Welcome to the United Nations | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in João Pessoa, Brazil, from 10 to 13 November 2015. 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. 

 

***

>> LIDIA BRITO: Well, good morning or good afternoon to everybody. Apologies that we are in this very strange room so that we are ourselves also on the phone. It's channel 1 that we should have. And welcome to all to this UNESCO Open Forum. We were saying that you were interested in our work. Because at this time in this room on Friday, it's really a sign that, that the report is probably an important piece of work. And we are very happy to have you here and allow me also to extend from the beginning a special word of thanks to our panelists for really in the last day being able to -- to be here.

This session is really about a report that we are launching today and officially and publicly that this related to how to foster inclusive knowledge societies. And in this concept of knowledge societies is very dear to UNESCO and I have to say very dear to me personally. At the time I was the minister for ISN technology of Mozambique in 2003, and we were talking about the information society. In coming from Mozambique, I didn't like the concept. I felt that when we talked about information and then the knowledge economy, then we were using knowledge to exclude less developed countries. And I was very much behind as a government, the member state of UNESCO, in pushing the concept of knowledge societies because if the society is about knowledge, then indeed we are all empowered to make our choices and the choices that are good for us, the choices that are good for our committees, our societies, and the choices that are good for the different societies in the world.

So it's a privilege to me as the head of UNESCO in this forum and as the original director for science in Latin America and in the Caribbean region for UNESCO to really manage and share this session where the concept of knowledge societies are more than ever alive. They are more than ever important. This study was requested for our member states, to the 37 General Conference.

So two years ago an idea was to say in the areas of UNESCO, how can we really make sure that the information and knowledge, freedom of expression, privacy, ethics on -- on the global internet can be analyzed and understood in order to empower our societies in this -- in the global society as a whole. The way it will work, I will have my colleague to present the report briefly. And then we have really -- we're very privileged to a very interesting and very prestigious members of the panel who will bring their perspectives. Is the report interesting? Does it bring something new? Are they gaps that we didn't cover in the report? How can we improve this reflection about how to foster inclusive knowledge societies? So I am the timekeeper. We're asking our speakers to speak for three minutes, because this is a short session. Then if we can have your input, okay? Let's try to make it as interactive as I can. Welcome, again. I pass the floor to you.

>> XIANHONG HU: Thank you, Lidia. The last day of IGF, I think this is presented in the right time and the right place because among the UNESCO general conference, the commissioner just endorsed the study and the member states are happy with the options that have presented in this study. In the right locations means the study was mandated by a resolution maybe two years ago. And the resolution was really proposed by a group by Brazil and Germany. So it's really happy to -- happy to present this study in Brazil as well. We finally got it endorsed.

So I would talk more about the process in this presentation because for us, it's not an academic research, but a policy study. The idea as the process doesn't matter to justify the results. You've got the resolution two years ago. We are mandated to go through a multi-stakeholder process and look at the UNESCO niche, the area of internet governance because it's very broad. We couldn't take off. But just to some specific areas mentioned and not in the society and not even the society of the UNESCO vision of the society of internet governance.

So for the area, our member states have requested the access to information and the knowledge. It's a free traditional mandate and now we find a free special offline, on-line together. The privacies with a new mandate taking because we look at it as a master condition to other fundamental freedom, including the expression and the dynamic information society. Look how this puzzle -- the puzzle is our new concept, the internet Universality which UNESCO positioned itself in the ecosystem. They are promoting an internet based on human rights, an internet open -- open in terms of technology and markets. We call for internet accessible to all and all of the process should be driven by a multi-stakeholder participation. The process was going on for two years. And we started with eight consultation meetings with member states. We organized the five groups, original group consultation with our governments. Plus the G-77 committee and the royal China commission. We've launched a request there, we have received 200 substantial responses to that.

I would like to mention we have run a very successful written consultation in Latin America by the office as Lidia was supervising that we received a -- so many local contributions to the questionnaire. Plus we are presenting the concept in the multi-stakeholder events to take in other comments there. As the process in the conference, we had stakeholder participants, we leaked to the final version distributing here.

Okay. The conclusion first in the study helped to identify the different roles for different stakeholders in the internet governance for ideals like UNESCO. We are then relevant to hold our governments to shape the global standard sighting on the governance for the users for intermediaries. We have a study on that. We're also working with the companies to hold a company responsible and to respect the human rights. And as a principle of that is very important. And up we are using this framework to invade the future work in this domain. Shall I say that, Lidia? Okay.

So there are stacking points. We have eight options for UNESCO's future actions which is on page 101 in this study. That is really the core issue welcome to discuss here, I believe. Because it's already being endorsed by the governments. But we need to implement it in the coming years. And I just am showcasing what -- it's under internet universality framework. Under the resolution. They're creating the semantic studies to inform the policy makers. Also, I like to share my webpage, you can see that we have reviewed the 55 international declarations on internet governance. As a policy. So for the future discussion here we like to discuss show how we implement them and shall we consider developing indicators to have the internet facility, internet governance. So that's basically the study is about. Thank you, Lidia.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much, for maintaining the time also. I think we don't have all of the speakers. So I will start in the order as they are here. But then I may bring other people. You can sit in the table. We are not that many. Let's make it a conversation and more close conversation and don't stay in the back because it's a very big room for -- for some -- not much people. Well, our first speaker then would be Jase -- Joseph is the U.N. special reporter on rights to privacy, a very central issue in this report. Indefinitely how do you see these and I will be your recommendations in terms of helping UNESCO advance.

>> JOSEPH CANNATACI: I was very pleased when I saw the reports with which I had nothing do, I should make clear. But which reflects a number of ideas on how to express in the past -- over the past ten years or so. If you look at page 16 of the report, and the table -- the table one, where you have the four keystone fields of focus. This is something in which I was also talking about in the panel I have just participated in barely an hour ago.

With these fundamental rights because to a certain extent if you look at the first three keystones, for the benefit of people, even those watching on-line. But the first keystone is access to information and knowledge. The second one is freedom of expression, and the third one is privacy. And what I'd like to explore here more the privacy of its own was actually the interaction of these three. And the extent to which these may not be an end to themselves. There is an idea you advanced also, Lidia, where things that are missing from the report and things which you might want to consider.

I have in other areas explored, or just have begun to explore, the extent to which we need to ask the question: Why do we have the rights to privacy? Why do we have the freedom of expression? Because is it an end to itself or a means to an end? The means to an end that I would like to suggest that we consider is that there should be a discussion on a fundamental -- on an overarching fundamental right. Something which is not taken place world-wide, something which is not even taken place in Europe. And this overarching right that I would like to describe is the right to free unhindered development of personality, right? Because to me, the -- those rights which are fundamental rights like the right to privacy, like to the right to -- like the right to freedom of expression, like the right to access of information.

These remind me of what my grandmother used to cook on. My grandmother would cook on a pot with a tripod. The tripod has three legs. And to me the three rights are the -- the three legs of the tripod. Obviously if you have a more sophisticated hold, it has four legs. And I know the extent to which you want to use ethics there, because ethics to me covers all of these areas. And the -- and therefore, I think that UNESCO can contribute to help structure an ongoing dialogue on how we should examine the right to free unhindered development of personality. Because this is something that we want to help for ourselves, especially for our children, how to take this forward.

And I would like to bring to the attention of the audience that some countries have already articulated that right as a constitution right. Germany is one of those countries. Romania is a number of the countries and there are a number of other countries in Europe which have done so. But other countries have not. This will help respond and compliment the excellent work being done in this report, thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you, very much, Joe. I think that's a very interesting way of really expressing what I think our member states wanted from this study is precisely how can we address that kind of right that is so, so -- so central to what UNESCO does. Our next speaker is Nigel Hickson, he's the Vice President for the global stakeholder engagement in Iran. Following Joe's comment, how would you see this report really impacting in some of the discussions that we are having at your level.

>> NIGEL HICKSON: Yes. Never quite sure if you're supposed to put the headphones on or not. I'll take them off when I speak. Good afternoon, thank you for inviting us on to this panel. I would like go back a step. We're fortunate enough to be involved in some of the early workings of this report. We work with UNESCO on this preparation event that you hosted back in 2013. And, of course, the connecting -- the CONNECTing the Dots Conference which I think was incredibly important earlier this year on which a lot of this report is based. This is a very important time for the sort of conclusions that are coming out of this report.

We have this process, which we know, which is culminating in New York in the U.N.'s time in the general assembly. UNESCO played an important role in the preparation for this event. And you contributed to it, both in terms of person and in terms of intellectual energy. And I think it's been very important indeed. Because the clarity of purpose that you bring and the fundamental aspect to the rights of people and the rights of privacy and the rights of -- the rights of freedom of expression, I think, are very salient to this whole process. And so I would certainly like to think that it's a very -- it's very timely. You're issuing this report just before this discussion. Hopefully no doubt on your membership, the members -- the countries in your membership will have a chance to read it. And hopefully that will influence some of the thinking that takes place in New York.

On the themes -- I mean freedom of expression and privacy, I think others are much more expert. But I like the ideas that you put forward in terms of the freedom, the personality. I think that's very fundamental. I think ethics is something which as you say is an overarching -- an overarching theme, but equally important. And, of course, access. I think where access comes in, certainly in the ICANN context and here at the IGF but also the whole nature of being able to access education, many different levels. Not just the infrastructure, but access, being able to access the content, the rightful content people should be able to access in their own language. And I think this is fundamentally important to the process and to the rights.

So I would finish by saying thank you very much for this report. It endorses the multi-stakeholder approach to the governance of the internet which I think we've been championing here this week at the IGF. It's been -- anyone, I always totally amazed by IGFs because if you go to earned internet governance forum where people have energy and compassion or commitment and it doesn't matter if they're young or old, where they come from, doesn't matter what stakeholder group they're in, they want to be involved. And sometimes you sit in the U.N. forum for people argue and they say well, actually it's just governance that want to decide this thing. And you think it can't be right. It can't be right when you have the energy, the compassion, the commitment of so many people to being involved in the processes. Thank you, UNESCO.

>> LIDIA BRITO: You know our members are governments. But we are lucky that we have also associate members in the wealth of partnerships and definitely we defend more than ever the multi-stakeholder approach. Because I think this is a creative process and it's so complex that there are no single organizations that can deal with all of the complexity and we need to work together to think together. And for that, of course, it's really my pleasure to introduce our next speaker. Will Hudson, Senior Advisor for Internet Policy from Google. And also to the companies, to the private sector, what does it mean, this report, for you guys. And how can we work together in really pushing to the outcomes of the report?

>> WILL HUDSON: Particularly on a Friday last year. The IGF. Going to be brief because you're waiting on lunch and not even the last person. For Google, it's an interesting report. One of the things it does is it's talking about the knowledge society but it's talking about the knowledge society in the particular concept of the global internet, right?

So what can the internet do to help further and enhance the society around the world for everyone? And this is something near and dear to Google's heart. And so I'd make two points within that box. One of which is it's incredibly helpful that the report highlights sort of the fundamental importance of internet access to the knowledge. I mean, you can't -- you can't contribute to the knowledge economy in the 21st century if you're not on the internet. And secondly that's the only way we're going to deal with the challenge of actually accomplishing that necessity is by everybody working together, all of the stakeholders working together.

So for the first point, I think, this IGF has been fantastic for a number of reasons, but one of which has been the focus on the access and connectivity portion of the internet governance world. We all think about this in the noble and global goal in its own right. One thing that UNESCO does well is putting it in context and telling us what's at stake. To everyone in this room, the internet is something we all take for granted. In large part, it's been tremendously successful, right? There are 2 billion people on the internet in over 100 countries.

The problem is that if you do a Wikipedia search find the denominator for that number, it's that we have 4.5 billion people still unconnected, 60% of the world's population. And that, that's simply unacceptable. The only way we're going to continue to -- continue to have a vibrant thriving knowledge society is to get everyone on-line everywhere. And, you know, that's a very maximalist goal and it's a long-term goal.

But it brings me to the second point. I think one of the important things in this report embraces fully is that I'm talking about the connectivity portion of this but I think it's equally relevant to the other portions is that governments have a vitally important role to play in many aspects of this, until they are one important player. And that whether we're talking about connectivity and what can the private sector do to innovate and iterate to solve a challenge and how can data society do to keep everyone grounded on a data results oriented growth, governments have a role here too, to create an enabling environment. And so I think, you know, looking at the report as a whole, I think what I would say is its tremendous value to see something come out now that's looking at this holistically. But in a context that I think is very familiar to everyone here, but is not necessarily very evident to people outside of the internet governance community. So I commend you all for that.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you for this. The next speaker -- I'm very happy. I'm coming to the speakers. Gender balance is not using these forums. But we did pretty well this time. So I would start with Veridiana Alimonti, a lawyer from Brazil Social Communication Collective. And I think you've also been involved with intervoices and so on. So give me the perspective of civil society and these movements.

>> VERIDIANA ALIMONTI: Thank you for the opportunity. I'm from a society organization that since 2003 fighting for a more diverse media and the human rights protection. First of all, I would like to stress the suitability of the debate ground zero which is how to foster new edge societies which is much more than connected societies. As the document says, normally societies are those that enable people to not only have the ability to access information resources from around the world, but to also contribute information in the local and global communities. Key rights related to UNESCO, freedom of expression, cultural diversity and education.

My first comment is net neutrality issues should be considered as part of the mandate, especially because this debate has to be done taking to regard all of those rights and not only economic and technical approaches. The document is not silent in relation to this issue. However, will this discussion be underlined and engage and working on net neutrality as a crucial element of ensuring the rights within the mandate. Related to net neutrality is the fact that the linking device for most individuals come on-line in a period is the phone. Besides the consumers already at UNESCO at this document regarding privacy, security, and other service, the enthusiasm with such statistics have to be balanced with two other concerns.

First the broadband access follows logic, billing, according to how many bits you consumed, the high prices data caps especially in developing countries and this discussion is directly related to this. Is that of the internet logic where you hire to capacity. An interesting way to dial with this is policies and investments related to the spectrum. Second in the internet, assessing the secondary in comparison. Depending on how the APPS are developed, the internet we know today can be replaced with walled gardens. And I wanted to discuss and hear from the other participants is about how UNESCO is being to -- is doing this and can foster the discussion about how to deal with hate speech in the internet environment and in the right environment and not the internet being taken as a dangerous place and how this is an opportune discussion related to privacy concerns.

So to finish, I would like to agree with connecting the dots, stakeholders as a trusted broker had to be partnerships in the stake holder opportunities. This is crucial to the national and international legislation as well as corporate best practices asides from setbacks. Without setbacks, I want to take the opportunity to talk about criminal threats, the internet civil rights. What we're going watch at the end if you have time can be found at the link B.lee/spyvideo. Thanks.

>> LIDIA BRITO: I do hope we will have a minute after the end of the session to see the film that you wanted to show to us before. Our next speaker is Cristina Monty. She's the official for the Director General for Communication Network, Contact and Technology. Give us your perspective also from the commission perspective. Because you've done a lot of studies on these areas and now do you see these studies, also, bringing together important actionable plans for us?

>> CRISTINA MONTY: Thank you very much. I would like to thank UNESCO for this comprehensive study. It's worth recognizing that UNESCO, even though it's a member, the organization where the members are governments still made the effort to enlarge and consult with other stakeholders so effectively using the multi-stakeholder model to advance on this issue. So I think this is something valuable.

The European Commission and U.N. in general has done a lot of studies. Beyond that, we're starting to make laws, regulations that are rules in 20, 28 member states. And I think it's important to maybe highlight what the study acknowledges is that internet is a common good for humanity. And this is exactly what the Vice President of the European commission responsible for digital single market just said here at the opening session of this IGF.

And also the good governance of the internet could help to bring the benefit of the internet to everybody in the world. And good governance can only be based on shared and common principles that are future proof that do not depend on a specific technology. As we know, the technology can change so quickly. So we really need common values, principles, on which we can build.

Many of the principles we see here are in line with broadly on the international community on netMUNDIAL principles are in line. We're talking about fundamental freedoms and human rights. From a European perspective, these rights are intrigueled in our rules and in everything we're trying to do. Again, I would like to highlight here that the Vice President said for the new generation gap for Europe is a digital single market strategy is based on the netMUNDIAL principles and freedoms and human rights.

On many of the issues we already have legislation or we'll soon have legislation. Like on the net neutrality issue which is now going to become a reality, a rule in 28 numbers states and on other issues, that's a protection reform which is something that's very important and we are aimed at having a complete legislation by the end of the year.

One other aspect that I would like to highlight is of course it's very important to talk about principles. One thing is that maybe we shouldn't forget that you need to ensure the security and the stability of the internet. Because without that, we can talk about freedom of expression and access. If you don't have the physical access. If the access is disrupted for whatever reason, then we really have a problem. Also because our societies rely so much on the internet. Thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much, Christina, for bringing that perspective. In the next speaker is Marc Rotenberg. He's the Executive And Director of Electronic Privacy Information Center. Again, no profit in Washington. Privacy related, how do you see this report, Marc, and what are the issues that you bring forward, thank you?

>> MARC ROTENBERG: Privacy seems to be a popular topic today. I want to thank UNESCO for the opportunity to participate in the discussion. I looked on-line and found I participated first in 1998 on the panel of info ethics for UNESCO when we first started the discussion. Things have come a long way. It's a substantial report, an important report. And I would like to congratulate you on the publication. There's nothing here at least I read so far that I would disagree with.

I think the main comment that I would make is I think there's a lot more do. I would use in the reference document in the privacy field a declaration put together by NGOs and experts in 2009. Called the Madrid privacy declaration. You'll find this on-line if you prefer to look, instead of Google, if you look for the privacy documentation, you'll find it on-line. The title is global privacy standards for global world.

I'll read just a few excerpts, some of it will be familiar. So the very first sentence in the Madrid declaration is affirming the privacy is a fundamental human right set out in the Universal declaration of human rights; the international covenant on civil and political rights and other human rights instruments and national constitutions. Then it goes on to talk about the other instruments. But the opening section ends in a significant way, particularly in this report. The section ends warning that the failure to safeguard privacy jeopardizes associated freedoms, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of access to information, nondiscrimination, and ultimately the stability of constitutional democracies. So the Madrid privacy declaration tries to recognize the interrelated nature of the various human rights that are so very important to safeguard the individual.

So there are a series of 10 different recommendations. They're all quite concrete. I'm going to take a moment on the last declaration, which I think is very timely following the decision of the European court of justice which many of you may be familiar with, the case by Max Schrems concerning the safe harbor arrangement between the European Union and the United States which in effect tried to substitute a self-regulatory framework of trade policy for a system of law that directed fundamental rights.

The court of justice concluded this violated the Charter of the Fundamental Rights as well as the EU Data Directive. The question raised now is not only what is the difference between the data flows between the EUS and the EU but also right around the world. We all conduct these issues in our societies. So this is the final recommendation in 2009 from the Madrid privacy declaration which I think has been given greater resonance because of the recent decision of the court of justice. It calls for a framework with a full protection of civil society based on the rule of law, respect for fundamental human rights, and support for democratic institutions.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much, Marc, and also for bringing some of the instruments that are already there that the idea is to not to reinvent something but to build. Next speaker is Stefaan Verhulst. He's with the Governance Laboratory, the Government Lab in New York. And, again, in your perspective and you have been involved with the UNESCO in several ways and how do you look at these reports from your perspective also from governance. And how can we really make sure that the report can impact beyond even this reach.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST: I'm delighted to be here. Having been a UNESCO chair at Oxford University. I'm delighted to be back with UNESCO colleagues it at the table and especially focusing on a document that is extremely rich and dense to logics than to consume because of this all-encompassing and really an amazing taking stock of the issues that we currently are dealing with.

I will focus on four elements in order to limit the time. I will start with what I think is the more pronounced statement of the report which is on page 82 on the conclusions. The first line which basically says technologies in their use are not value free. And I think that basically I think encompasses the whole report. And the whole report to a large extent is about different values that are embedded in technology in the design of technology and the use of technology and that those different values match each other. There's a battle going on between the values and there's an effort going on in order to at least make sure that the values to a large extent are valued to large extent. There are two elements here important to take away.

There are two elements that perhaps the reports should have emphasized more. One is exactly the design of technology is not value neutral. So it would have been important, probably, for the report to also start reflecting on how is design, how is technology actually designed. How do companies like Google and others structure the services which have major implications for all of the keystones that are mentioned. Implications for free speech, for accessibility, they have indications for ethics and privacy. That element for values and design is an element that is an important underscoring.

The second element is because there are diversities of values involved and because the values actually do have equal value quite often, it's very important to have an eloquent process that mitigates and integrates the variety of points of view and the different kinds of values that are embedded with the technology. And so multi-stakeholder ownership. We need to look at what is multi-stakeholdership in the 21st century. What does it mean in the 21st century. Where can you start using technology to go beyond the -- the multi-stakeholdership which often is very messy, requires a convention center like that, and can be done in a different way, in a more innovative way. That's another element.

The second element is that the focus of the report is on knowledge societies. But to a large extent, we are really moving to the knowledge societies that are data driven. And I would have hoped that the report was somewhat more focused on the importance and the creation and the abundance of data to a large extent. It has implications for the four keystones.

First of all, it's crucial to start thinking about access to data, access to open government data, but also access to corporate data for public good. And I think it starts -- it's becoming key to start reflecting on corporations with future mines of data that is collected through society and through the use of the services. How can they actually open up the data and conditions to serve and give back. The key element that needs to be looked at.

The second element with data is a free expression. Given the fact that algorithmic editing will be more of a discussion. How do algorithms make more decisions and how does the impact discuss free development here given the UNESCO mission that is out there. Privacy clearly, there are huge elements of privacy consideration but with regard to data and we need to as mark and Joe have indicated, we need to talk about new concepts, concepts that invent data in the privacy approach that requires some kind of a framework.

I would say the biggest ethical challenge we have right now is ethics and how do we establish the new data ethics that start thinking about the implications of the use of data and the negative kind of discrimination that might happen as a result of the -- the prevalent use of data has become critical and needs to be considered and in sync with the privacy consideration and it's not the same. That's it.

And the fourth element I want to make is that the report indicates that internet governance becomes more and more complex and to it's that end, we need more and more efforts to start mapping the variety of issues and mapping especially the connections to those issues.

So yesterday there was a session on observatories and mapping efforts, we have one which is called the solutions map, the European commission has one, GYPO. And we're starting to work together more and more. Given the complexity reflected in the report, we see the value of the efforts more and more underscored. These are my four interventions I wanted to make. It's a dense report and I think everyone could probably make comments on every single page that was made. So I'll keep it to there.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much. We're going to open now in the time that we have left to you. And I know that you want to speak, Max, so you can take the floor now and then we have another one. And let's make it a conversation.

>> AUDIENCE: Just for the record, I'm Patrick Hennings from the ICANN Council of Europe and head of Innovation Society Department. First of all, congratulations to the report for putting this panel together. We've testified that we have a unit that contributed strongly to the report. And it's taken a lot of time and effort to produce it. It took time and effort to respond to the many questions that were raised and a loft intelligence and input there.

If you don't mind, I would like to take up the elements of some of your speakers. First of all, Joe, you hit the nail on the head so to say when we say this is about the right to free and unhindered development. I would add something to that. In the free and democratic society because that is what we are also aiming for. It's not the individual as such, it's the individual in a society. Whereby nature human beings are social beings and we need to be able to see our development in this global -- in this context. That's just the first reflection.

And just also to respond to Marc, Marc Rotenberg. Well we brought Max Schrems to the IGF. We had the open forum where we thought it was important that after such an important decision we would be able to exchange directly with one of the litigators or the litigator in this question. And when you say come back to the Madrid declaration, it's important to recall that we have a global instrument and in the council of Europe data protection convention, convention 108, it's an open, partial -- it's an open convention.

It's a global convention. We have a number of states this week. There is Tunisia is requesting to exceed to the convention. We've had requests from Mexico, we have requests from Africa, from Latin America. We've had a number of interactions world-wide. And I think the Shrems case clearly identifies it's not sufficient to have how much importance we also give to the EU. It’s not sufficient to have an EU regulation and an agreement with a number of countries. It is important to regulate things at the more global level. I think what Stefaan was saying.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Can I ask you to be short. I do have some --

>> AUDIENCE: The design of technology is indeed not neutral. We will be looking Alt specifically on the one side how algorithms are constructed. It's one of the key elements of privacy and data protection and orientation, free speech for the future. So we'll be looking into that. Thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much for that contribution. I think -- the speakers also on data shares, you can use also the microphones or move to the table, okay?

>> AUDIENCE: Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Subicha. I've been a professor of communication at university. I want to start by congratulating you to put together a fantastic report and recognizing everybody whose work has gone into it. I want to speak to three specific points. I see four cornerstone ethics. But with that, I would like to see digital trust, which is at the heart of the conversation.

I also want to re-emphasized the importance of carrying on this conversation. It is very important for us to see in UNESCO the kind of amplification that happens whether it's issues of education or access and the kind of influence you carry with governments world-wide. But civil societies and academia, it's a constant struggle to get attention. This is a powerful platform to bring together these issues.

The third is the importance of national and regional initiatives. So I hear there's one regional consultation in Latin America. The internet changes as we speak and there are many issues that emerge as far as things are concerned. Many, many issues when it comes to connecting not just the next million but also the disenfranchised. Issues of developing countries and other stake holder groups. And UNESCO is a wonderful platform which is neutral and acceptable to all. So this work must continue and carry on and we look forward to contributing to that. Thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much. We have more comments? Participation? Ideas? Otherwise, I may go to the -- to our panel again and we are finishing. So if there is one message that you would like to leave to us, as we finish this panel, what would be? I will start with you and go around.

>> The message UNESCO continue to play a role in constructing the bridges and the document have always on the horizon the idea of the knowledge of societies in a complete new way.

>> Very briefly, I think I would just say take away for me is that we've come a long way. But we've tremendously a long way to go and with ear only going to do it there if we do it together.

>> Thanks. So my message would be to -- as also as page 82 says, these are principles. So how do we move from principles to actions? That's going be the key element. Especially thinking about doing this in an innovative way. There's a lot of -- throughout the report, there's a lot of reference to the need for regulation. But there are different ways to actually go about meeting the objectives. We have behavioral science that can apply. We have design technology -- design principles that you can apply. You have funding mechanisms, you are procurement references. All elements that ultimately quite often are ignored in thinking about how do you actually tailor those principles and turn them into something that's meaningful beyond thinking about new law and new kind of policies that you might have there.

>> LIDIA BRITO: We have one last speaker. Please, very short. We are out of time.

>> AUDIENCE: It's really short. I'm from here in Brazil. I'm representing youth at IGF. I think it's really important because UNESCO is doing something really important with the young people. In Paris last month, they're including the young people in here and IGF. They're also including this kind of conversation. And there's the government and there's the young people. They're so -- I think this conversation here and also that it happened, it's really important. I think this is really great. So thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: You're referring to our youth forum that just took place two days before our general conference and really a very nice forum because it was on the environment and the technology and the internet came about. So clearly it's important. Can I give you the floor also?

>> Thank you. I have -- I have one message to deliver. First I want to thank our panelists and also our stakeholders to provide a substantial contribution. Look in New York, 50 pages and many other stakeholders. Really, much appreciated. And second, we're in the moment to plan for UNESCO. I heard your suggestions. You're quite in line. For example, neutrality, you want us to do to look at it from the human rights aspect. The agenda and algorithm. It's so complicated now, it's all kind of different technical solutions that we are also looking to these issues. Of course I had so many instruments. We're happening every day. We're creating a webpage. We're trying to harmonize the different values, different frameworks. UNESCO, the value is we're international. We have 195 members. We're trying to bring in the voice from all regions and also from the south. It's still there and the issues are different. The priorities are different. Looking at the 2013 sustainable agenda, its's really a good sticking point for going to the next phase of the conversation.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you. What can I ask you?

>> AUDIENCE: I'll be very brief. To the council of Europe question. I want to say the Madrid declaration says urge countries that have not ratified convention 108 to do so as expeditiously as possible. So we covered that. And to the second point, I agree entirely the next big focus should be algorithmic transparency. We need to make transparent and hold accountable the basis of automated decision making. That's one of the great challenges that we face.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Joe?

>> JOE CANNATACI: Thank you. I would like to say for those people who -- when the doctor was referring to what was the plan for the last two years, UNESCO offers the ability, the institutionalized ability to provide further structure and assistance for the dialogue. And one of the things I would invite UNESCO to do is participate in the large multi-stake holder conference organizing in October in 2016 together more so with human rights and freedom of expression. The number of the keystones that you have there, which is deemed precisely and focused on the rights to unhindered development of personality hopefully in a free society. I would like to point out with those people who don't live in free democratic societies deserve a right to free and unhindered development of personality which is why they would probably like to make the transition from not free to free or totally free. Thank you.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you, Joe. Thank you for the information to participate. I'm sure that it will be riding along with you and others on this very topic and essential human right. They would say child and youth rights. Nigel?

>> NIGEL HICKSON: Thank you very much. And just briefly thank you as well to UNESCO. I suppose my message would be just to please continue. Please continue with what you're doing. Please develop. I know it's complex. It's difficult. But your membership is so wide, the people you involve in your processes is so comprehensive. And we are in this together as others have said. So congratulations.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Yes?

>> I guess my suggestion would be to focus on the most vulnerable groups, on the women, the children, the elderly. Go on and contribute to the protection of cultural and linguistic diversity, promote multilingualism. So as to avoid the digital gap and we can ensure digital inclusion.

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much. All of the strong messages. Yes? Please?

>> One minute before the break, okay?

>> LIDIA BRITO: Let me just finish if you don't mind. This is a share and then we can have your movie. Thank you again to all of you. I think we have listened and we know that there is a lot to do in particular with implementation and going from principles and re-elections and also to take the key issues and like you said, don't just look to what it results on. So thank you very much to our panelists I would propose a round of applause to them.

[ Applause ]

And really thank you to you because you stayed here, you came to this very strange room so keep coming to UNESCO sessions. Keep going to our websites. We are constantly producing new information. And clearly this idea of new indicators to measure the human rights approach in internet, the openness of internet, the access of the internet, and the multi-stakeholder approach of the internet is our biggest challenge now and we will need the consultation and this time with our member states, the six languages of the organization in all of the regions, all stakeholders. So prepare yourselves because we will come back to you to make sure that together we can construct indicators that help us in governments and companies and in civil societies really to assess progress and to make sure that it's not only a dream is not only principles but that become reality that building is just the knowledge of society everywhere in the world.

So thank you very much. And then now, yes, can we have the movie and who can stay, please stay for one minute to see the Intervoices movie.

(Captioned Video)

>> LIDIA BRITO: Thank you very much. Thanks again for being with us.