IP: Some background on -- NEW INFO AGE - UN summit in Paris

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 19:47:08 -0500
> From: k n cukier <KNCUKIER () compuserve com>
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> Regarding the posts on the UNESCO conference on Internet regulation, Declan
> McCullagh's, George Sadowsky's and Will Rodger's comments are astute, yet
> lack some important pieces of background and nuances that are essential to
> understand the issue.
>
> I've followed the matter quite closely from my perch in Paris as a
> reporter, and can clarify a bit of the mystery as to what's happening
> generally, and the UNESCO conference specifically.
>
> In short, it's the French. Again.
>
> More precisely, one of France's disintermediated regulatory agencies, the
> Conseil Superieur de l'Audiovisuel (CSA), which oversees national
> broadcasters, is making a wacky push to get its hand into the
> Internet-governance cookie jar. (That said, it's unclear exactly how much
> support the CSA has from the French government itself, which has adopted a
> rather hands-off approach!) I suspect the CSA's gambit will fail, but it
> might complicate a lot of things for a lot of well-meaning people in the
> Internet community in the process.
>
> Here's the background and the analysis:
>
> UNESCO has been making a Net governance push since as far back as 1996, by
> hosting conferences (mainly on content and culture) as well as gaining
> exposure for its Net activities in the European press, and especially with
> its power base in the developing world.
>
> At the same time, the CSA has been rallying regulators around the world to
> open up a debate on the proper role of government for Internet governance
> and regulation - most recently at a regulator's conference in Kuala Lumpur
> in September. While the move appears to be neutral, it's far from it. By
> framing the debate as it has, the presupposition is that traditional
> regulatory authorities ought remain active, alongside the "faddish"
> industry self-regulation. (France has taken the cause to the Asia-Pacific
> Economic Council, to African communication ministers, and to its European
> partners.)
>
> There are two motivations: Firstly, the French like to regulate things (he
> had to go to college to learn that?!). Secondly, the CSA represents one of
> the major pillars of French cultural anti-Americanism. Combined, it's a
> potent mixture, and France is using her classic tactic: She's calling on
> multilateral institutions as a means to dilute US influence on the issue.
> As a result, France is seeking support from the international community and
> is positioning itself as the standard bearer for the "alternative way," a
> role France *loves* to play to oppose a perceived (or/and real) US
> hegemony.
>
> Here's the link: The CSA is turning to UNESCO because it's one of the UN
> agencies it has the most influence with (and happens to be based in Paris),
> and also because the US does *NOT* belong to UNESCO (America left in the
> 70s or 80s over a dispute I've now forgotten). Finally, UNESCO is home turf
> of the CSA president, Herve Bourges: He was the spokesperson of the UNESCO
> secretary-general in 1980, and was France's ambassador to UNESCO from
> 1993-95. A former journalist with strong political ties, he's not
> particularly knowledgeable about the Net. (For the curious, Bourges'
> remarks at UNESCO are already posted online, since they are the same as he
> gave in Kuala Lumpur; it's in French, at:
> http://www.csa.fr/(---AABgQA.csa)/html/inter1u.htm)
>
> But here's the irony: It's not clear how much support the CSA has from the
> French government. Just as in the US, the president can appoint an agency
> commissioner or Supreme Court Justice and then feel burned by the decisions
> handed down, so too in this case, the CSA president is appointed by the
> French President, but it's the prime minister that controls the
> "government" or "administration." The two positions are very different -
> and at times (such as now) of different political parties. It's uncertain
> whether the French administration approves of the CSA's moves, since it is
> very unlike the rest of French government's position of "self-regulation as
> much as possible."  Prime Minister Lionel Jospin - who cannot do much to
> hold the CSA to account - has steered a rather hands-off approach to Net
> governance (hey! they even freed up crypto!). While a bit more governmental
> when compared with the US (e.g. Jospin is to create by March 2000 a
> "co-regulatory" agency of the public and private sector for the Internet,
> notably for content questions), it is still much more relaxed than
> traditional French policy.
>
> However, the ultimate impact of the CSA is likely limited: It can create
> domestic policy obstacles for Jospin, and garner international support from
> third-tier Internet nations, but the CSA as an institution is impotent and
> I doubt it will have any effect on the broader international Net governance
> debate.
>
> And that takes us back to UNESCO. It too will become one of a number of
> talking shops regarding Net governance. Get used to it. But in its remit,
> the discussions will be about content and what rides atop the Net, not the
> Internet's undergirding (which is the remit of ICANN).
>
> Fear not, Declan: UNESCO in the Internet age will resemble UNESCO today --
> it will not have any powers, nor any impact. While Declan's article is
> excellent to expose the issue, it does give a bit more credence to the
> institution and the gathering than they deserve.
>
> What lies at the heart of the matter is this: The French have a hard time
> understanding that systems can work without any centralized degree of
> control. Historically, where the US places its faith in rugged
> individualism to cut through the frontier, France turns to the
> predictability afforded by a formal, central management a la Louise XIV to
> provide those Pascal-like qualities of order, structure, the proper
> measure. That's seen in everything from education to entrepreneurism. Take
> public parks -- nature in an urban environment -- for example: American
> gardens are typified by the raw jungle of NYC's Central Park; France has
> sculpted gardens with trees in perfect alignment and flowerbeds in complete
> symmetry.
>
> In a profound sense, in personality like in politics, these are very
> different, and very hostile, approaches to how to view  -- and interact -
> with the world.
>
> Yrs,
>
> KNC