the panelists who will state their view on this. I will start up with Felicia. Felicia can you talk about the key trend are you seeing in 2024 around shutdown and some of the challenges you foresee in so far as taking a collaborative approach.
>> Hello, I'm Felicia. I come bearing good news. Before I jump into that, just to mention that those familiar with the digital campaign and coalition. This has been a global coalition that is dedicated to fighting international (?) since 2015 and currently has 330 organizations as members. We track international (?) and work with stakeholders including governments, regional and international bodies like the UN, the EU, the African you know Union. The journalists, researchers, among others to push back again shutdowns.
We track shutdowns, those that are likely to get a government to impose a shutdown. And destruction to the internet complete shutdowns as well as other social media platform or other digital platforms. So what we have seen over the years since we starred documenting shutdowns is that exams and election elections and in 2023 conflict was the main trigger of shutdowns where we saw 74 shutdowns reported in nine countries in terms of conflict. And the second highest of 53 shutdowns in 15 countries and we also have seen the governments disrupt the internet during school exams. And then elections is also an area where governments are likely to disrupt internet access.
So for 20224 we are working on that database and we have seen approximately over 270 shutdowns in 40 plus countries globally, and the countries are likely to do more. And if that is the case we are going to see the highest number of countries where we have documented shutdowns in a single year. And that is not good news. The number of shutdowns are also likely to be really tight. But these figures would be finalized early next year when we release more reports.
And so this, of course, underscores a worrying trend that shutdowns are spreading. Increasingly becoming a go-to both authoritative and democratic countries. In 2024 we have already documented seven countries that had imposed international shutdowns and we have seen countries including -- Caledonia and Malaysia -- disruption or having an internet shutdown. In that case we have also seen two members of the coalition in Kenya and France. We have is spoken to the use of internet disruptions.
Another worrying trend we are seeing a deliberate use of shutdowns that is countries imposing shutdowns around the globe. And this is really really concerning for us and for the society. So just as these trends have indicated, some of the challenges is the fact that we are seeing democracies also resourcing to the use of shutdowns, so it really makes our advocacy work difficult.
So I think it's important for us to continue to hole each and every document that shuts down the internet to account so we can push back confidently and effectively against internet shutdowns.
We have also seen that conflict related shutdowns is really becoming a big problem, which means that this has implications on delivery of humanitarian aid during conflict. And we are also looking at what alternative for this connectivity can be provided during conflict to show that the internet remains open and secure for people as well as the humanitarian organizations that are operating on the ground. Having the issue community support is real estate I will crucial. So they had a shutdown prior to the 2024 election which we have seen 2024 was declared a year of elections. It was really, really important for our work and we continue to use this for advocacy and engagement with governments and the election was indicated. In 2024 the African commission in human and people's rights revolution which roidses the internet connectivity to work with elections. So this was also really timely for advocacy during a shutdown. And prior to some of these
milestones we have also seen governments that like Nigeria the democracy repluck of the congo during electrics in their respective countries and at the beginning of the year we also saw Bangladesh. In January with the internet.
I mentioned one of the countries new countries that have shut internet access. If you may be aware in November the authorities issued an order to shut down social media until after elections and this was ten days or so before elections. And this was really shocking. They shut the internet access and we all recognized that is a democratic country. So seeing a country like that impose shut downs and even an intention to have a shutdown in place for over two weeks was really concerning. So following that from the society and also engagement with diverse stakeholder because the authorities. So it was lifted after 24 hours and the people went to the polls on November 10th. Which opened access to secure internet throughout the election process.
In 2024 (?) hopefully we can have questions and discussion.
>> MODERATOR: Worrying trend but I'm positive you concluded with positive examples where countries have agreed to keep the internet open and accountability. Should we move on to Joss Wright. Joss if I can bring you in here. Can you talk about how a much more data driven approach to this particular challenge help us navigate this challenge and maybe come up with better policy approaches. Joss, over t to you.
>> JOSS: Yes, thank you. Multi---
They are by the different effects and policies going on but I think there's an interesting shift and perspective on multistakeholderism when we are -- as a group trying to address a problem that is fairly universally recognized as a problem. And I think that -- what I would like to represent from the perspective of academia here, is a form of multi-stake holderrism is not really just hearing our voices but providing input to resolving the problem. And working in in area as an academic with the limations of academia. I really see that every group that is working in this area -- we have representation from civil society weapon have academia. We have got business. We have policy makers. Each one has their particular strengths and their particular abilities to effect change in an interesting way. But each has its flip side instead of weaknesses. I'm not going to go into all the detail of all of them because I will just insult people in the room. It has the positive
society and solution focused and working directly to reduce the impacts of things like internet shutdowns. But the flip side of that is a tenancy to need results quite quickly to be very solution focused in itself. And have a restricted amount of long-term stepping back that can go on.
Business in contrast has a lot of voice and resource to affect the policy of interaction at the business level but they also have to take into account their own measure considerings and legal constrains in doing thing like that.
The policy side are the government side is obviously the strongest voice in being able to push policies forwards. But necessarily is relatively slow -- not quite as reactive as it can be. And from my perspective as an academic I see our abilities in this area as being more in the flexible methodlogical innovation, the idea to bring new approaches and longer term questions and understandings but we tend to have less voice, less capacity to directly interact with policy. And frankly as academicking maybe a little less urgency in directly achieving the solution to a problem. And we are all focused on publishing academic papers because that's what we care about is academics ultimately when we should be looking to work to help there. But that's yet multi-stakeholderrism approach is so important because the things that are to bring techniques that wouldn't necessarily be applicable for government or society to do or even business to
do.
So to speak directly to -- you know the academic side of thing and my own particular role in this. I think one F particular strengths we have is the interdisciplinarity. It's a tech heavy field and as someone who studied as scientist it was a frustration in my career that I should have studied law because that's where it would help in stopping thing like that.
It's a bit late now so I will stick with computer science. But that's the interaction between what we can bring on the data side, the method side and the data science side is something we can bring to this. And traditionally the limation of the academic side is related to.
This there's been a measure of shutdowns and providing data but then not being so interested in doing something with that data. We have built a tool that will measure internet shutdowns and X, Y, Z and now it's up to someone towels do the policy advocacy or the interaction with users. Or on that technical side we will build a circumvention tool and show we can get around the internet shutdown and we can still access the internet in this particular place in a way that is largely meaningless to 95% of the population who don't have advanced computer science degrees that can use these technologies.
So the reality of this while this is a technological basis for what we are talking about here, it's an attempt to use important society-wide technology to have control over an aspect of society. So the research that I do that my group does here at the Oxford Internet Institute is largly filling that gap between the strong technical almosts and the social political understanding that drives it. Because we do need to understand the technology. We need to know how it works so that he we don't make silly mistakings. But we also need to answer the question, why are internet shut downs happening?
Why do states or authorities implement internet shut downs? Because if we understand that, we can say look this is what you are trying to do. And it's not doing what you think it's doing. It's not achieving the goals you are set out for yourself.
And then hopefully that's a reason for policy to prevent that from happening in the future. Or if we are being honest we need to say this is having the effect you think it's having but there are externalities, there are negative sides that are so significant it's not worth what you are paying for it. And there are many forms of externalities. I think GDP is widely mention. Frankly I think it's a poor measure of the impact of a shutdown. I'm much more interested in people being unable to communicate with friend. People being unable to coordinate their activities. People being unable to access health care information, quality need information and similar.
I realize I've already hit the 5-minute limit I've been given for this talk. But I would like to continue the work. Britaining the gaps the interference and they have been working strongly with us to provide data and we reciprocate by give the analytical tools and statistical science and data tools to try to understand how the data around shut downs relates to the social and political factors on the group and how does a shutdown lead up to an election. How likely are they leading up to an election. What happens after an election? Not just in terms of the internet but in how people respond.
Does a shutdown increase or decrease the amount of political violence, the amount of protests or things like that. And can we understand these dynamics and feed into the policy process to try and reduce the effects, the negative effects if that happens. So just to conclude, then, at the multi-stakeholder level which I think is hugely important to tackling with problem, what we need to do is to continue this route of drawing from the strengths from the perspectives of each stakeholder, not in terms what have do they want out of it. But what does society bring.
It brings people to work on the ground and to advocate with people on the ground and to interact with policy. Policy makers have the ability to drive policy directly by need for agreement, nationally and internationally. Academia provides the analytical tools and the perspectives and the methods. And businesses provides resources and infrastructure. And there's a lot of crossover between these. But I'm so happy to see that this community and this field takes this multi-stakeholder approach very strongly. So that coordination is something I hope will continue going forward. And I will stop there.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much, Josh. Really helpful. I will move on to the head of Google. How is the private sector affected by issue shutdowns. Thank you.
>> Thanks for the question and it's nice to come after Felicia and Josh because I think you hit on thing important in the private sector and we think are important to continue partnering with you on. These issues have long been a priority for Google. You know we believe in a free and open internet. That has always ban core value of Google and its products and the way we interact in the world. So the increase in shut downs that Felicia talked to us about is deeply troubles for us and why we believe in the stakeholder model and believing in governments and society and academia and others in the industry to make sure there is data available to those of us who are studying it as well as informing public policy statements and advocacy to ensure that governments who are using shutdowns understand what the repercussions are and hopefully can think of more tailored ways to address the problems that they are seeking to work on by doing shut downs and
disruptions and throttling. In particular one thing we were thinking about the isle the value of human right ask due dill against. For us it's what we do think about when we think about how our product are operating in the world.
We have to think about how to value and plan when these things are going to happen and how do we design potentially around this kind of activity that will ultimately of course effect the people who are I trying to use our tools are the devices that run on our operating systems, et cetera. The thing about shutdowns is they are rarely from a human rights perspective rarely necessary and rarely proportionate. They are a blunt tool that impacts all of our users and all of our services so from a company's perspective it's bad for business because it's bad for everyone who uses our products. And I think Joss was hitting on this a little bit but certainly it's everyone who is messaging and trying to communicate with our friend and family members. It's people who are trying to use digital payments and trying to send money back and forth. It impacts businesses and small and large around the wore. It's not just GDP it's every single action we are trying to digitize for
people. When you have disruptions it means that activity cannot happen.
I do think it's interesting to think about ways we can maybe illustrate that and measure the impact of people in all of these small ways.
For us for a long time we have been working on these issues.
One thing we have always had is a disruptions report on our transparency side. What that does it tracks the activity across all of Google products around the world and you can see when the activity gets low on any given product. Ultimately when there is a shutdown, Google doesn't directly control any of the infrastructure, so when there's a shutdown we normally learn about it when people are not able to access our product. It's not something we know about ahead of time. So that's the value of the transparency report. It makes sure when we are learning these things are.
Haing, we are aware of it at the same time. So transparency is one place where we have a lot of energy that everyone has information about when thed a shutdowns are happening so the advocacy can happen. And they have invested in transparency but in partner to ensure there's more data sharing and visibility around the impacts of shutdowns and disruptions. So that's included partnership and support of the measurement lab and UNI and various others and I'm sure Joss has worked closely with them as well. That is one place we are continuing to invest in the measurement and tracking and information sharing around transparency and disruptions.
Just to maybe highlight a little bit more of the other ways we are woring with other stakeholders we have long supported the Keep It on Campaign and think the advocacy role needs to be supported by us in industry and many of the companies that are a part of global initiative have done that. And that's also why we engage with the Freedom Online Coalition we think that engaging with governments with the disruptions and why that's not the best way to solve the challenges that are happening in any given country. But it's important for the private sector to be at the table, talking about what we are seeing and what we are tracking and to come to the table with one voice on that.
The last thing I wanted to flag was, Joss it was funny you said law school would be use F. I would say someone as a lawyer, would say it's really important for us to be partnered with technologists because ultimately going back to the human right due diligence and how do we plan for addressing these issues really that does require us to think about what tools are available to peel. So again my colleagues in Jigsaw have focused on VPNs and how do we make sure VPNs are accessible to people and how to maintain thing that are.
Haing and those are questions that require technologists to be at the table along with policy makers. Maybe that does help with policy makers from a technical and advocacy perspective.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Alex. Really help.
And we will go to our last speaker before we open it up for questions. Do hole on to the questions. We will be coming to you. Scott your organization recently had a be inform recommendations after you reported internet shutdowns. What is your assessment on the progress of trying to facilitate positive change in this field, building on those recommendations. Thanks.
>> SCOTT: Thank you very much, Kanbar and on gooingel and different actors and Google and Oxford and Access. We with pleased to take part. And at the rerisk of repeating we have been a champion of multi-stakeholders and we will continue to be going forward. The value of this conversations clear and this will be a priority area for our office in ensuring that participatory decision making processes and -- the one that Alex just mention, are truly participatory, and all can take part freely in such discussion on the challenges of internet governance and also on the topic today F shutdowns.
The progress on shutdowns -- I was asked to supreme speak on that on the frame of our report. I think the first thing I would say is we very much need a multi-stakeholder approach to make progress, to quote Joss or misquote Joss but we need a multi-stakeholder approach to provide input and solve the problem.
That's a key takeaway and in this conversation I see the opportunity for the coalition to be thinking about in 2025. For Google to be thinking about. For all of us to be thinking about alongside membered states with how to move the dial.
I don't want to repeat Felicia, in terms of progress but I wanted to solute for the exceptional work they have done for the Keep It On campaign and the important data am I won't repeat that today. I thought it would be more use F to look fortune for problem solving through the multistakeholder lens and looking through the global digital come back. And today the frame for multi-stakeholder frame for problem solving. The multi-stakeholder is clear. And in terms of our office making progress and recommendations in our report we need to seize this opportunity along with all.
I just want to touch on a couple of those hooks and maybe ask a few questions or put out a few ideas. I think as most of that you followed the digital compact are aware it's in issue human right law. And it's fair to say that the GDC doesn't move us forward in terms of framework but in having 193 membered states reaffirm their commitment to states and reaffirm to multistakeholderism. So I think we need to seize on that commit he recommitment for some and afirrations and seize on that political momentum. And we are pleased that our office is one of five called tonight to implement which leads me to a challenge and leads to the to areas I will focus on in terms of looks.
Most you if you are attending the workshop on shutdowns, watered down by effective calling on states to refrain from internet shutdowns. Where are the tune to push on that very clear commitment.
Companies, and Alex you touched on this. But there's a clear call on companies to respect human right and apply human rights due diligence athlete throughout the full life cycle of technology. What are the opportunities to move forward also in a multistakeholder fashion on that.
And I think there's work --
You gave one example. And I think Felicia touched on another example the Democratic of congo, slowed phone was talking about the agreement with the -- slowed phone was talking about an agreement with the context. What was that impact on the agreement and the short comes and the gaps and how they can be used as examples to build on, observe question. And the last area was objective one on GDC on connectivity.
This in our view is likely to be a massive area of investment from the international institutions and innovations and a huge tune to integrate human rights concerns into agreements around connectivity.
And as different types of infrastructure and connectivity projects are being established there's a key moment for prevention as we outlined in our report but for language to be included that makes it very difficult for governments to shut down and easier for companies to push back with their legal tools against shutdowns.
I'm going to stop there. Because I could go on but I sense we are the at time and really look forward to the conversation. Thanks again for including us.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Scott. Some really helpful concluding remarks there. Now I will open it up for questions and answers I will first look to the room here some if you do want to ask a question -- can you hear me? Quick sound check. Okay. If you do want to ask a question, please make your way forward. There's a mic there at the front. And you're very welcome. So who would like to open up? Great. Please come in am I think we may need to turn the mic on. Do you want to use my mic? A guy just wanted to ask about any kind of good examples where policy advocacy actually made a difference influencing internet shutdowns or prevents them? That goes for people in the panel or in the room and if so what was the anatomy of that influence?
>> MODERATOR: Great. Before I pass that on, I think there's another hand up. We will have two questions in the room and then I will ask the panel to come in on that.
>> Thank you. Are there any active states to prevent the disaster behind shutdowns in countries?
>> MODERATOR: I will take that last one. Interactive steps I think meetings like there are an example of that. We are trying to raise awareness around shutdowns we are trying to take a holistic approach for shutdowns be it from issues around GEO political right and the economy but also development. This San example of that. But I will work through the advocacy of the task force internet shutdowns and coalition. So we are trying to be proactive there but certainly there is much more we can do.
Who in the panel would like to come in on the point that was raised for positive examples about advocacy working?
I see Felicia you are nodding. Do you want to briefly address that? Thanks.
>> Yes, definitely. I think I mentioned some good examples, having commitments from governments. And I think there is prior engagement where we are able to engage with governments prior to electrics to raise awareness on shutdowns on human rights and how people can actually leverage connectivity to actively participate in the electoral processes. And through these engagements that is a point where we go to governments like the GOC for learn call processes. Taking governments to court against international shut downs and have gone so far as two or three jumps in society against internet shutdowns. One in Nigeria during the -- and also in Guinea. So these are positives in addition to what was mentioned. And I think proactive measures are really important but some of the triggers is very difficult to predict. Like conflict. We don't know when they spring up on us and we have to find solutions to. That.
But with elections over time we have been able to prepare ahead and engage with stakeholders to go against election shutdowns.
>> MODERATOR: I'm just going to make a note. I can't sees coming online. I'm joining a little late. I'm asking if you can make a scrub of any comments on the chat and bring that to our attention. But while that happens I do see a hand up in the room. So if you would like to come and ask a question and introduce yourself. That would be great.
>> Hi, everyone my name is Nicky. First I between say thank you so much for to the U.K. government for continuing to chair the task force on the shutdowns for the FOC. I look forward to this every year. I have two questions. Someone to Google Alex you were talking quite a bit about how thible for people to be able to actually access all the different Google products is key for thible for Google toll actually do business in this that county. So I guess one of the thing I'm wondering when you are considering introducing products in different new countries and different new settings, are internet shutdowns something you look at. Are internet products you look at in new markets. I think it's helpful for people to know because there's broad conversation about FDI but it's not looked at from a private sector perspective in that way. So it would just be helpful if you could share.
It and the second question, I think it was Joss noting that governments will shut down the internet and provide a justification and sometimes it's not resolving the issue that they want. Sometimes it's having the exact effect that they want. But the issue that they are trying to resolve is one that has nothing to do with the internet itself. So I guess I'm wondering for the panelist or for the room we have been having this conversation for a long time. The fact that government shutdowns are often imposed because someone is trying to address something that really doesn't have to actually do with the internet. Has there been conversation in these multi-stakeholder settings on how do you address the actual root issue at hand. I think one of the thing we hear --
We got to shut down the internet because there's a protest that is going to.
Hatch those are all very different thing that are technically a solution that is not a real solution being applied. So thanks.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you very much, Nicky. One question for Alec and one question which chimes with Nicky's second question around chatting to governments and trying to explain issue. So maybe I might ask one of Joss or Scott if they want to address. That but Alex over to you. We had a question directed at you. Thanks.
>> Alex: Yeah, I think there are a myriad of factors but one F factors is the operating environment. What is the Rule of Law like and the regulations we have to comply with and certainly whether or not there is access available with the infrastructure. Is the government shutting it down on a regular basis are thing we would highlight when we are thinking about the riskiness of a country, and is it worthwhile to expand their business there. So it is something that comes up, be a licker when we are doing those valuations.
>> MODERATOR: Thanks, Alec. And we got a question which we talked about having a dialogue with states. Trying to really explain the challenges around this. I might ask Joss to come in on that. And then Scott there's a question in chat directly for you. So Joss do you want to address that one. And Scott if you could come in afterwards. Thanks. Alex --
Scott you come in after. That but Joss first to you.
>> JOSS: Yeah, I think trying to understand the relationship between the intended action of some authority, whether it's local government or national government, and what they actually do. I'm beginning to suspect that maybe policy makers are not entirely rationale actors at all times in the way that they make their policies. And in many Sens there is this knee-jerk reaction. And in some cases it's -- I say it carefully but justifiable. You know -- I've certainly seen cases where the stated intention is is beingian environments going on this in this region going on by social media. We don't see an alternative.
This is the only think we can think of to do. And as somebody who is ultimaterly against internet shut downs can I still have sympathy with that perspective because if I don't try to understand why an authority want to shut down the internet, I can't work proactively to try to prevent them from having that conclusion. And I think that's something we really need to accept as a community, that it's not an us and them problem. It's a problem to work out together. How can we prevent this from happening.
And I think there's a much wider point, there which is -- you know most people in this room would probably share this opinion with me. If you told me ten years ago that internet shutdowns would be increasing, I was studying censorship 10 years ago, 15 years ago, and the perspective would always have been the internet is becoming more and more important. And become more and more embedded in society. Everyone is using.
It it's necessary. How could it possibly be shut down? It's just going to die off is something that you wouldn't do. And yet it is. And why is that happening?
Paritally because the authorities who are I trying to achieve their societal or political or economic goals don't feel that they have an alternative lever of power to achieve that. So it's become an all or nothing problem. Especially with the rise of encryption on the enter nit, which is obviously from my perspective an unmitigated good. But it's meant that some of the more subtle form of censorship where can you block pages or key word have gone away. And states have gone with the option, we now shut down everything or functionally everything in terms of the larger services or we have no control over this. And that's a different position for a state or authority to be in.
So that's why I focus a lot of my work on trying to understand the motivations and the impacts. Because it feels to me that that is the most proactive way and holistic way to try to combat this problem rather than the 10, 15-year ago approach which was more naive saying we will just say we will fin ways for get around your censorship and then we will just give up.
And that's not happened. That drives at the research of my agenda but where we need to be thinking in these terms.
>> MODERATOR: Thanks, Joss. Can I bring in Scott in the chat. Is there a recommended nothing --
How can we ensure national states use a issue model to use structures for the UN issue body. Does the UN have an international model.
>> SCOTT: Can you hear me. Sorry, lost power. Missed the question. I want to emphasize with what Joss was saying we see more ask more governments look for tech solutions to what are deep societal problems in a nutshell and the root causes of protests are related to a lot of our bread and butter work but promoting freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and non-discriminate nation and exclusion. So I think we need to look at those societal causes and take on the reality of the human rights space that is or is not available to get to the problem, similarly with online racism. Racism won't go away if we start sensorring I racism online. If so we would see knee-jerk reacts so now that my -- there is --
>> MODERATOR: Institutional structures to engage all interested bodies. Do we have success cases in nation at states and a UN approach.
>> SCOTT: Yes, hopefully we will see them at the next AGIF and the next IGF, and the next IGF.
>> MODERATOR: I have a sign saying 3 minutes left. There is one question in the room I will try to wrap up thing. I will give you my mic. Introduce yourself and ask the question. Thanks.
>> Thank you. It was my question. So the question was how can we promote national governments to use this multi-stakeholder body to develop all the policies including all the bodies, et cetera.
>> SCOTT: Sorry. We can hear you now. Short answer is leverage the global digital come back. The 183 governments have just committed to a multistakeholder level. It's very clear language, I'm forgetting -- but there is clear language committing to multistakeholderism and inclusive IGF is in there. Again it's not anything new that we couldn't find in existing international human right law and principals but the fact that governments have collectively come together and reafirred that gives us space for advocacy and for pure pressure.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much.
I'm going to wrap this up. I will say a few word and ask each panelist to briefly come up with any concluding thoughts. I think from my perspective I want to thank everyone again. I this today is a real demonstration -- this panel is a real demonstration of the power of the multi-stakeholder approach. I think one particular point which I want to draw out which hasn't been highlighted is good state practice. Often it's very easy to highlight examples where states have actually shut the internet down. Representing the British government I would say this -- in the summer in the U.K. some really shocking riots across the country. And they had real impact on our social fabric. They were reported widely and reported quite a lot of violence. However during that time the internet was not should down. Policy makers took the decision not to do that. So I would just highlight that because good state practice and encourage other states to look at this and realize that this is a
blunt tool. And there are wider societal issues at play and there are different levers available to address. That so with that in mind I might ask each panelist very briefly to have some sort F concluding thought for you, so Felicia do you want to come in.
>> Yes, we have the fight against multi---
So it's important for us to continue to work together to push back in common practices. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Joss. Any concluding thoughts?
>> JOSS: Just to agree with what you said. And I think really in terms of understanding the motivations and the activities of the authorities that are engaging in internet shut downs we all agree this is blunt tool and there are alternative ways to achieve those goals. Let's not fall into the same problem of thinking that we can have similarly blunt solutions. We need to be just as subtle and holistic in how we address this problem if we are going to bring it together and multistakeholderism is the way to do that.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Alex.
>> Alex: I don't think I have anything to add. But I this Google is continuing to work with society to understand how are you experiencing the impact of shutdowns so we can continue to think about building tools that are effective as part of the work that we are doing.
>> MODERATOR: Last but not least, Scott.
>> SCOTT: No thanks, I learned quite a bit in the dialogue. So thanks for including us. And I guess I'm inspired to go deeper into some of the examples that Felicia was putting out there as possible models. Good and bad but how we can learning to and improve in the shutdown space.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you to our panelists but also thank you to everyone else who was joined us both in the room and online. Thank you.