Transcript: Confronting the digital divide (1) - Internet access and/as human rights for minorities
EuroDIG 2016 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM 9 JUNE 2016 2:30 PM LOCAL TIME WS 2 CONFRONTING DIGITAL DIVIDE INTERNET ACCESS AND/AS HUMAN RIGHTS FOR MINORITIES ROOM 211
Services Provided By: Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 www.captionfirst.com
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: (Speaking different languages) Welcome, everybody to Workshop 2. This is the first of two workshops. We're linking them. This is under the title of confronting the digital divide. The subtitle is Internet access and or as human rights for minorities. Minorities is our focus. Tomorrow, workshop 10, we will focus on refugees and newcomers. Thank you very much for coming today. My name is Marianne Franklin. I'm your moderator today. I would like to thank all the people that helped put this together, all the great content on the wiki page. If you have a look at the results of the preliminary discussions, go to EuroDIG program. Access and this cannot be considered separately. We will persist in linking the two Rubrics that the whole meeting is organized around. Do checkout the wiki pages. Our discussion today will be based a little bit on those preliminary ideas. If anyone has looked at the wiki pages, you will see how rich the discussion can be. It is my job to allow you all to shape as speak as you wish and give you shape to the program and be ready for the coffee break. And we have the co chair of the cohort. And we have TK to help us with the room. Charles, one of the speakers will be holding the microphone. He's an important person to know. He will give you the microphone. We have other speakers who I will introduce to you right now. We have Valentina Pellizzer from One World Platform. To her left is Ruth Hennell from Bristol, representing the youth. They can't see you. Charles McCathie Nevile. And Kiamars Baghbani he's representing the IFLA. And a number of you are in the room. I know you are ready and willing to speak. Please feel free. Our hashtag is #minoritiesinternet. When you are tweeting include #eurodig16.
>> You will get up on the big board and we want that.
>> And it means you say less.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Okay. I want to prove a point about how architecture is so important and the design issues we want to get into. I believe the two workshops are a milestone in the history of EuroDIG and the Internet governance for meetings. We are out here consciously looking at minorities in a very inclusive sense. We have problem with the term and acknowledging there is such a thing as disadvantaged minority issues that have yet to be addressed fully within the emerging Rubric of human rights for design access and use. We're excited about tomorrow, we will tackle the hottest political topic on the European agenda at the moment. That is refugees and newcomers. The word "newcomers" we will look at tomorrow. We're excited to have arranged experts with us today and tomorrow. So join us. Look around the room, look at the way the room is organized. It is organized as a square circle. And we came in, we thought oh, that's nice, but it is a very deep square circle how do we get to the middle? We discovered the tables were tied together in such a way we could not break it open. This is what we had to do. I had to just put the microphone down for a minute. Can someone there is someone that can't see, this is what I am about to do. We had to find the thing holding it together, undo it, unplug something, untape something, make sure we broke nothing to do something very simple. And I will show. Ta da! Anyone else want to join me in the middle, feel free. The carpet is gorgeous. This is to prove quite physically how architecture matters. How a space is organized in meet space matters. If you have a trouble following what this has got to do with Internet governance or policymaking what has it got to do with technical decisions brilliant engineers make every day is this. What we take for granted is inclusive is in fact for some cases excluding, not deliberately. Sometimes just by circumstance. And assuring this is the appropriate way to work. I hope you don't mind me charging up and down the room, may be confrontational for some. If I offend with my bare feet, let me know quietly. (Chuckling). That's it, really. We have one more exercise before I shut up and let the panelists begin. We have a beautiful hat, I believe. Charles, TK? We would like anyone that wants to answer this question, to write down on a piece of paper with a pen. This guaranties anonymity completely. It guaranties that you will not be data mined, data tracked, data archived or surveyed at any point. Please feel free to consider it question seriously. Write down on the piece of paper you have. TK will come around to collect it and put it in Charles' beautiful hat. This is the question. What is the one thing that has to change in order to confront the digital divide effectively? So I'll repeat. What is the one thing that has to change in order to confront the digital divide effectively? You all got that? It's up there. So you can read it. Thank you very much. You're not obliged to answer, but feel free to write on the piece of paper. We'll address it later. So ... let's get going. We have four wonderful panelists. I'm not sure who wants to start. Doesn't matter. Whoever wants to start. They're going to open up the floor. I think we will start with Charles mainly because he has the mic. If you want to speak, put up your hand, we will need to know who you are, where you are from. Okay? The first question I have asked the wonderful panelists here is for them to tell us in so many words briefly what they consider minorities Internet access and human rights to mean for them in their work. So Charles, you first.
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: I'm Charles, I'm from Yandex. I'm from Australia, but a work for Yandex. And a bunch of stuff I do is working on the web to figure out could I have a piece of paper, too, please? Can I have one, too, please? I've got one. Working ahead to make sure it works with people with disabilities of various kinds. Because if you don't think about it hard, then a lot of the time it doesn't and these are not things where it is like oh, you know, people can figure out how to fix it, right? It is not like oh, you know, it's no big deal. Minorities, minorities. If I take the streaming thing seriously, then you guys are all the minority and I should have my back to you so I can look at my camera and talk to the huge majority out there. Instead ... in disability, 10, 20% of people have disabilities. No one knows exactly how many because all of the people argue about exactly how many it is. I'm just counting definitions. But as well as 10% to 20% of people being part of the market, being able to take part as citizens and as participants in society or not. It's their friends and their families and their colleagues and their coworkers and their employers, you know, and their students, and their teachers, all of those people who would or would not work with them. So the minority affected is actually all of the people around everyone. It is a very large number. And in disability, in particular.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks so much, Charles. It is important we're not simply talking about one individual. We're talking about their network, and that network. Thanks. We have some people on remote. I would like to include them if they have anything to add. That is Charles talking about disabilities as a widening pool of groups. Who's next? Valentina?
>> VALENTINA PELLIZZER: Okay. So the power. But I was not so good at the removing obstacles. I will walk. So minorities, first any of us can become a minority. Minority is not a status that you got when you were born. And we very often think that minority and the others, the poor others, between our gorgeous generosity decide to help, but each and everyone is a minority. Because if we talk about access or literacy, there are things from which we are excluded. It could be because of the gender, you're not the right gender. It can be because of your sexual orientation. It could be because of your language. Your language could be written or oral. Not all the people read, not all the people listen. So minority is a continuum and change. And to understand we should ask ourself for the result. I will stop here.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you, Valentina. Kiamars, would you like to follow up. Share the power?
>> KIAMARS BAGHBAI: I apologize for bad English. I speak Finish but no one can understand for sure. I go to the library and ask for example some person. Didn't know anything for us and patient is speaking. They said this kind of groups we have no minorities, so what you are saying all Finish speaker are five million. And the speaker is 150 million. Who is minority and majority. And it is one example. And I think as she said different places everybody can be a minority.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. Very important. When we talk about minorities, it is not just the numbers. And if we remember apartheid, South Africa, that is a telling, story and example. Disadvantaged and disenfranchised, nonetheless. Very important point, thank you very much. And we have Ruth with your ... Just getting a microphone for Ruth.
>> RUTH HENNELL: Yeah. I also agree with this comments about what and isn't a minority. I'm particularly thinking like, as myself, my personal experience in having mental health issues and experiencing homelessness. As soon as they start speaking about it, that say yeah, it happened to me or my family member or someone else. It is not like this group of people that are like "other." They're people within your society and within your networks. And my feeling is that the people we call minorities on the Internet are actually people that are marginalized on the Internet. So it's much more about designing the Internet for everybody and seeing who it excludes rather than going there are minorities that need to be taught to use the Internet the way we want to design it.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks so much, Ruth. Very important point. Anyone else from the floor want to add to the initial point and terms of reference? Feel free? Kiamars.
>> KIAMARS BAGHBAI: I have lot of experiences. My first book publish in '95, we have access to Internet in university. I wrote it in the computer in Persian language because it was both Persian and Finish. But the computer paying for patient language was just like typewriter. And at that time, we have very long process in terms of those working in I.T. we make a copy, scan all the pages and make it like a picture and put it together. It was very it is one thing. And it is important to have a possibility for all the different thing. Those language (indiscernible).
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. Exactly. It often is also not just the alphabets but also the layout. How something looks is specific and tied to the language, correct. Roman language readers forget most of the world doesn't read left to right and down. They read in other directions. We forget that. Perhaps we are talking about what is the default setting in some respect, if you want to use a techy term. Anyone else what to talk about what other minorities, so to speak, need to be put on the table here or term itself. Talking about home little groups, I myself have done something in that regard. The assumption if you are homeless, you shouldn't have a mobile phone. House first, mobile phone later. It is extraordinary the sort of abuse a rough sleeper can be objected to if they whip out their mobile phone. People attest to this. Issues around language, layout, design, any comments from anyone on the floor.
>> I have one. An important point was made by Joe Dixon. He's from Southampton, U.K. He's saying I relate to what Charles said about counting people who match the Finish and minorities. Whose society are deemed to be functional illiterate. These include people that don't look like minorities or take boxes. They may match out of necessity because of gender, et cetera. They hide the differences but they're not supposed to find appropriate ways to find the ways to Internet, and need help in using it the way the majority does.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Any comments on that.
>> There is a guy holding on to the microphone.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Because I gave it to him.
>> To this point?
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Any contribution to this point how the definition itself is suspect? We use it as a disadvantage to what we think numerically smaller groups that need special treatment. We are hearing a different picture. In fact, what you look like does not dictate where you fit. Somebody on our wiki was mentioning about multiple layers of identity and affiliation and issues. Is there any one way that we can be defined in terms of design, access and use of the extraordinary technologies? Is there only one universal form? Is there a standard that needs to be set? Are we talking about a complex set of interlocking, intersecting, multiple standards which is a design challenge. That is something I think many designers would enjoy, perhaps. Any designers in the room like to comment? I see some nodding.
>> Thanks very much. My name is Olivier Crepin Leblond. I'm the chair of one of the organizations, and I was the chair of the Technical Community when few others were on the Net. It has evolved an enormous amount. As far as the design of the services are concerned, because it is a commercial offering and it is always private sector led when you start looking at the actual commercial offerings, you will find it caters for the majority of people. And minorities and so you are talking about of course minority geographically but also people who are disabled, the elderly, as well, I think is an important category. Your eyesight goes. My eyesight is starting to go slowly and I realize how small the letters are on the screen. This is not on the edge of development of new apps. I see the Internet as being the cutting edge train. The front where the stuff comes out. And the back of the train where you have to try to catch up with the front of the train. There are times when the Internet train has shortened itself. In the mid 90s, I would say when there was this first Internet that was implemented, Africa was lacking behind the rest of the regions of the world. And suddenly, they caught up in five years, most African countries had Internet access. The front of the train started moving forward with the dot com double, moving forward with services that were only available in developed countries. And we have the concern which is the Internet of things, where there are a lot of different applications that will be good for developing countries. But they're just not there yet, because the infrastructure is lagging behind. As I said, the designers usually going for the big markets where they can make big money. They don't go for the markets where there is an actual need. But very few are interested in the need because they can't bring cash in.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks you brought up the hot topic of research and development. We'll return to this, I'm sure. Any other comments on this point? Valentina.
>> VALENTINA PELLIZZER: f I don't lose my to be honest, there is not the majority, the business model is not developing for the majority. It is developing for the richer, for the less poorer. Because the majority, it's out. There is another minority that we have to call out. That is the minority of the decision maker, because they're the only real minority, but they hold the key.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you, Valentina. Kiamars.
>> KIAMARS BAGHBAI: Yeah, there is something wrong. When we say minority, the disabled minority. There is two things, they make who made it for English speaker. Why not Persian speaker. One is different, disabled. You have a tool that we don't have. And you are going to sell us with that amount of money we have now. There is a little problem.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I think you hit a point about being positioned as disabled when in fact you're not disabled in the understanding that Charles' work is, for instance, being disabled in a way that shouldn't necessarily be the case. If you were disabled and speaking a language not catered for, that would be worse. I was thinking surely design innovation, something designers want to be innovated about.
>> I'm sorry. You keep jumping out of the topic I want to connect to.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Bring us back.
>> I want to connect to languages. Finally, I will say something. I was going to go there. My name is Sebastian. I work and help organize the workshop we have tomorrow at 14:30. Around this place. I wanted to connect to languages. I think especially in Europe, one thing that we experience every day, particularly people being expats here in Brussels, we experience geo blocking. Geo blocking is a huge topic, probably especially for expats that are not minority or the people that are needed in immediate help but language minorities in countries are. Geo blocking is a huge factor, excluding them from information, disallowing them to access their cultural well, productions. So we started a campaign to end geo blocking in Europe. Hopefully once and for all. I would like to invite you to join that campaign because it has to do with minorities. It is at endgeoblocking.eu.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I would argue that is related to design. Maybe you can disagree. Before we move on to topics, is there any questions on how to understand minorities.
>> I like the framing when talking about marginalization, it is not about counting numbers. I sort of disagree a bit with Valentina. Businesses often go for the money. But as an example of technical marginalization, the U.S. has been repeatedly technically marginalized compared to Africa. There are things like making payments on the Internet. Africa was way ahead of the U.S. and Europe. In fact. A lot of mobile technology stuff. The U.S. was pretty far behind, even for the filthy rich people at the top of the tree. There are lots of ways the marginalization cuts. The other thing is design development is critical, in my world, you have blind people, deaf people trying to work with video resources, it is really business that there are different design considerations that you have to bring together to make stuff work. And where you are not only produced in content, but requiring people to use it, you know, say, you want to pay your taxes, some people do want to then you have to actually make it possible. There has to be consideration of what other things make it possible.
>> I forgot what I was going to say. The main areas, yesterday I went to open a bank account. It is difficult to open a bank account when you are not in full term employment, you are disabled you don't meet the correct criteria. I already have a bank account, so I was lucky they would also give me a basic cart. That is a massive problem, I work with refugees as a volunteer. It is a massive problem in the organization that looks at homelessness and mental health. If you don't have access to a bank card that lets you buy stuff online, you are excluded from services like cheap travel tickets, paying beers on line and ordering the cheapest things you want to order. You are limited if you have the money. You have the money but you can't pay for it. The second item is a lot of people create Facebook groups. It is increasingly common. I have seen it in health related groups, with a family member who has a chronic illness who uses that as a way to maintain a lot and her friends use it as a way to maintain a connection with an outside world. Facebook groups still use algorithms to see who sees what is posted and when. If you have a group of 50 to 100 people that have the same condition or situation you are in, and you most something and no one answers, that's because of an external algorithm that is deciding which things in your support group should be shown to the other people. That is a big problem in access. It is great to make our own groups to support ourselves and not have to always be in this public sphere. That makes me uncomfortable. One is online, finds one's self in a difficult situation.
>> Thank you, Marianne, this is Olivier. Depending on the interests you have, the results in search engines, every website might be changed according to your preferences. We are in parallel Internets, but not the same Internet. That focuses people in their own corner rather than access to everything out there. It is a really concern. Charles and then Kiamars wants to comment.
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: Yeah. One of the problems of creating spaces in Facebook, wait a minute. This is an organization that is taking all kinds of things you don't understand from you in exchange for a service. We don't think about who should provide the services? Do we want technology guys to define the limit of? Do we want business guys to define the limits or something we want government, which is society's instrument for control by the people depending on where you are to be putting limes on things. There are different implications when different parts of the decision get made. And then you mentioned a lot. The obvious access things for people with disabilities, does stuff work? There are fundamental technical reasons why things will or won't work for a certain group of people. Why something can be translated or not translated. When people take our taxes, spend their money by systems that were developed without thinking carefully who was the target audience beyond rich guys in Silicon Valley, then we run the risk again and again of building in further barriers of entrenching the marginalization.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thanks so much, Charles. Kiamars.
>> KIAMARS BAGHBAI: Yeah, just when we first brought the news to the state about the terrorist, and the company doesn't like to open the code when it is good. But when I am looking at (indiscernible) those companies give this opportunity to the police, the police can one day after the demonstration, they can follow all those people that are holding this phone. It is a kind of limitation for people to use the Internet. . There are limitation. There are law or order that we are facing the limitation. My brother, okay, he's afraid to answer my message because of something it's limitation, but it is coming from maybe from the money makers who give this opportunity to police to control.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Yes, exactly. I think we need to move through into our next area, because we're heading that way. We had five points for the debate. The first was terms of reference. I hope we stand to crack open this idea that we need to rearticulate our understanding of minorities, attach it to different sorts of disadvantage and marginalization. Sometimes it is about position. The default language is Finish, but more people speak Farsi and Persian than Finish. Because you are in Finland, the assumption is Finish first. There is a position there. The mind set is complicated. Let's think more complex because of the politics involved and the money, perhaps involved. One of our themes is regulatory and commercial environments. Charles brought it up again and again. At the end of the day, who pays for these innovations, the research and development? Do we leave it to the free market and very powerful commercial providers or should our governments or local and regional governments, should they ensure a role in the funds and space for the innovations that allow people to get online and once online use all that is available in ways that most others do take for granted? Anybody want to try and respond to the regulatory and commercial environment issue and perhaps be concrete about what you think needs to happen, whether it is a commercial initiative and whether you think it is down to your national or local government to do something. And what you think they need to do. I have a volunteer here, anybody else? The rest of the room are more than welcome to participate. Anyone on remote?
>> I start with the money and you can continue. Because I think that when we talk about commercial, if we talk about innovation and we do not attach its growth and not attached to the allotment, I think that the kind of research we will have is to bring back the money to the richer. I will do an example, naming, maybe it is not so nice, but there is a company, it is called Microsoft. The foundation, it is the gates and they work a lot and they are for innovation and also use technology. The technology for health is developed in the north and the rich tech health company. So I think that when we talk about commercial models, government. We need to understand the development, it is about really making a better world for anyone. Because research innovation led to a capitalist venture, we need to understand the basis of a capitalist venture is not the good of the people, it is getting as rich as possible. One person is rich at the top of the pyramid, the other just work for the richest. So this model, we can get some benefit, but it's I would say an accessory of the model.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Any responses to that very clear point about where the priority should lie? Charles?
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: So, yeah. Companies and people who are making money out of stuff they're there to make money and they make money because they find a market, that means they find someone who needs what they're doing. And that's what makes them a potentially potential engine of innovation. We shouldn't destroy that and have the government engine. The European Commission that hands out hundreds of euros every year, there is a corporate structure that is not so different from company structures in the way that research is done. We need to allow that kind of research but I think as government and people that try to influence our governments, we need to say to our government, hey, don't just let everyone go off and do whatever they want. Don't let the technologists say trust us, we're looking after your best interest because they're not. Some of them by accident are. Some of them on purpose are, but there is no clear way of knowing who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Governments are in the role of setting limits to what you can do. And what you can do to other people. And they're also generally in the role of handing out money and, you know, setting up legal frameworks that might make it easier to do research on making actual things that are useful or might make it easier to do research on figuring out how you can extract more money by understanding people's advertising preferences better. So governments send signals to companies all the time. And we should be telling them, send signals that match what we want to achieve. Countries that don't have a development don't have much development should be saying send signals that doing development here instead of just importing everything is helpful to us in the long run.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: This brings us to one of the other points, because the five points are intimately connected. The future or principles of public access. Charles, if that is the case, what can governments do? Should they not fulfill their role as enablers of human rights enabling if universal access to the Internet is a sustainable development goal, it effectively is, collecting the next billion. How are governments supposed to do this? Let's think practically. Think about public access points. Think about the libraries, the libraries are often local government funded or national government funded. The colleagues here from the IFLA, perhaps, what impairments are happening or what things are happening to the good to allow people to access online goods and services in a public space, no matter what their background is? Is there anything happening there that we need to hear about? I hope something is. (Chuckling).
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: Well, I'm working for the library. In Helsinki, I'm going to make a huge library. It is central library. I'm working on that project. I will ask that particularly for living in Finland, what they're looking for, library and what is necessary to be there and what else they need, more than books and music and something. And the most important is this model of media and Internet. That we have for example, we have 68 libraries six mobile and the other the library I'm working with is about 40 computers. And everybody can use. But if I remember, there is sometimes some limitation for somebody. As you say, if you are homeless and you are bad looking guy, you smell bad, something like that, it's problem. The other thing is when everybody come to library, need to have library card to use Internet. And if they are tourist, they show passport. With that passport with them we give them a code for one day or one time. For those with no paper, it is impossible on the Internet. It is far from that question.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: No, no, it is pertinent. It reminds us what Ruth was saying earlier and certainly most of us will attest, without I.D., you cannot get access to the public access. So for various reasons, if you don't have I.D., you are already blocked from possibly the only point of public access. That has changed. It used to be easier to walk into the library and log on. There is a lot of authentication going on. Libraries, also, parts of Europe are seeing their public libraries cut, seeing the funding cut. The U.K., I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, a number of local libraries closing. Certainly Australia and New Zealand are experiencing. A lot of European immigrants living in a global world. As an example, funding is cut from public libraries. Maybe I can ask a provocative question. You don't have to answer, but I will say it and you can think about it. Should we worry about minorities? Isn't the Internet and the access an individual matter and you should work it out yourself? I was thinking, perhaps are we being a little bit naive about this. You don't have to answer this. Please say your name.
>> Hi, my name is Huda. I'm a student at university in Italy. I want to elaborate on the point of public access. I can relate to it, because I'm a student researcher. I find that access to academic concepts are constrained. I go to the journal, their business model is based on a can access that either by my institution or by being for individual access and the average prize for each paper, goes to maybe $30 per page. So, you know, sometimes we are forced to resort to, you know, other illegals for getting that content. The thing is just paying for a paper $30 per paper for content if we know if it will be totally relevant to our research, it is a bit, you know, sometimes some students cannot afford it. Sometimes universities cannot also afford to pay for, you know, prices of subscription to this, you know, journals. So this is also an issue that should be also focused on, you know, trying to provide, you know, complete access to academic content because, you know, at the end, you know, knowledge should not being privileged. This is the point I want to elaborate on.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Yes. Very important. Carry on.
>> Hello everybody. It is nice to see such diverse attendees here. People from different genders, ages and I presume different countries. My name is Socrates Hungary it is a rather long name, I'm just a normal oh, it's okay. I'm just a normal person from civil society. I don't I don't have an academic I don't have academic education yet, but I'm working on it. I wanted to answer Marianne's question about if we should have access to Internet and why should we care if minorities have access. I say, yeah, if you look at the global Internet, without borders, without fragmentation, as it should be, it's part of something bigger. It is also an immense sorry. I got lost there. It is an immense source of knowledge, of art, and of information. What's happening in the world. And to be a bit extreme, it's a human right, too, to be a part of this knowledge and all this sources. Yeah, we should care. Because we will we will only, you know, diversify a lot you know, a large group of minorities because minorities when you put them in a bunch, get like many people. Because there are many minorities. And yeah. That's what I'm trying to say. Thank you.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you, Socrates. Great to see more from the floor.
>> He hello. I'm a bit sleepy. My name is Heather Moore. I come from Dutchland. A call myself a Dutch lady for now. But originally from Somalia, I grew up in Kenya. I am in Germany right now. Long history. It is a good question. Why do we have to care for the minorities? Definitely, yes. If you look in the position of the newcomers, the so called refugees, I don't like to call myself in that position, I advocate in using normal names or something very different. I think the newcomer community has been left out. Everybody is talking right now about different communities but this community, somebody mentioned before as well, I think what we need to focus is if we talk about the point of integration, there is a lot of migrants and refugees, the newcomers community to fit into the society. How do we come into the society if we have been isolated and kicked out, we need some sort of cultural life change. We need to learn the language. I can speak some German I'm not zero, but my German is not so good. I'm surviving with my small English. Coming to the community, myself, I come from, we need to educate each other. I don't have to learn only your culture, you need to learn my culture. There is a level of motivation between individuals and people, so nobody is vulnerable and nobody is attacked by the other society that they live with. So to sum up, I think we really have to the most powerful thing here is education. Education is the solution to all the problems. If I try to understand you and you try to understand me, regardless of where we belong to, the solution will come to position. The Internet is a key important element to solve a lot of problems for using political education, whatever. Definitely, we should care for each other. I don't care only for newcomers, I care for everybody.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Ooh, thank you! Socrates, to you, you're not being extreme. As enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights, everyone has the right to educate has the right to education. In the charter of human rights for the Internet, it is read that everyone has the right to be educated about the Internet and use the Internet for education. You are not being extreme at all, Socrates. I mean, this is the conversation we're looking to change today and tomorrow. Carrying on, please. Don't forget to say who you are.
>> Yes, I'm Fabian Gursella, the president of the rainbow pirates in Sweden and I'm always trans guide. So I know somewhat about the minority problem and what we face. As to if we should care for the minority, I mean, we have this thing called human rights that some of us think is important. But I mean, more from a linguistic point of view, there is also the if more people are included in the Internet then we also get more ideas there. Which also leads to more awesome technologies, innovative stuff, everything like that. So we have a more not only human rights but innovative purposes to include everybody, because then we can move forward in this awesome development of technology that we have today to foster.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much for involving innovation inure thinking. This is relevant for designers and policymakers. Caro Lena.
>> Carolina from the national federation of libraries and institutions. I thought your question was quite radical, even if a rhetorical question that public access some be everyone's own problem, that sort of applies that human rights don't apply to minorities. Article 19 is that everyone includes freedom of opinion and expression and to seek and receive and impart information and ideas through any media. So where do you go to seek, receive and impart information? You go to libraries. You mentioned the library card. This is a worrisome part, not only because libraries even though libraries face cuts in almost all countries at the moment in Europe, the problem is not that they're closing down but the staff is taking over by volunteers who are not able in the same way as a trained librarian to educate users in the use and critique of information that you find at the library. That is also a great worry, because you also have use of the librarians and not only the library. That is a big danger, I can see. Of course, education is the solution to all problems, as you said, to a degree. And librarians are educators. So it is not just a place where you get access, it is the people that allows you to do access and how to work with the tools that you get access to. That is a very important thing.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. It links our point oh, we have remote input.
>> We do have three interventions from remote participants. I think the first one that I would like to maybe elaborate on here is related to the refugee crisis in Europe. I'm surprised until now it didn't come up in this conversation. We have Ruth Ann Powell from Turkey. Well, the statement made here is on the biggest concerns of the Syrian children in Turkey who are unable to finish their education. I think the assumption here is exclusion will you will exclude them completely from the society and thinks that the Internet will definitely contribute to integrate them in the Turkish community. He believes that libraries play a very crucial role in integrating minorities in the day to day life of host countries. Another point by Marta Maroney concerning the right to access the Internet. She said we should differentiate between the accessibility and content that is accessible. Indeed the service should be the first step and maybe start thinking about having a social pricing to make connections accessible to all. I believe there are many projects led by major companies in this regard. But I think we all question, you know, the role in the industry like project thrown of Google is a good initiative, but it is controversial as well. Free basics is also meant to provide certain services, but there is a huge discussion about that. There is a third point, can I? It is about the controversial question of should we care. Joan said she heard it is about literacy is a revolution, the fact that minority never gain literacy or skills didn't stop the society as a whole progressing toward being based on literary practices or paperwork. She thinks technological tools exist and can be developed in an Internet that is more developed and no excuse not to care. Thank you.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Fantastic. Thank you. I have seen people have come in the room. We have our hat, as a moment to gather our thoughts. We have a question for people to write on paper, anonymously the answer. I will give you pens and paper. What is the one thing that has to change in order to confront the digital divide effectively? If anyone has a contribution, for those that have come into the room. Right, yes, I was being provocative. Sometimes we have to ask the simple question. Because I get the feeling as long as their connection works, their access works, why should they care about anybody else, really. We are here from a practical point of view. We can get realistic. Policymakers and designers want concrete suggestions about what to do or what to change their thinking about. Comments, Charles behind you as well. Olivier, did you put your hand up? Obviously, good.
>> My name is Stannia, I'm with the Council of Europe in the field of youth. Last year, we organized a symposium in the participation of young people in the digitalized world. And it was some of the messages that came out were relating to how to better use the access to Internet and the whole kind of presence of information technologies in the lives of young people. And one aspect that was somehow explored but quite clear is that a lot of youth workers need support and perhaps capacity building and some maybe even technical support to get the right skills to help young people access and benefit from the digitalized world that we live in. So especially in relation to young people living experiencing social exclusion or as someone here mentioned, marginalized groups. And so for me, that is a question that I would like to kind of put out there, that it is not only the policymakers and I don't know the companies, but often this practical the translation of the policy guidelines into back into practice still needs the same kind of support and engagement of different groups.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. I feel we have a bullet point emerging for our hearty reporter here, Linda. We have short bullet points, bullet points are about enabling actual, physical help and people to help you learn how to use this stuff in libraries. What was the other one? Advising actual guides. So a sort of Internet cyber librarian sort of thing. Someone that can come up and say I need help. They help you. Ways to enable it. I don't know if it is a bullet point you want, Olivier and then Charles.
>> OLIVIER: Thanks, it is Olivier speaking. You asked should we care? A few years ago, we might have said Internet is a luxury rather than what is needed as a part of life. As there is the E services world and cost cutting, and we see this many places. People without Internet access are finding it harder and harder to conduct daily life. You can queue at the employment office for six hours. You can do it online. You can go to the bank and do it online, or queue up for half an hour because there is only one counter left. Tax a number of counties are asking for tax return submission online. Everything is moving in that direction. There used to be a joke, back in the day, a few years ago, if you search for something on Google and it wasn't, there it didn't exist. If you searched for your name, you couldn't find anything, it didn't exist. I think it is actually not much of a joke saying if you don't have Internet access, you don't use the Internet and not proficient of using the Internet, that you risk being a second class citizen, but some even a no class citizen. That is a worry. We can't use a significant part of the population worldwide. Moving to Charles and then hand it.
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: So maybe I'm a bit of a stirrer. I think we need to think carefully about the difference between enabling access and forcing people into the Internet. Because there is a point at which people have the right to say, you know, I would like not to have my entire life listed out in a search financial or social network or something. I would like to have my life in my control a bit more. On the other hand, there are costs for society to enable that. The reason why most countries aim for universal literacy is not because we're lovely and think it is great that everyone should be able to read "Alice in Wonderland." It is so that people can pay taxes and so people don't drive the wrong way when they get in the car and crash into other people. There is a price to pay when you marginalize people. Fundamentally the reason we should care is the number of marginalized people one way or another is almost everybody. So yeah. We really do need to think about how we make these things work. But we also need to think about how we do it. The discussion about libraries, the Dominican Republic over the last decade or so spent a pile of effort building libraries, stuffing them with librarians, which is to say people who are more trained than they had before, and enabling them as public access points, giving people access to what amounts to a digital library. It was fundamentally about digital first libraries. That was and what they figured was appropriate in the Dominican Republic. Bill and Melinda Gates give them a million bucks to kick that along. And that goes a long way in many ways. It is better to hand out mobile phones to every homeless person and every newcomer, every person that can use a mobile phone but can't afford one because that's a good way to get them contributing and participating in society. It's the cheapest answer. Maybe a library isn't always a place where everyone can go. You can get thrown out of a library. If you have your own phone, that is a different situation. You can think carefully about those two things.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I feel another bullet point. Hand out mobile phones in libraries. Okay. Someone here, then off you go.
>> I would just go supporting the education again. Once I was I am Maria, from Libya, living in Sweden now. Once I moved from Bolivia to Sweden, in Sweden they gave me technology devices to use. I don't know how to use any. I didn't know who to ask. I will go for technology devices. If I have a book and I don't know how to read it. I do not consider myself a read er. I would go reader. And I would go to the education part.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: I think it was Carmen in the back?
>> Hi. My name is Carmen from Astonia, I'm an attorney in the field of Internet freedoms. I marched in a bit late and a just heard the very interesting question that give me one bullet point what to do to make this divide go away. I started to think. I think I have a solution. (Chuckling).
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Have you written it down?
>> I have it copyrighted. I know there are many lawyers, I know you know how it developed. For example, in 1980s when it was first discussed at any one level, they said okay, acknowledge there is a right to water. What it meant, no one knows, what it meant is basically European countries said yes. Now there is human right to water, we will sell our bottles in countries that don't have water. Transported it there and sold it. It was in the discussion in 1990s. Yes, we have a right to water, but not to buy it from you. You should ensure it because it is a human right. Fourth generation right to life. Then it started to be, okay, we have to help and provide water somehow. And in 2011, there was actually the revolution saying the right to life is a right to water is actually certain distance from your home and so forth. This is what should happen with the right to access. And right to access is a very twofold right and you have to specify what you talk about. If you talk about right to connection that is affordable or right to access that flows freely and not interfered with. So both of the rights can you always have to specify. If the U.N. or country of Europe would confirm, this is a human right, both of them. Not just one of them or without being specific, what it means is that from the start, it would mean that companies and states would have to start effecting, ensuring promoting. In time, there is a positive obligation for a state to ensure. Positive obligation is a nice legal institute that the state cannot escape anymore and they have to provide or be reliable and respond in the international community. So I think starting with the resolution, stating concretely what you mean by right to access to the content and to the connection and working on from there.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. I'm pecking from the general to the particular. Kiamars, you had a response to Charles's point.
>> KIAMARS BAGHBAI: Yes, I have contact with those that came to Europe a few months ago after the war in Syria. Most of the young people they had already a smartphone with them. What they can do is a GPS to cross the border now only talk with family. As she said, problem with language. Not enough material, for example, about European community, about European life, about the society, about the law, roads. Nothing. Those that have contact with them, unfortunately, they cannot understand the culture. It is a matter of culture, not just a smartphone and mobile phone.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: It is a bullet point. Just ignore me at will. Language is more than functionality, access is more than a thing, culture is more than how you look, access is multilevel. We're looking for positive obligations for states. Okay. We have Maria lined up, we have Ruth, we have one more remote participant then we have to round up. I would like to do it through our hat. Maria, Ruth, our remote participant.
>> Thanks, my name is Maria. I almost don't want to say this, but I think we need to think about the structural inequalities that the Internet is driving in our societies and globally. It is helping or giving means to people to constraint political debate, to close it down. It is hollowing out middle class jobs with the automation, the Internet of things, we're closing down public spaces for the right to protest. And also, you know, it does many good thing, but there are also so many harmful effects that the Internet is also part of being responsible. I don't want to be such a downer about it, but that is also part of what we're living in.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Following on from following on to that and what Charles said about not wanting to make the Internet something you want to join. I'm aware that government is somehow the good guys and companies are somehow the bad guys. But obligation a lot of governments. I'm from U.K., the government wants to get people online to use the job centers, in a certain way, that I can track you, see when you look in. See what jobs you look at. Asylum seekers don't put things on the Facebook page because it can be used against them to say they don't need asylum help. Some have had evidence used against them. How many of you agree what we don't put the exact truth on the social network. You might well put you have a job you don't have, because you want to fit in with the cultural norms online. And at the same time, you are taking a risk because that might effect your case. You know, basically. The society itself isn't equal. Governments are not automatically pro minorities. The Internet isn't inherently a good thing, but it is something people shouldn't be excluded from. So one of my feelings is to look at the tech industry makeup and who is working on this? Who is deciding the policies? Who is building the stuff? I want to quote from a friend of mine, a refugee has status in the U.K. but can't fine stuff with the skills and teaching other people skills, as great as it is to teach your society. To teach however you as an individual and in relation to others want to use it. If you want to use it on your phone, you shouldn't be forced to use it in a library. If you don't want to use it, you shouldn't be forced to use it. There is a big thing. I think a lot of minorities, it interacts around policies, but there is some lack of action because of fear.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you. Lack of agency, lack of agency. That's a great word to include in our discussion. We have an online participant.
>> Yeah, Julia Marena. Cyber crimes, she wants more involvement with local authorities in finding better processes for participation in modern lives. People I think the policy framework or government interference depend very much on the context. I think in other regions, people tend to rely more on governments to reinforce policies, you know, to make change. I think she's coming from that kind of background. She's practically would be interested in having the point of view of panelists and audience on how to bring questions to local authorities and how to bring local authorities to such events like EuroDIG. I heard this as well, we try to hoard authorities that we're having the discussion. Maybe they have a say in that.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Any comments? We have 10 minutes to go before we wrap up. Bringing in the middle the local authorities, the City Council, the university managements. Charles, very briefly, you have a comment?
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: Yeah, the first thing. It is the same thing as homeless people shouldn't have phones, right? Local council people shouldn't be going off to Jones and nice places in Europe to talk about airy fairy stuff about what to do with the library. They should be putting stuff in the library with that money instead. That is one of the tradeoffs you get. The conversation has a price.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: And we're touching on the issue of perception, which has been implicit. Oh, yes, please. Feel free, yeah.
>> I feel like maybe we shouldn't force the local government people to come here. Maybe we should go and sit in the local governments, instead, we that already have this kind of interest.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Go to them. Okay. Perhaps before we get to the amazing things in this hat, I would like to share them. Would the panelists like to wrap up what they got from the discussion, briefly because Menda will sum us up. Valentina, I will hold the microphone. Do it this way.
>> VALENTINA PELLIZZER: Okay. So I just want to point out the Internet is supposed to be a two way communication. It goes two ways and changed by the contribution. The Internet we are describing is streamline people. That is why it is an identity. But are digital. We don't have to push each and everyone to be in line. People have a right to get their salary in cash, if they want. This is an actual right, even if it is not practiced then we get into the perception. I think we should be aware of the models that are behind the Internet. The Internet is never been neutral. We need it to continue because if we come to the one big wall we come back to the same at the beginning where we want to plug in the poorest or excluded from the perfect model. There is one real life and there are the minority lives that do not deserve the title of a real life.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Kiamars, did you want to say?
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: It is okay. Don't put him on the spot. Yeah, please?
>> Let us just try to find solution not only based on policies, this takes so long. We need an immediate action to help people who are in need of Internet support. A lot of these people come from less advantaged countries and don't need how to use computers. We need support as a whole package. If you have newcomers in the area, go to the refugee camps and find out how to support from your level to find Internet access to them.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thank you very much. That is a great segue for tomorrow's workshop where we will address this discussion from today in specific with refugees and newcomers. We finish at 4:00, correct? I think we need to respect the time to have our cup of tea. We have an amazing set of things here. We will put them up on the wiki page. Copy type them there. I will allow my colleague to read not all of them. Let you know, for the transcript what people have said. Remember, the question was, what is the one thing that has to change in order to confront the digital divide effectively.
>> Hello, I'm T, I am from the New Media summer school, I will read this. The first said testing.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Thinking carefully about the balance of making rules and making technology that encode rules and where decisions should be made.
>> From a remote participant. Gussan from Turkey, she said pay attention to human rights and equality.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: One thing that has to change, political will.
>> Human nature. (Laughter).
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: We need to define digital divide more broadly, more than access, also about education. Okay.
>> If there is a need, there is someone willing and able to satisfy the need. We need to give access to the knowledge so that people are able to develop in (indiscernible) pace with the fast technology code development.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Digital divide reflects our existing inequalities and exacerbates them. We need to be honest that we need solutions the Internet will not provide on its own.
>> Divine digital divide.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: That came up a few times. Attitude as an omnipotent human being. The level of security.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: One thing to change according to this piece of paper is public private partnerships.
>> More (indiscernible) problems.
>> Can't read this one. Back in a minute.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: People need to feel they have ownership of the corner of the Internet as much as or even more than they do with physical space.
>> Business model, political view, people I can't read this.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: One thing that has to change is include universal access to the Internet and stop all forms of blocking, including geo blocking as one example. What has to change is education reform with open minded activity. Change the way we feel about language.
>> And learning.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Did we put your piece of paper in there? We continue is you we will include it anyway. We haven't read them all out. We have gotten rid of the identifier of Carmen, we haven't read them all out.
>> Can I add one more complicated thing to think about.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Charles.
>> CHARLES McCATHIE-NEVILE: These things conflict. All the things we want are in conflict. The right to have a safe space and the right to free expression, which is included the right to be horrible to people. Are actually in conflict and we need to think hard about where we draw the lines and how we identify the conflicts and find resolutions that are that meet our needs. Because human rights is about people that changing the omnipotent Internet into a thing for people is a pretty key thing.
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: Well, with that, I would like to thank you all very much for being in the room and taking part. I hope you got something out of this first workshop and you are thinking in ways. Please join us. We will get all the particulars up on the wiki page. All of them as they have arrived. To toll anonymized. We will see you tomorrow at the same time, 2:30 p.m. for workshop 10, refugees newcomers can we confirm what workshop room it is? Is it the same one as this? Which one is it? >> (Indiscernible).
>> MARIANNE FRANKLIN: A bit further down the corridor. But on this floor. My thanks to our panelists. Thank you. (Applause) (End of session)
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.