You are here

IGF 2020 - MAG - Virtual Meeting - XIX

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during an IGF virtual call. 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. 

***

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. Good afternoon, good evening and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to MAG Virtual Meeting number XIX. As you know just the legal stuff that's being recorded, transcript will be made available after the meeting and also a summary report will be made available a couple of days later.

Just a quick note on people who cannot make it, we have Danko, Guinella, Masko, they sent their regrets. If I left anyone else out, please just say the name. With that, I'll turn the meeting over to Anriette, our chair, to start the meeting. Anriette, please.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I'm here. I think Leanna also sent her apology.

>> Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: So if you can just add her name to the list. Danka, good you can be here for a bit. It's the 19th virtual call of MAG 2020. It also happens to be 19 working days until the IGF start. So the tension, I hope is increasing, but not in a way that induces ‑‑ I don't think ‑‑ even though we have a lot to do, the secretariat has a lot to do and the MAG has a lot to do. I don't think there is any reason for panic. Let's increase the pace, but let's not panic.

I'll ‑‑ Chengetai, I don't see the agenda on screen, oh, there it is. It's in the chat for us. We can run through the agenda to see if we need to make changes from it.

Welcome from the chair, checking on action items from the previous meeting. Number three, updates from the secretariat. Four, updates from main session organizing groups, and, five, updates from those DCs, MAG working groups and BPFs who sent written updates. So we'll only go through those ones that have had something to report which they have shared with us and then any other business.

I think the primary goal of today's meeting, I would say there are two things that are very important. The one is to finalize the main sessions. I have looked at the preparation and some of them are completely ready. Some of them are not quite ready. But we absolutely have to finalize them this week. I think this is the cut‑off point. So that's the primary goal. I would say the secondary goal is for us to get a sense from the secretariat about the technical preparation for the meeting and what we can expect, what's still going to happen in terms of the website, the website development, technical support for participants, security and the different types of Zoom formats we are going to be using and how we are going to facilitate that.

Chengetai, if you would take time to give an update and if MAG members come out and ask questions, it is important at this point in time that you feel well informed about the preparation of the entire IGF. Because you are the champions and people expect MAG members to be well prepared. So if you are not sure about anything and if anything has been overlooked, please ask.

So is that okay? Does anybody have suggestions or additions to the agenda? I'm checking the participant list for hands. I don't see any hands.

So welcome, everyone. Let's have a good meeting. Chengetai, over to you for the update. Shall we go through ‑‑ actually, the action items. Let's first start and check on action items from the previous meeting, please.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much. Item one, a deeper discussion on recommendations on the BFP reports. I will ask the MAG chair, Anriette.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I'm sorry, Chengetai. Can you just repeat that? I just couldn't hear you clearly.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. Sorry. To schedule a dedicated MAG meeting for a deeper discussion on recommendations ‑‑

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: From the BFP.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I haven't scheduled that yet. So I think that should just be action for next week. I didn't feel that the timing was good. Certainly not until MAG members feel they have overcome or completed the workload of organizing the main sessions. I will consult with Marcus to set a date before the IGF starts. Sorry. Not done yet. Added to my list for next week.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anriette.

The second action item is MAG members involved in the introductory session, the thematic groups to work with the secretariat on developing how to make the introductory session.

As you'll recall there is going to be a recording of the introductory session so that people can view the recording and get an idea on the main thrust of the virtual IGF, the themes, et cetera.

And so I did send out a starter message last week just on the formats and I think I had a report from, I think, when et cetera, but not everybody. So I would say that's continuing, but I wouldn't say that it is ‑‑ we can do more work on that. It is not yet finalized, but it has been started.

The third item is the MAG chair to share with the wider MAG the draft response by the MAG working group on strategy and strengthening to the options paper on recommendations 5‑A and 5‑B. I have seen that. I have seen a copy of that.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: It was sent to the MAG list, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: It's also up, if anyone wants to find it again. If you go to the IGF website and look for MAG working groups, go to MAG working group strategy and click on the working group strategy page and you'll find a link to the document there.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: The third one is the secretariat to provide a narrative description to accompany the flow charts. Those are the ones that Sam presented on the outputs of the IGF 2020. And those outputs have been incorporated into version two of the draft overview of approach to planning the annual IGF. And that is on section 8.2.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: That's right.  That's actually been done.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: It is in the document we are developing on organizing the IGF.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. And so those are all the action items that I have from last week. Back to you, Anriette.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Chengetai. Any questions? I don't see any hands. So let's proceed to the next agenda item which is the update from the IGF secretariat. Back to you, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anriette. So this is the busiest time for the secretariat, as you may guess, from now until a week after the meeting, I suppose.

And we can forget about ‑‑ I think the chair said there are 19 working days. For us it's more than 19. Every single day is a working day, not just the work week.

But Luis on the secretariat has been working very hard on the website. That's the first thing. Luis is creating a landing page and we are all contributing for the look and feel of it. We are also going to get consultation with our colleagues that we are also going to get a designer, if you want to have it, from New York DESA. They are going to loan us somebody and that will help us also work on the website and also contribute to other facets such as video production as needed.

So I would just like to thank them for finding a solution for that.

We are going to have a help desk ‑‑ virtual help desk. For every IGF, when we have a physical meeting, there is a help desk where people can come and ask questions. So we are going to work on a virtual help desk which is basically like a chat function where people can come and it's going to be on the landing page of the virtual IGF landing page.

And people can come in and ask questions, any questions, and there will be a number of us that the texts can go to. We have volunteers as well to come and man the desk, so to speak. We'll be very grateful. So just send us an e‑mail and then we can distribute hours because we would like the help desk to be manned 24 hours a day, if possible, not just during the time when we are transmitting.

So if any MAG member would like to help or anybody else would like to help man the desk, it's very, very ‑‑ I wouldn't say it's heavy work. You just have to have the web interface open. If somebody comes in, you can help them out. If there is something you can't do, of course you can reach out to somebody who can help them out.

So that's one thing that we are planning.

The other thing about the website or the sessions, the Zoom we are thinking about as well is we do have the webinar format and we do have the meeting format. The webinar format is, of course, much more secure. You have very finite control of who speaks and also the text messages, whether they go just to panelists or whether they go to everybody. So there is a very fine control over the interactions.

With the meeting format as well like we are having now, people can see each other and people can message and people can also interrupt if they want. So the onus is quite heavy work on the moderator, but what you lose with the fine control you gain with the social interaction.

What we are doing right now is that we are going to ask the session organizers which type of format they would want to go for. Would they want to go for the webinar format or the meeting format? That e‑mail is going out to them this week and they'll have to answer by next week. And then we can formulate a plan to accommodate those issues.

The main sessions and the high level sessions will be webinar format. Just because we do expect a lot more people for the webinar format and the webinar format, of course, can carry more people than the meeting format. And also we do feel that since we do have ministers and a lot of VIPs there, it would be good to have finer control over how the things are going on there.

But that does not say that there is going to be much less interaction because you can still have breakout rooms which you have the same meeting formats, et cetera, in that.

I don't know if Luis wants to add anything on that. Just give Luis a chance to say something.

>> Thank you, Chengetai. I think you said everything. The only maybe one is minor. But if we should allow individual participants to chat to each other because it is true that it is good practice for social networking, but at the same time sometimes it is better to allow the people to decide if they want to be contacted.

In any case, people can know in advance. So I don't see a big problem there.

Then about capacity, actually we can have this webcasting thing. We may maximum capacity, but yeah. I completely agree with you on the rest.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Luis.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Luis. Just want to interject quickly here. I'm really pleased to hear that we are giving session organizers the option of webinar format versus business meeting format.

I have been talking to national IGFs and others using webinar format. There is one concept of webinar formats which is that people leave. They more readily leave because no one can really see they are leaving except the panelists obviously. It's interesting. There is a pattern with webinars that people leave whereas in meeting format, participants see one another. They can see who is in the room. So if someone leaves the room it is much more visible. It's interesting that there are different patterns of behavior that result from the different formats. I'm very pleased we will be allowing meeting format for the IGF, at least for sessions that want to use that format because it's more akin to the style of the IGF. It's more interactive. People can see who is in the room with them.

I think, Luis, maybe you can put that question to the mag about whether we should allow participants to have one‑on‑one chat with one another and maybe other questions we can compile and send to the MAG for input. There are quite a few things actually.

We want to consult MAG members how to name the rooms. We could do a list of questions for MAG members we can send to you in the coming days. Back to you, Chengetai.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anriette. We are also planning more sessions that will encourage social interaction because, of course, it has been said that the strength of the IGF ‑‑ the value of the IGF is at the edges as well where people can meet each other and you have this serendipitous meetings and connections are made.

So we are going to try to replicate that online. We have been watching how other people have been doing it. So we are going to feature some social networking tools. We are having great difficulty with music night because of the latency involved. So we cannot promise you music night at this time. But we'll see what we can do for some sort of maybe solo sessions. We can't really have joint sessions as such.

We are also going to plan to have at least 60 minutes of networking each day which is broken across, you know, some breakout groups and which can be organized by region where people can meet each other regionally like last year or the year before you have the Caribbean group meeting that they can meet regionally or by interest or issue you know on big data, et cetera, with no real structure. Just people coming in, meeting, talking to see what can come up with that.

Also the one thing that we are going to do is we are going to have a virtual IGF village and I'll just ask for a little bit about that.

>> Thank you, Chengetai. We have been talking about past meetings on the village. Nothing has changed in terms of the concept. Once we have the graphic designer hopefullily we'll create the entry page in the form of a map of the venue. Then you can walk to the map, click on the pins and each directs you to individual E‑booth pages.

Once you go to the individual booth page then currently the work is under development where the booth organizers are putting critical information they would like to share with the IGF 2020 participants. There it can be in different forms. It can be e‑mail, text, image. So the burden of creativity now is on the booth organizers, but we are working with them and sharing some advice where possible giving good examples to make these pages more creative.

One of the social activities Chengetai mentioned will focus on a joint tour of the IGF village. That one hour we'll dedicate to go through the village. All the village organizers will be there so we can run internal consultations. We'll further discuss should we break into breakout rooms maybe for one‑on‑one conversations.

Finally,ing each booth page allows for scheduling one to one consultations with the booth organizers at the convenience of the organizers and of the person who wants to engage. You see the little calendar icon on the page that Luis is now showing. When you click on the calendar it directs you to an external calendar of the booth organizer where you can communicate your request to schedule face to face. Well, one‑to‑one online consultations. Thank you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anya. So that's it with the website. Then just in the form of updates, we do have the topic for the parliamentary track which is going to be entitled building trust in a time of COVID‑19 response and post COVID‑19 recovery.

We are also doing this incorporation with the international parliamentary union. So invitations will be sent out to parliamentarians through the IPU.

The other thing I was asked to talk about a little bit, the high level track. We are still working on the high level tracks. I think I did send out the concept note on the high level track. I would also like to mention and thank Jacomo and the ABU for helping to find professional journalists to also moderate the tracks and we are getting journalists that have some knowledge of the subject. So they are not coming in cold. They have knowledge of the subject and we are going to be talking to them as well and also talking to the panelists.

The other thing is there will be a youth summit within the first phase of the IGF and we are also incorporating youth, so we are going to have a youth respirator. In fact, we are going to have two youth representatives within the high level track. So we do pay attention when we do have these open mic sessions. So we are going to have them.

Is there anything else?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Maybe a little bit about the opening session and also the communication strategy.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Oh, yes. So for this IGF we want to do away with the conveyer belt speeches, et cetera. Yes, you will have basically one speech at the opening by Mr. Liu just welcoming people. But it is going to be a discussion. And that's what we do plan with not just the opening, but the high level session and also the closing where we have invited the Secretary‑General to attend as well. We do want a flowing discussion, not just people having two rounds of statements. We are working hard to do that.

I think this is the time that we can do that. We'll see how it works out. Because of course this is the IGF and we should feel free to try new concepts and see how they work.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Maybe mention that you'll be using professional moderators.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, I did. I said when I thanked the EBU that we are using professional journalists.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: That's right. You did.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: We are using professional journalists with some knowledge of the subject. So they are not coming in cold.

Sam has come up with a communications strategy, hashtags, et cetera. We have starter graphics as well which we hope to improve upon as well this week and next week. We are going to be in touch with our department of global communications. This is more of New York, Wyman's area here. We are talking to them and see if we can come up with that. The sessions are not just going to be transmitted through YouTube and Facebook, but also the main sessions and the high level sessions are going to be transmitted on UNTV. Yes. We will have more focused communication strategy meetings as we go along.

I don't know if, Sam, you want to say something else more. I'll give you both the chance to speak since I'm picking on people.

>> I'll let Wyman go first.

>> Hi. Chengetai has pretty much said everything. I have nothing to add. Thanks. Back to Sam.

>> Hi. The first draft, one of the challenges we have for this IGF is participants getting the information they need and us being able to push out information to the general media which in the past has been easier because you have a physical local host in the room and you can have press conferences. So we don't have the ability this year. But because everyone this year has got very used to being online we can make a lot more use of virtual communication strategies. So that's the focus this year.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you. Another thing I would like to mention, what we realized as we have been sending out all these invitations and we'll send them out to Geneva and just save the date, a note for that. They are aware there is a virtual IGF there. Woe would like to not just send these messages out to the regular people who have attended an IGF.

So we would ask you, MAG members, to also send out notices of the IGF in your networks and your mailing list as well so we can get those people who will not normally attend an IGF. It doesn't make that much effort just to sit on your computer and listen to one session, two sessions. In that way, we might encourage more people who are not in the regular sphere to come in and take part in the IGF.

That's all I can think of to say. Thank you very much. Anriette. If there are any more questions you would like us to talk about, we are here.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Chengetai. And also Wyman and Sam. We'll share more details about the communication strategy soon.

Does anyone have questions for the secretariat on this quite detailed update? I'm looking for hands. Timea.

>> Thank you very much for the overview. There is a lot there. I know you guys are working hard in the background. Congrats on that.

The website looks great. I haven't seen it yet. So perhaps it would be good to share that link with us just to browse it.

But I had a couple of questions regarding information to workshop organizers. This is because I as a MAG member am being approached with questions and I'm not sure how toens a them.er regarding Zoom links to session organizers and what is at their disposal with the Zoom, I have been asked over the course of the last week by three different people how is that going to work, will speakers get their links, is there different links for speakers, organizers. So how is that exactly going to work? That would be good to know.

I'm guessing for the main session that would be helpful.

What isn't clear for me is which parts are being live web cast and which parts are being recorded and available later on the YouTube channel for IGF. Somebody was asking me as well will they be able to share the web cast link with their networks. One of the speakers we were talking to.

So I just wanted to confirm whether the web cast is available ‑‑ the whole IGF or only for the main sessions, only for the high level? And where can the session be viewed later if people can't join at the same time. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Timea. Chengetai, can you respond to that or Luis?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: I will let Luis respond to that.

>> Hello, yes. Happy to answer. For the second, yes, there will be web cast for the full IGF and the pages are always the same. Basically the IGF channel live. Then the videos will be uploaded also.

I forgot your first question. Can you remind me real fast?

>> Yes. About the Zoom links, who is going to send them and when and to whom?

>> There is a complex system in which they basically register directly into the webinars with one click. Depending if they are organizers or not they receive one link.

For the meeting side we need to develop this for the meetings. I will develop it in the following days. This is basically for everyone to get the credentials with their name. And everyone is identified. Also we get the statistics of the stakeholders, groups, et cetera.

For the webinar using the QA model we can have all the statistics of who requests the floor, speaks, et cetera, with all this information.

>> Sorry for jumping in again with a follow up. Does that mean that everybody for the IGF will be able to register for the individual sessions and then they get the link to attend. Will the link be live for organizers and speakers ahead? Or everything goes live the moment the session goes live?

>> Show you here. Very fast, okay? Here in the guidelines basically you select the sessions you are interested in, go to your schedule and in your schedule you have the links.

For example, if I go to this day and I go to one of the sessions. Here I can filter by type of session or by theme. Inclusion, for example. Everything is automatic. I just go to the main session, inclusion. Basically these are the participants. They can contact with them. This is offline messages.

With one click, I add myself here. I am here now. All the schedule is here. Now this is the link to be published. It will appear here.

The point is these things will be personalized with some kind of system which basically if the meeting has started you go to the meeting. If the meeting has not started you have the link on the screen and you also receive it through e‑mail.

>> I understand. Thank you so much. Last follow up, I promise.

Will the speakers and the organizers be able to meet before their session?

>> They can. All of this is possible in the webinars. In the meetings, no. They are just internal. In the webinars they can. They can join and then they can be prepared. All the participants can join. For the meetings, everyone sees the link and once the meeting is started they can just join. Everyone has the same rights.

>> Okay.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Luis, I'm sorry to jump in, but you could enable waiting room. So moderators and speakers could join and other people joining the session can be in the waiting room until such time as the moderator and the speakers are ready to start. But as Luis says, it will all be the same link.

>> Thank you very much. May I suggest we send this information to session organizers at some point? Just because I have been getting questions and I don't know how to respond. So maybe others are thinking the same. That would be helpful.

>> Just to clarify, the only point with the waiting room is the waiting room, every participant needs to be let in.

>> Yeah.

>> That's the only drawback of that.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Which is also a bit of an advantage. Please tell the people that are asking you, remind them of the training sessions Luis is running next week. They receive an updated guide.

The other thing is the help desk Luis and Chengetai showed us earlier will be a place where you can go to. If you don't know your meeting number or where your meeting is, that's also the kind of information you'll be able to get from that help desk.

>> Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Any other questions?

>> Hello. This is Mary.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I see your question. Mary is asking for an update on remote hubs.

>> Apart from that, I'm not too sure where that will be for the waiting room as well as the meetings. Our experience from West Africa was we had two links where organizers can schedule the time to meet in the waiting room and they do that last‑minute crossing of the T and dotting of the I's and then they join the main room at the time they are to present their session. Or when their session will be coming up.

So if Luis can clarify, are you saying it would be the same link or there will be another link that would just be for the ‑‑

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Luis will explain to you, Mary. It depends on if you are using webinar or meeting format. Luis, over to you to explain.

>> Yes, I think the webinar format is clear. Panelists can enter earlier and when everything is ready they can proceed. For the meeting they can even chat in private. It's not a problem. If the meeting has started they can even chat in private.

If they decide ‑‑ we have to tell them the advantages and disadvantages. The advantage of this facility for people to directly enter with video and giving permissions, simply they can just have this discussion. They have to prepare in advance. We'll see in the following days.

They will just record it and have a hands‑on experience. At the beginning of the meeting everybody should be in their positions really prepared. Knowing the role of each one and what they are to do. Then we are there for supporting them.

The first is the volunteers covering each session and then, of course, the MAG secretariat. There is a need help thing we can put in place for fast help.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Luis. So, everyone, Luis is going to prepare a kind of what the pros and cons are of the different formats of webinar format and meeting format. Meeting format being what we use for these MAG meetings.

I really invite everyone to share their insights, particularly those of you who have been organizing NRIs or other meetings for the purposes of your work. Just to share what you feel are the different advantages of the two different formats ‑‑ webinar versus meeting because we are going to present these pros and cons to session organizers and they'll be given a choice as to what format they want to use.

But main sessions, as Chengetai said, main sessions and the high level leaders track will be defaulting with the webinar, will use the webinar format.

Any other questions? This is a good opportunity to ask questions. We have Denise and Wyman with us. Any other questions for the secretariat? Nothing, okay.

Well, in that case, let's move on. Thank you very much for the updates to Luis and Chengetai and everyone else.

Timea has a question. I'm going to read it. It is good to cover them now. She says I'm a little concerned for the main session where we have to deal with a number of high level speaker. They generally like to have a quick moment to check connections, make sure everyone is in position to start the meeting on time.

That's right. Afonso says we need an explanation on the remote hubs.

Timea, my sense is that's going to happen with the main sessions. Luis, do you want to respond to Timea? My sense is that will be part of the process, that the speakers will have this period where everyone can check in beforehand.

Chengetai ‑‑ Luis, you respond.

>> LUIS BOBO: I'm sorry. I thought I had the floor.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Go ahead.

>> LUIS BOBO: Thank you. No. It's really as we are displaying. This is the format. The panelists are invited independently in advance and we are here with video. When everyone is ready they can just ‑‑ the webinar can be launched.

I just want to remind that the sessions for next week are not necessarily for the organizers but also for the speakers. So every year we invite their speakers, the remote speakers to participate. This year, everyone is going to be removed. So anyone that doesn't feel very assured they should participate first hand. In any case the webinar will be there.

If you have other suggestions in order to help, I'm sure that at the beginning at the beginning things will need to be in place Lilly little. We have the VM historically and when we get to the main session everyone should be very well with lessons learned, I guess.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. I would like to underline that. For the high level speakers, we do plan to contact their offices and at least have somebody in the offices who are going to connect them to have a session with us to make sure that their connection works and everything is okay. So it may not necessarily be the minister, but it would be, you know, whoever is going to be setting up the connection with them. So we do plan.

And as Luis says, starting from next week, we are going to have those training sessions and any kinks will be ironed out in the training sessions with the questions from the panelists and moderators and participants then. And also in phase one there is a reason why we start with the pre‑events or day zero events. By the time we have passed that time and start everything for the high level sessions, everything will be more or less sorted out. So we do have stages of trial and error and fixing and adjusting.

>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Chengetai, before you go, any updates on remote hubs? By the way, the captioning has stopped. I think Kelli who was doing captioning dropped off the call. Apologies, everyone. I'm sure she will come back as soon as she can.

Remote hubs.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO:  Yes. We are going to have some remote hubs. There is a great deal of discussion that is going on about the remote hubs, whether or not we can sponsor them or not. And, sorry, thank you very much for reminding me as well that it just came down from New York as well that those Mag members, I'll send an e‑mail as well. That's mag members resident in the global south just like we had in the June meetings if you would like some support for your connection costs because we know that in the global south that the connection costs are really quite high. Please just send us an e‑mail and we will do the same as we did last June and hopefully we will do it much more efficiently because last June was a trial.

This time around, we do have a new system and we are going to try it. But, yes, we do intend to support those people from the global south and we do intend to support remote hubs as well where we can. I also ask for you to bear with us as well.

We do intend to support remote hubs as well. Where we can ‑‑ I also ask for you to bear with us as well.

There is quite a lot of hoops that we have to go through and, again ‑‑ I'm sorry, I'm always thinking a lot today. So, yes, we will be contacting remote hubs to see whether or not we can actually give them some space in the meetings to raise their visibility as well. So we'll be asking the moderators, the remote hubs what they're interested in and asking the moderators that this remote hub says they are interested in this and these are the questions they have.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Chengetai. Also, I hope you are noting the comments on the chat, Wyman, thanking you and the team and Chengetai for organizing. That was a step forward.

We kind of are nearly on the hour. If we could have brief updates or sharing of experiences. First from Jennifer about the Asia‑Pacific regional IGF and then from Mary from the West African IGF. Just particularly technical issues, lessons learned about the different formats which we can ‑‑

>> I'm sorry, Anriette. I raised my hand. I'm sorry.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Hi, Rudolf, go ahead. Do you have a question? I have lost Rudolf now.

>> Do you hear me now?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yes and I see the captioning is back. You go ahead and after the question, we'll come to the sharing of experiences from the regional IGFs.

>> Thank you very much, Anriette. Just one question to Chengetai. If you say you want to experience this new format in the high level sessions, not having one speech after the other is something I think is very, very good idea.

Do you however ‑‑ I don't know. Going to structure the discussion in some way or are you going to send around or prefabricate the discussion in some way or are you just expecting one kickoff speech and then free floating discussion? How is this going to work?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: So when we did send out the invitation letter in that cover e‑mail we did ask what the ‑‑ be it the minister or the panelist ‑‑ is interested in speaking about as well. And what are the interests. Some have responded and we do have a set of ‑‑ you want to call them starter questions as well. Because we are talking about professional journalists here. We do have starter questions. We do know some have, not many responded, but we do know some of the issues that some panelists are interested in, if they are doing for the health implications or economic implications, et cetera.

Our next stage which we are going to do next week is also talk to the moderators and then once we have some sort of a concept, we are going to contact the panelists again or the panelist's office again and see whether or not we can come up to some.

So it's not going to be ‑‑ it cannot be highly scripted, but of course it is not going to be a free‑for‑all that nobody knows what will happen. We'll have some set questions and some questions may flow out of the responses that people give. We do want to have some sort of a lively discussion amongst the discussants.

>> Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: To build on that, Chengetai, this is not the first time the IGF used journalists as moderators. People like myself who have been around will remember this has happened before. I have been in other U.N. sessions where that's used. You still find that certain high level individuals will respond to any question with a prepared statement. So I think it is very important that you warn your speakers that they need to be ready to respond to questions.

I think you have to just stress it again and again. Otherwise you could have a moderator who asks questions and the responses are static, you know, prepared statements. So just watch out for that.

Okay. Jennifer, can you share some experiences from the Asia‑Pacific regional IGF?

>> Thank you, Anriette. This is Jennifer, for the record. I hope I can be heard. Looks like I can be.

So the Asia‑Pacific regional IGF just finished last week, so everything is quite fresh on the mind. There is actually way more that I would like to share I guess specifically with the secretariat, but I'll just condense it to a few here.

Logistics‑wise, I think since we are using Zoom there is a lot of nuance to setting different permissions. Even in webinar mode, there can be a way to have still audience interaction in the chat mode. Of course I don't know if this is something that the IGF will contemplate, but just to reassure everyone that it is not as sterile as we all imagine it to be. It is, you know, kind of a nuance of sliding permissions that we set for the room before hand.

One thing that we found was really important was to have the interface moderator between, I guess, the audience and the panelists. Of course the vocal moderator, if we have such a moderator for the session.

One thing we have found that's quite interesting, and it doesn't really happen in an in‑person meeting is that plenaries or more high level sessions sometimes the panelists can see how the audience is reacting to them and that's not something they could possibly see when they are sitting on a stage with a spotlight in their face as much.

So it's interesting to note that there would be two conversations going on, one that's being broadcast and prepared and is the panelists and then a very vibrant second conversation or line in the communications in chat. It's important to have the interface person to pick out comments or questions that they want to feed to the vocal moderator to bring the discussion together to make people feel like they are participating in a session instead of just watching something unfold that was quite interesting.

Another thing that's quite important is, I would say, and I would like to volunteer if you need people to help you test, is to test, test, test, test. Test all the functionalities and capabilities. Test for scenarios that might crop up.

One thing that's quite good is that there are a lot of tools and functionalities that will allow you to remove disruptive elements very quickly as long as people on the support team understand and know how to use it immediately.

So that's another thing that we learned with APRIGF. We had a three‑day conference with a day zero. It's interesting to note the participation levels.

Previously when it was in person and everyone is together in one location and everyone is kind of stuck in a room or, you know, people do tend to appear in all the sessions. But in an online and virtual meeting you have the flexibility because you are in your home or you're in your home location that you pick and choose particular sessions you're interested in.

So that could make you see different participation numbers across the board.

Finally, I guess the streaming options, I really commend the idea of secretariat and Desa for having this on UNTV. A lot of people having the choice to listen in different ways that suits their work day or daily schedule is really important. So just these few observations. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Jennifer. It's very important. Please share more in writing.

Mary, you wanted to share something quickly as well?

>> Yes, quickly. I hope I can be heard.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: We can hear you, Mary.

>> Okay. Just to add to what Jennifer has said, we heard the logistics of prerecorded videos. Sometimes they may not be maybe because of bandwidth issues or what. Sometimes they will not play, so we should test them and ensure that those things ‑‑ the prerecorded videos are playing fine. We had that challenge.

The other thing was that we asked session players to meet on their own, self‑organize themselves. The session, I moderated in IGF to have a session with my speakers and every other person that would take part including the Rapporteurs, that everything is in synch with what we are doing.

The hub as well, we use the break time to do our hub during the West Africa IGF so we are able to beam to Niger Republic, to the Ivory Coast and to Ghana. Those are the moderate experiences we had during our meeting.

We had an issue of the speaker not being able to speak ‑‑ you know, being able to speak and be heard. Sometimes the speaker is on and the speaker fizzles out. So we had those challenges. So those are things we should take note of and see what we can do to be able to avoid them. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Mary. Jennifer, could you start a thread for us on the MAG list of chairing these experiences of virtual meetings. Then I invite everyone, Mary, Jennifer, and everyone else to share lessons they have learned or anything you feel we should be aware of.

We are just over the first hour of our meeting. It is a good time to move to agenda item four, updates from main session organizers. Luis will put it on screen. Otherwise you can share your screen. Natasha or Maria, who will report for data? We'll go in alphabetical order.

>> Thank you, I think it is me, Maria Paz. Can you hear me?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yes. I hope you had a good holiday.

>> It was a busy holiday, but it was good. The update that I can share from the main session on data is that we move on with the preparation, with the session, the description of the session is finalized now.

We have identified the ‑‑ that will guide the session during the discussion. We have agreed in principle about the agenda for the session. But we want to wait a little bit in terms of confirm what will be the format of the agenda in the session for seeing which speakers we have finally confirmed. We identified during the last week a list of potential speakers that we want to engage with the session. We have issued e‑mails with invitation for them. We thought it will be good to have up to six speakers. I see that another MAG session, the number of speakers others are considering, I think is a good number to ensure diversity and the different criteria we are looking for.

So we have issued five of the six invitations already. We have received at this point one confirmation. We are waiting for the other ones to come and we'll reserve that one invitation in order to be able to balance any kind of diversity consideration that should be taken into consideration thinking on the confirmation we receive for the speakers.

So I think that's what I can report for now. I don't know if Natasha or June that are cofacilitators of the session want to add something, if I'm missing something. Also I'm here if you have any questions or further recommendations for the session. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Any additions from June or Natasha?

>> Hello, this is June Parris. I don't have other additions at this moment.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, June, and Natasha. Thank you, Maria Paz. I had a look at your session. I think it is coming along well. I think you need to try to finish it. The schedule is going live. So I think we need to start having the main session descriptive tests be ready to go live quite soon. But I think you are very close. So please if you need help, go ahead and ask, but it looks good and I think we are nearly done with it. Let us know if you need more help.

Any questions for data? Any suggestions? Okay. Let's move to environment. Timea, will you be reporting?

>> I'm happy to do that. I welcome any additional comments from June, Deanna and colleagues who we are working together with for this session. I think you all have the Google doc for the environment main session. It's the same we have been using all along.

I want to go through everything I told you last time. I will just share with you a couple of updates that we have discussed in our last group call regarding the actual agenda and play‑by‑play of the session. And an update on the speakers.

So as you know, the environment session will want to explore three policy questions. One on how existing and emerging digital technologies can contribute to addressing climate change issues, one on how we can work together to reduce the carbon footprint of digital technologies, and one on how we can unlock data by the public and private sector to build data analytics for climate action.

So these are the three main topics the session will want to cover. We have discussed that it would be perhaps more interactive if we organized the whole session into three parts. Each part discussing one of these questions. So right now we are working to have six speakers. We would also like to invite at least three discussants. So each section will feature also its own moderator. The moderator will give a quick introduction. Then the two panelists will give a deeper dive into learnings and impressions from their respective fields.

Then we would have a discussant which is basically in order to have more interaction given the webinar format, these would be technically qualified speakers, so they will have the same status within the Zoom platform to be able to put on their microphones and actually speak rather than just putting questions into chat.

So each section will see one discussant to bring in additional questions to the speakers based on that policy area that we are exploring. And then the speakers will have time to react to that question or additional input.

And then we'll have a couple of minutes also to field questions from the chat, from the audience, respond to that and move on to the second bit and then the third bit.

Basically what we are trying to do is not have a long series of speeches, then one or two discussions and questions but break up the online format to make it more interactive and keep people engaged throughout the one hour and a half we have.

We are hoping and we are already working with Deanna and Anya working together on identifying our discussants, but the idea would be to have impressions and input from NRIs. Ideally those discussions that have happened before in the original IGFs who have dealt with environment questions.

We would have them be the discussants. So to talk about the various topics from their discussions. This is what we have in mind for the agenda for the 90 minutes and then a quick update on the speakers. We have confirmed interest from UNEP, from an organization from AP Nick, Amazon and we are looking for a government speaker which the secretariat has helped us with. So ideally we will be reaching out to the speakers by the end of the week formally as well and getting their confirmation and then we can get on with organizing the session.

But I think we are in really good shape with it. Thank you to everyone who helped with that. If there are any other colleagues who would like to add anything, please do so.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Timea. It's a nice way of using the webinar format but also interactive. I think the idea of using NRIs as discussants is a brilliant way to integrate NRIs. Sounds really good.

Any questions for Timea or additions from others that are working with her? I see no hands. So good progress again. Let's move to inclusion. Roberto, are you ready? I know you were having audio problems earlier.

>> Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Good. Go ahead. We can hear you.

>> Thank you very much, Anriette. Good morning, good afternoon, everyone again. In our case, as you know we were actually going very good in time. We were just discussing our final panelists that will go after the ones we already have confirmed. But before commenting on that, I will say we had a problem when we were confirming the first five we agreed would be the panelists initially.

The problem was that most of them have a problem with the time slot we were assigned. Personally I don't have any problems. I'm going to be very interested to attend to different activities around 2:00, 3:00 in the morning my time. But considering some of the other important panelists we were inviting like Sonia Jorge or even Christina Flaherty, the problem was the time slot we had assigned.

We asked Anja to see if we could move the time slot and until last week she was helping us. I think it would be able to be moved perhaps to the next day, not on the 10th but on the 11th. Something that Anja needs to confirm for us. She's asking Chengetai if it would be finally possible. Hopefully we'll have this information for today and if so, then we will be no problem to confirm and, of course, send invitations, formal invitations to the original main five panelists.

Besides that, we also discussed the possibility of inviting some other people. One more from the telecom operators. Thanks to Timea we have the possibility to get approached to telephonica and orange. Based on things we were discussing we thought it would be a good idea to invite Orange. So that's something we have to finish discussing in the group.

Besides that, there was another suggestion of the group to invite other people from the government side. We asked Mary. She kindly also approached a colleague. You can see the suggestions in the shared document. We were also planning to invite professor Omar Calava, executed by his chairman of the Nigeria communications commission. That's something we have to decide with the group if this is also going to be invited, this important person is also going to be invited.

And with this last thing about the speakers, I think we will be ready. Hopefully we will have this meeting. I couldn't manage to organize a meeting for this week. We were with our national IGF last week. But I think we'll do this meeting by Monday or Tuesday next week in order to finish this final list of speakers that will be our last thing, I think, to do.

I think this is so far, Anriette. I'm not sure if anyone from the group also wants to add something.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Roberto. Does anybody want to add?

Any questions for Roberto? Anja, Chengetai, any updates from you on the scheduling issue? Did you manage to find a solution?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. It is possible.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Good, good. You don't have to go into detail now. I think, Roberto, as long as you can feel confident that the secretariat is finding a solution to you. Thank you very much on that group.

I think try and have your meeting on Monday rather than on Tuesday. I'm sorry to pressure you.

>> Totally, totally.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: The sooner the better. If you can do it on Monday, that would be great.

So thanks a lot, Roberto and his team. We still have kind of talking about the logistics. It would be good when we go over the main sessions at our next call, I would like you all to talk just about content, okay? Not about logistics at all. I don't think we are quite there yet. So let's go on, but remind me if I forget next time when we talk about the main sessions let's focus on content.

Next we have trust. Over to you for your report.

>> Thank you, Anriette. This is Jennifer reporting for the trust main session. Happy to report that we had a very good and awesome meeting on last Friday with the moderators of our session from the internet and policy network ‑‑ I'm sorry, internet jurisdiction policy network. We had Paul and Sophie Thompson. We had a full group of the trust main session members as well.

So actually taking a cue from what you just reminded us, we had a lot of the logistics sorted out already since we have our six speakers confirmed and finalized. What we did do was to delve into more of the session flow and the policy questions.

There was a question during the call about whether we wanted to narrow it down to simply three questions, but actually a lot of us felt having the clusters allowed the moderator to direct questions to the speakers on the expertise that they have and that would not limit everybody to answer the exact same questions.

So that was something we decided to go forward. One thing we did change ‑‑ and let me drop this link on the chat as well ‑‑ was the agenda. Originally, we did have a larger, longer question and answer session at the end of the three policy kind of roundtables but it was agreed splitting the interaction between the conversation, the three policy clusters would be more engaging for the audience.

One possible suggestion was to direct certain clusters ‑‑ let me drop the link actually before I go forward. For example we have Stephan from the government and that could be policy two regarding jurisdiction and the policy. We have Alyssa Cooper and June from Wide. So they could discuss the technical aspects.

For each the moderator will aim the question at one or two speakers and other speakers will react on that. Then we'll bring in a discussant and the audience. So it would be more engaging for everybody involved. We did have Anja join us on the call which was helpful because we had logistics questions as well.

She would also be able to give us the list of NRIs who have discussed internet fragmentation in their 2020 meetings. So that would also add a good dimension to the conversation and, of course, form part of the discussants.

We were happy to note the linkages to sessions in IGF 2020 discussing on this particular topic, I think there was one such workshop that would happen immediately after the trust main session which we thought was actually a very good way of setting the scene with the main session so people would understand in a more general term and some nuances before they dive into different workshops that could have a more, you know, diving deeper or have more polarized opinions, so that's so much that we have had so far and Uta and others on the call, please do add if I have missed anything.

>> Thanks, Jen. I don't have anything to add. Thank you so much.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks a lot, Jennifer. It really looks excellent. I like very much that in your session description you make a link to Berlin IGF messages. I think that's building the kind of continuity and also that you, like environment are looking at linkages with NRIs. These are little things other session organizers, you don't have to build it in, but if you can find a way to build it into your design that can work very well.

So really good progress. I think, you know, if you're ready to have your session description go live just tell Luis so he can put it up. I think you weres looks like it is almost ready to share. But I'm assuming all of you will let the secretariat know when you're ready to share your description.

Any questions for Trust?

>> Hello. This is Mary.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead, Mary. 

>> Okay. Jennifer, do you say that you confirmed your speakers? How many speakers have you decided to have in your session?

>> Thanks, Mary, for the question. It was decided that six speakers was quite the limit with the time constraints. But we are trying to bring in discussants for each q&a session to start the conversation in a way that is similar to what Timea described earlier for the Environment main session as well. That way we can add more viewpoints which would be very interesting to kick off the conversation.

I think it was felt by some members on the call and also the moderator that adding speakers to quite a packed agenda may not be the best way at least logistics‑wise for him to steer the conversation. Happy to take questions and comments as well.

>> Why I ask, even if you are going to have discussants lust j U.S. like I wanted to ask Timea as well, how will you accommodate them? One and a half hours, I mean 90 minutes is not a long time. I'm sure probably you just within these suggestions, suggested speakers to share within them the speakers will be smaller than five or six and then the other ones will be discussants, but trying to manage it in such a way that 90 minutes can accommodate. Before you know it, 90 minutes is gone. So maybe you consider that. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: June has her hand up. Jennifer, do you want to respond to that?

>> Yes, thank you, Mary and Anriette. This was a concern we discussed because we don't want to limit the time left or the time structured for audience participation and engagement to be completely filled up with preinvited responses.  That's not the intention of including discussants.

However, we do note ‑‑ of course we face the same problem. There are so many very, very good and very expert people that we all want on our panels. I think that's faced by the other main sessions as well. We cannot include a roster that's 12 people. That's one way we are hoping to have one discussant kick off the conversation and still there would be enough time to take, I don't know, three questions that organically come up from the audience. That's what I'm envisaging. Hopefully more kinks can be worked out.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I think what also works well is the discussants to respond to some of the questions in the chat. I think that's the other thing you can do especially if the discussants are coming later on. You know, they are able to follow questions in the chat and you can also ask them to include that.

In fact, I find that with webinar format, it works well to have a very dynamic conversation between your moderator, speakers and discussants if you have them. Because it is more difficult in a way to involve the audience other than through the chat and q&a really.

As you said when you made your earlier input, that has to be moderated. It is not a question of the moderator just giving the turn to someone in the audience to ask a question. You have to look at the questions, scan them, and manage them and moderate them carefully. I think it is really tricky with the online format and also exciting if you do it well. If your chat text moderator does their job well it can enhance the quality of the conversation.

June? You wanted to ask something.

>> Thank you, chair. I was going to respond to Mary's concern about how we are going to answer all these questions. You have just said what I was going to say. In most of the meetings I have been attending there's been ‑‑ you can ask the panelists questions directly. You can write the questions for the panelists. The panelists can also reply to the question or you can put it in the chat and the moderator can answer the question, write the question or put it to the panelists. This is how we can go about it.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Precisely. Mary, what June is saying is exactly what I think this medium allows. It really can work well.

Okay. I see no hands ‑‑

>> Yeah. Thank you very much. It is not only for Trust. I think the main session organizers should think about that as well and apply the same strategy to work and manage our time well. We normally run short of 90 minutes very fastly. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: It's true. It's true. It will be the same now.

Next we have main session on Digital Inclusion. Hannah, will you be reporting for us? I'm sorry. I heard inclusion?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Digital cooperation. My apologies, Hana.

>> No problem. Thank you so much, Anriette. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, colleagues.

First off, congratulations are in order for all the presentations heard so far. It's particularly nice to see attention given to gender and geographical balance. That's something that we have been striving to achieve as well. Thanks to all.

We are over a month to go but of course the time goes quickly. Thank you, Anriette, for steering us through this timing. I would also like to think members of our group. We haven't had in the last week had a follow up meeting but we have been busy trying to secure speakers, reach out and find out. So we are on our way. We do have quite a few pendings in terms of speakers, but that's been our current focus. We are reaching out to networks.

We are now going to start reaching out to the discussants to make sure they are at least confirmed and we thank Anriette for your support on that.

The one idea that we are waiting to hear back from and engagement with the broader group would still be helpful was we wanted to create space in the session if there are stakeholders that plan on making announcements that would have some kind of support for broader cooperation or for the IGF to be able to give them space in the session to make that pledge or announcement or share details.

So if colleagues hear through their networks or know there is intention for this, this is certainly something we can't do alone. But we think would add a nice dynamic. It is not a must, but it would absolutely be a plus. We haven't secured that as of yet.

Those are the updates so far. I would defer to Adema and Titi if they would like to add anything or other members of the group. Everything is also reflected in the Google Doc which I believe everyone has, too. Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Hana. Adema, Titti, do you want to add anything?

>> Nothing from my side. Thanks a lot.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Hana, thank you for the report. It sounds good. The question about pledges is an interesting one. If you put it out there and you don't get a response then I think it could, you know, feel quite awkward. I think if you are going to do it, you are going to have to prepare it, you know, and prime people to respond at least so that you do have a certain number of responses.

So in that sense ‑‑

>> Can I clarify, please, Anriette?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yes, go ahead.

>> Thank you. My question to the MAG is to please reach out to networks to find out if there are intentions already, or if we can encourage further support.

As part of the responsibilities of the MAG is to raise awareness about the IGF, to also support if possible with support for the forum. If through our networks over the next month we can reach out, ask, et cetera, what we want to do in the main session is offer space for those announcements.

So it's not going to be kind of, oh, now we'll hear announcements.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I understand completely. That's perfect.

>> Thank you.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: That's a really important call from Hana. I think you have mentioned it previously, but just send it by e‑mail so that they can make space for those contributions. I think that's it and I don't see any hands in chat or in the Zoom or in the speaker queue.

Congratulations, everyone. I think you have made excellent progress and we are over the hump. There are loose ends here and there. My sense is by the middle of next week we'll have completed main session descriptions, we'll have policy question clusters, speaker confirmations. There will be changes but we can deal with that.

I think the takeaways from today is the testing, preparation and Mary's point about timing and the mapping out of timing. Preparation with the moderators and then extremely important is to make sure that you have at least one if not two people that are monitoring the chat and the q&a.

Keep in mind with the webinar format we have q&a and chat although there are options around that. Those are things we can still work on before the actual main sessions take place.

There was a question in the chat for Luis. I don't know if you saw that. Timea was asking ‑‑ oh, you responded. Luis, why don't you respond in person? The question about what happens if you run late?

>> I'm very happy to do that. Thank you, Anriette. We'll try to plan the sessions using any other room. So not planning the same room one after the other. However, there might be issues with streams, et cetera. We cannot guarantee and of course we'll have the recording of everything, but we cannot guarantee, for example, we can stream everything if one session delays. But I cannot assure you, but we'll do our best. For the session itself, it shouldn't be a problem. But just it would be appreciated if the session ends on time. We assume the sessions will end on time.

[ Multiple voices ]

>> I would like to add on that to say please don't. But if you really have to run over, yes, we have some leeway there, but it would be best not to run over.

>> We told the session organizers at the West Africa IGF if you have 90 minutes, ten minutes, five before end and organizers did abide by it. So if we could also do that in the global IGF so people will not think they have 90 minutes when they actually have, like, 80 minutes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Mary. It's very inconsiderate at any event to go over your time. So I really think we should not do it. You know, a minute maybe. A minute. That happens. But there is a very short break between sessions and people will be tired. They need a bathroom break. They need to drink water. So it's very important for session organizers to stick to the schedule.

Okay. I think we are done with main sessions. I'm taking a last look to see if there are hands. There are no hands. So thanks, everyone, for your hard work. There is really, really good progress here.

So next I'm going to give it to Anja to take us through updates from D.C.s, dynamic coalitions, and MAG working groups. If we have received any.

I saw the one from the Data. Best practices forum. So I think Titti, I'm not sure if you are presenting that. Anja, do you have the list of people who sent written updates?

>> Yes. I have a list of people. I think the first would be BPF, new technologies and data. I think Titti will be presenting if I'm not wrong.

>> Yes. Thanks. I will give you a brief update about the BPF on data and new technology in an internet context. The BPF is focusing on best practice for the use of user data by new technologies.

Also, on the collecting best practice around the users benefit from the data and the data can be used to do harm. So the BPF at the last meeting last week, I don't remember the day. Still collecting case study. Also is inviting to collect and to share case studies. Also in relation to the COVID‑19 pandemic.

We received five case studies so far and we can see that actually the send ‑‑ there is a lot of experience with the use of data by new technologies. In those are the challenges that they are having when sharing in collecting the data.

We also activate the cooperation with the coalition with data with technologies. So we have to collect more case studies in the next week. We are also preparing the session that we are going to have during IGF 2020. That's all from my side. Thank you.

>> Thank you, Tittie.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I'm here, but I'm happy for you to take this section. Please continue, Anja. We'll take questions at the end.

>> Perfect. We have an update from BPF and local contents. I assume Carlos will IGF an update. But Jacomo and Serena are in backup.

>> Hello. Yes, Carlos here. I sent a message to the list. We don't have much to add. We had a productive meeting last week in which we managed to organize ourselves to prepare the documents. We have just about two weeks to finish it. And we counted on the collaboration of several organizations who participated in the meeting for national organizations and others.

We hope to finish in time. That's what I have. If Serena or Jacomo have anything to add, please go ahead.

>> Thank you, Carlos. Serena, Jacomo, if you want to come in, now is the time. Serena says nothing from me.

The next update would be BPF and cybersecurity. Ben, would you be giving the update? That's what I have been advised.

>> Thank you. Yeah. I can give a brief update. Yes, Wem did send an e‑mail update with all the details about seven hours ago to the MAG list. Very briefly the BPF on cybersecurity published a background paper and a draft research paper and lodged a call for contributions, comments on that draft research paper.

We will be ‑‑ the call for contributions closes on the 17th of October and we will be holding a final BPF meeting on the 22nd of October where we can review the calls for contributions, what's been received and we can also discuss with the BPF our plans for the session during the IGF. So I'll leave it there for the BPF on cybersecurity. Thanks.

>> Thank you very much, Ben. We haven't received an update from BPF on gender and I believe they will be updating after the MAG meeting. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

>> I think that's fine, Anja. I want to stick to looking at written inputs. We'll give those who haven't sent written inputs this week a chance to report at the next meeting. So it's fine if no one has something to report now.

Does anyone have questions for the BPFs that have reported?

I have one question. UTA, over to you.

>> Thank you, Anriette. It's a more general question of organizational nature.

I was wondering whether the deadline, 26th of October, is strict for registration or whether that will be changed for any latecomers to register for the IGF after October 26.

Also, during the meeting, it might be the case that some people just get there during the meeting, but I don't know if we have security restrictions so that the registration must be made before the start of the meeting.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Secretariat, can you respond to that? My assumption is that registration will remain open, but you can report.

In fact, if you are able to give us an update on the number for people who have already registered, that would be good. So Chengetai or Luis, over to you.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yeah. I mean we would like people to register in advance. I know it is an online meeting. Technically speaking you can register an hour before. But we would really appreciate if people would register in advance and then they can take advantage of the schedule because there are a lot of things you can do once you register that you can't do without registering. It helps for our planning processes as well. And there is an opportunity for people to ask questions in advance and a lot of other things that you do.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yeah.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: So it would help us out a lot if you would register beforehand and register by that date.

We will keep registration open until the last day, of course, yes. But yes, please do register before.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Maybe a distinction between registration and late registration so it is clear to people that late registration is something different and that you open that at a later stage. Anyway, go ahead, Chengetai. You wanted to report on the numbers.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: The numbers, I think the numbers are roughly ‑‑ just rounding off, around 800.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Luis is saying almost a thousand actually.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Well, you could, okay, fine, yes. This is yesterday's numbers. As you know, registration follows an S‑curve always.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yeah.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: But we would like to shorten that S‑curve a little and, yes, please register beforehand. You'll receive more information. You get the schedule. You can get your personal schedule out as well. And it will help us tremendously.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you, Chengetai. My question to the BPFs that have reported, are you getting a sense of what the kind of best practices are that you're beginning to see emerge from your processes? Just for those that have reported today, are you there yet where you can begin to get a sense of what will emerge or is your process still not ready enough to answer my question? Let's start with Tittie. Maybe my question isn't very clear.

I think what I'm asking is to the BPFs who reported today, all of you, do you feel that the way in which we identified the topics and we approached the topics, is it beginning to show the kind of results that we want to see which is extracting some concrete actual best practices or good practices.

>> Okay. The question is more clear. Thanks, Anriette, for explaining.

Actually, I think the ‑‑ I mean to address the topics it is quite good because we have a broad discussion even inside the BPF, but during the call to address to identify the topics on which to focus on. At least we had a broad discussion with the BPF.

I think the main problems with BPF is trying to collect input from the other organization, institution and so on. It's difficult to collect input. This is the main problem. I think it could be compared a little bit to the problem that sometimes we have so good discussion inside the IGF, we try to address so many issues, but at the same time we are not able to have an important impact on the policy worldwide. I mean in the norms.

The same is in a different way with BPF because, as you know, several organizations, for instance in our case there are several that are engaged in the probability to collecting data especially for the pandemic. So we were able to collect five case studies and we think Microsoft. We shared a lot of information. The problem is we need to engage more the institution. Maybe this could not be done only with a bottom‑up process. We need more ‑‑ I mean ‑‑

>> Research capacity.

>> Yeah. I needed to find the word. Thank you, Anriette.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Tittie. I think it's good for us to share these reflections now. Carlos, Ben, do you have anything to add from your BPFs?

>> This is Ben. The way ‑‑ so your question was to have a sense of what the best practices would be for our BPF this year.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: And if you will ‑‑ you don't have to say what they are, but do you get the sense that they are emerging?

>> Well, the way we worked this year of having volunteers from the BPF draft a kind of research paper and another one on the background paper, there's been quite a lot of work already to identify best practices. So the way we are using the call for contributions, I guess, is a way to test whether what we have done, whether people agree with that and to see if there are additional ideas coming forward.

So the way we organize it this year doing a lot of the work up front within the BPF has given us the ability to see it emerging. I agree with Tittie's point about the ability to engage directly with relevant institutions and bodies. I think that's something I would hope to see over the next year or so as the steps toward strengthening the IGF come into practice. It's like liaison offices, points between the IGF whether that's the secretariat or MAG members and the high level board which the secretary‑general has specified a function is to relay outputs. I see promise there for strengthening those links beyond just what the BPF members can do themselves in terms of outreach.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Ben. That actually confirms. I know Serena is on the call. She'll speak next time.

I did have a talk with the gender BPF and I think it's come up there as well that the current capacity given to BPFs is support capacity when there is often the need for more research, more capacity to do original research or to reach out. We have to look at changing the way in which BPFs are resourced and supported in the future. Carlos, I'm not sure if you want to add something.

>> Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead.

>> Carlos here. Yes, I agree, first of all. We finished the outcome document, the report. And what in terms of consequences for norms or policy‑making in the future. What is the impact of this work we do throughout the year?

I feel also that in each of these years we had the BPF. Really good experiences. I wouldn't say best practices. Not necessarily. But good experiences. This is the case with other BPFs as well where there is sort of a lack of continuity, following up on what these experiences were doing in the past. I think it is a good idea to try to rescue them again in every session and see how they are performing and what are the results? This may be a way of thinking how we are catching up with policy‑making norms, et cetera.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much for that, Carlos. When we have this dedicated MAG call on the BPF of BPFs then we can revisit some of these insights so we can start next year from a stronger and informed base.

>> Yes.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: We are coming to the end of our meeting. Are there any other matters that anyone wants to put on the agenda? And any MAG members that have any questions. I see a hand from an observer in our meeting. Do you want to ask your question? We have a few minutes, Wolfgang.

>> I want to encourage what was just said. I would say formally in the spirit of the roadmap and the option papers we have now also on the table, he should send invitations to the chairs of the U.N. negotiation groups and to invite them to come formally to the best practice forum so we can start with the liaison idea which Ben has mentioned. So that means not only to discuss it, but to do it.

Ben, go ahead. Back to you, Anriette.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Wolfgang. That's the kind of practical suggestion we should be putting into place. Wolfgang I hope you join the call when we have the BPF on BPF call that you can join us.

So I don't see anyone with a hand or in the speaking queue. We have come to the end of our two hours. Secretariat, can I ask you to put up our temperature test poll? So please everyone on the call, MAG members, everyone else, observers, let's see. Last time we did this, it didn't look too fantastic. It would be good to get a sense if we are moving forward. We'll give everyone a few minutes to respond. 

At least it's a two‑horse race. Only 27 people have responded. I know some of you are on calls. I think we can end it. Luis or Anja, you can close it.

So the results are good in a sense that more of us are very confident than fairly confident. But we clearly need to do more. It would be good to people what you feel most worried about. Does anybody want to try and express what they feel most worried about? Uta, you have a hand up.

>> Yes. Thank you, Anriette, for giving me the floor. I'm not really worried. I'm a bit concerned that we have a lot of people registering for the sessions and not showing up. I'm wondering how we can really motivate people to come to the sessions. My experience from other such meetings is a lot of people register and during the course of the day when they have had their first or second meeting they'll drop the third or fourth meeting just because they get tired.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Yes.

>> So we need to ensure they set the priorities right. But they are still engaged enough to attend a meeting that's only in the later days of the ‑‑ later hours of the day. In any area of the world people need to stay up and stay engaged.

I also think we could benefit from a bit more advertising of the IGF and the special sessions. I would like to motivate also MAG members to reach out to their communities to say, okay, if you are interested in data and especially in this or that issue, you should go to this or that session. And so on.

I do think that will help us to keep people interested in the program.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I agree completely. That's also why the secretariat is developing this guide to the IGF.

So I think ‑‑ I don't know if anyone else wants to add something else. I think Uta has put her finger on what I think is a real challenge which is we need to start spreading the word. We need to promote the IGF. We need to help session organizers promote their sessions. So we are out of time now, so out of respect for everyone, I want us to finish the meeting on time.

But I think it is important that we share our fears. This is not a trivial exercise to organize a virtual IGF. So let's use the mailing list and let's highlight more issues like this which we feel are going to make a big difference.

So I see in the chat that Juliana is suggesting daily updates. Our communication strategy is very important and it is important that we help support the secretariat.

Jennifer says registration numbers are always higher than actual participation numbers. Sometimes the ratio is as big as five to one. She says they prepared social media‑friendly graphics for each plenary and workshop to allow workshop organizers to publicize their sessions as well. It would depend on the communication strategy for the virtual IGF.

So I think let's aim at our next call to focus on communications. Hopefully that will help us make our temperature test look more positive.

So thank you very much, everyone, for a good meeting. I think it is ‑‑ the intensity is building up. That's important. But we also have really heard excellent progress. Good thinking, good ideas, good preparation.

>> Anriette, it is Carlos here. Can I say something?

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Go ahead.

>> We all, members of the MAG and others, have all seen regions or social networks or lists or communication possibilities, et cetera. It would be great if we had a small package very well conceived from the secretariat for us to distribute more widely which stresses the dates, the many main points, et cetera, we could stimulate people to be aware of what's coming and how to better participate in the IGF. If we have the kit, I don't know, a presentation or a pamphlet which we could distribute widely.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: I think it's exactly what's needed. Give the team a little bit of time. They have just developed the first draft of the communications strategy and they will be sharing it with you. As far as I understand, Chengetai, it will be before the end of this week. Am I correct?

>> Great.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Chengetai, Sam, is it true we'll share the communications strategy before the end of the week?

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. We can distribute the draft.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: And we can get comment on that. I see a suggestion from Paul Charlton and just asking if it is possible for us to promote the IGF at the U.N. 75th anniversary events that are taking place at the moment. Is that something that's been done or something we can still do?

>> This is Wai Min. Thank you for the suggestion. We have thought about reaching out to the U.N. delegates in general. Not specifically through the events. In fact, most of the high level events have taken place. That was during sessions organized by the USG, but nonetheless, I think we can reach out to GA, especially the second committee on economic affairs and we also look out for other events that are going to take place in the month of October. Back to you, Anriette.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks, Wai Min. Thanks for bringing that up, Paul.

So, everyone, it is the end of the meeting. Thanks for all your hard work. Thanks to the secretariat for your work. Thanks to our captioner. Thanks to the observers who joined us. And we'll talk again. Chengetai, when will be our next call? You're muted.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: As always. Our next call is going to ‑‑ oh, I pressed the wrong button, yeah.

Our next call is going to be on the 20th of October. 20:00 hours UTC. I was supposed to press the microphone and I pressed the camera.

>> MS. ESTERHUYSEN: That's fine. It sounds to me 20th October we might perhaps just have a call before that. But definitely we'll have a call on 20th of October.

So thank you very much, everyone. Look after yourselves and continue all the hard work. See you on the mailing list. See you online. Bye‑bye.

>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Anriette. Thank you very much, all.

>> Bye‑bye!

>> Thank you, bye.

Información de Contacto

United Nations

Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Villa Le Bocage

Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10

Switzerland

Tel.: +41 (0) 229 175 778