Talk:Youth empowerment – WS 02 2015

From EuroDIG Wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Youth empowerment)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Dear all,

Let's start our work as org.team for the Workshop 2 on Empowerment:

1. The team membership is open so everybody can invite any other person into the team

2. We have to look for volunteers for a moderator, a reporter and 3-4 panelists to be decided till 15 May - (as to their functions you can see in the presentation here: http://www.eurodig.org/fileadmin/user_upload/get_involved/EuroDIG_2015_session_planning_presentation_20150330.pdf

3. Till 10th of April we should agree on: - session teaser - key words

4. We can start also discussing the final title, session description and format. No presentations are allowed. Recommended format is open interactive discussion, could be in the format of World cafe, Open space, round table or any other suggested by the team. Panelists contributions should be kept short - up to 5 minutes, and should not be self-presenting (speaker placement) but rather brief, provocative statements aiming to provoke lively discussion and lead to conclusions, recommendations, benchmarks, etc.

5. We have to think and propose how to achieve representation balance - stakeholders, geographical, gender. Here is also important to organise youth participation. My organisation can involve 3-4 young people from Bulgaria.

6. For a space for org.team discussion and work I suggest creating a Facebook group. Please, advise, would everybody agree to this? Or any other suggestions?

Best regards, Georgi


Dear Georgi,

Thank you for being our focal point and starting the organisation of the workshop! We are happy to help with the organisation and/or on the day of the workshop if and where we can.

I think most of the answers to the questions raised in your email will depend on how the topic of the workshop is framed.

Albeit grouped together under the heading ‘Empowerment’, the 3 (or 4) contributions mentioned in the agenda (10,19 and 22 + 6) seem to cover a range of different issues.

To my mind, we have two potentially different topics (albeit there are linkages and they can maybe both be grouped under the general heading of ‘creating a better/safer online environment’):

1) The inclusive, positive use of ICTs by children

2) The fight against criminal sexual abuse material depicting children

At the same time we have a range of actors (children and young people; parents/teachers; online industry; law enforcement; the third sector;…) that could be ‘empowered’ or have a responsibility in either or both of the topics mentioned above. I am not sure a 90 minutes workshop can cover both aspects + all stakeholders or whether the topic should be further specified.

Our contribution (19) focussed mainly on role of technological measures such as filtering and or other control tools (which can either create a safer online environment for children or used to combat online child sexual abuse material) and how they relate to empowerment and issues surrounding, for instance, freedom of expression/access to information.

I am happy to hear how other organisers feel the workshop could be best framed as I think the panellists, format and representation will greatly depend on what the actual topic of the workshop will be.

As regards your last practical point, happy to use a Facebook group, email or the Eurodig WIKI.

Kindest regards, Kristof


Dear Georgi, Dear Kristof, Dear all,

Here are point-blank ideas for a more convergent and integrated approach. Perhaps the wider and all-encompassing angle could be Child Online Protection, as it is being more and more prioritised within the UN agenda and gradually reflected across Internet Governance fora.

The fight against CSAM is a key strand of COP initiatives. Empowering children and young people, parents, guardians and educators in understanding and handling online risks is essential in combating ICT-facilitated abuse and exploitation. So we could have something along the lines of Child Online Protection in Focus: Protecting and Empowering an Online Generation. A workshop with two interactive parts: Protect Yourself, Protect the Community...And here self-empowerment, empowerment of the digital citizen, reporting hotlines and mechanisms, industry initiatives, the power of tech for good, cooperation with law enforcement while balancing freedom, ethics and responsibility would be highlighted accordingly. We could identify relevant stakeholders who would make fresh and forward-looking recommendations.

THE INHOPE video 'Report online child sexual abuse, don't ignore it' could be a good and easy introduction to the second part and the subject matter, as it ties in well with better/safer Internet angle.

Best regards, Sarah Jane


Hi all,

I would like to echo Hans’ concern about trying to cover a very broad topic in a 90 minutes workshop. There are many important aspects to this debate and, in an ideal world, they should all be granted the time to discuss them in-depth as well as the linkages between them. I personally think that we would struggle to combine creating a safer internet (in particular combating online child sexual abuse) with the positive use of internet by children.

Below, my suggestions for a workshop. I have based my suggestion mainly on the proposals 19 and 22 and the work of our hotline. I completely understand our organisational team - and overall topic - covers potentially a wider range of issues so happy to discuss other suggestions as well.

Nevertheless, given our limited time I believe it might be best to have a clearly framed discussion. As the heading for the session is empowerment, we might be able to either frame the discussion regarding online child safety/protection based on:

- The role and responsibility of a specific actor (for instance, the role of industry and filtering/parental controls in protecting children online and how this relates to freedom of expression/access to information and the empowerment of young adults (panellists: ISPs/mobile operators, parental control providers, freedom of expression advocates, academia,…)).

- A specific area of concern, for instance the role (and empowerment) of all relevant stakeholders to prevent the distribution of child sexual abuse material (panellists: Hotlines/INHOPE, industry, law enforcement, academia, international partners/third sector organisations,…). Such a topic, I believe, would be in line with the proposal by the Centre of Abuse and Trauma Studies for this workshop and the work of the involved hotlines/INHOPE.

I understand the intention to include the empowerment of young people (also in reference to Sarah Jane’s suggestion ‘Protect yourself, Protect the community’). However, looking at the data in our hotline the child abuse we encounter is most frequently (80%) of children aged 10 or younger and often depicts the severest level of abuse (rape and sexual torture). The children in these images are clearly victims of the abuse and there are limits to a discussion about their ‘empowerment’. When perhaps talking about older children/young people sharing sexual content among each other, there is merit in a discussion about empowerment or awareness raising but I think this might be a different discussion than the one about the abuse we see in our hotline (or at least that distinction should be made very clear).

Depending on how we decide to frame the topic, our teaser/keywords/panellists/etc will be different, but to give it a first go based on the second option mentioned above and some of the wording of the CATS proposal (22):

- One sentence session teaser:

The importance of a multidisciplinary approach to combat online child sexual abuse material: How to build the necessary partnerships in a global, multi-stakeholder environment?

- Summary:

Child sexual abuse material constitutes one of the most horrific types of online content available. Combating this material requires the involvement of a range different stakeholders, including hotlines/reporting mechanisms, law enforcement, the online industry and third sector organisations. Each stakeholder plays an important part in combating online child sexual abuse material and building effective operational partnerships across sectors and across borders is of the utmost importance to effectively combat this horrendous material.

This session will look at the role, responsibilities and limitations each of the actors face from an operational, legal or geographical point of view. It will aim to identify best practices in cross-sector and cross-border cooperation and highlight areas where further improvement can be made so that all actors can be empowered to play their role to the best of their capabilities.

- Keywords of the session:

Online child sexual abuse, cross-border cooperation, multi-stakeholder empowerment/partnerships

- Format:

An interactive panel discussion with representatives from different sectors highlighting their role, responsibilities and limitations when combating online child sexual abuse. After a scene-setting introduction, each panellists will be given a couple of minutes to answer the following questions:

- What is your role in combating online child sexual abuse material?

- How do you work with other partners in the same sector, both nationally and internationally?

- How do you work with different stakeholders from different sectors, both nationally and internationally?

- How do you think the fight against online child sexual abuse material can be improved, in particular looking at the cooperation between different stakeholders?

Afterwards, the floor will be opened to an interactive discussion with participants.

- Panellist:

- Academia: Centre of Abuse and Trauma Studies (CATS) (perhaps to do the introduction?), …

- Law Enforcement: Europol or Interpol representative,…

- Industry: ISP, Search engine, Social Media,…

- Hotlines: INHOPE (international cooperation), IWF/Bulgarian Hotline (operational perspective),…

- Third Sector Organisations: To be decided?


This is my first attempt at a list of possible panellists and there are many more possible stakeholders that can be involved, including the ones involved in the organisation of this workshop.

Finally, I just wanted to stress again that this is just one approach so please feel free to completely change it or to suggest alternative approaches. I tried to update the WIKI, but I don’t think I have administrator rights.

Best, Kristof


Hi Georgi,

What is your take on the below? I had tried to bridge the gap and connect the topics last time (as you might remember from my email), as otherwise I feel we might lose this workshop opportunity altogether. And more and more Internet Governance platforms and fora want to link up empowerment and protection. So we need a fresh approach as you suggested and consequently adapt. And as I observed at the Global Conference on Cyberspace (GCCS) in The Hague last week, they do not want the fight against CSAM to be that ‘centre-staged’ anymore. So we need to be realistic and pragmatic about the whole thing.

As you are much more involved in the preparation for the EuroDIG, what is your feeling about it? Do you feel the organisers could still say OK for two different workshops? Also, would you like us to subtitle the INHOPE video in Bulgarian ahead of the event? I have attached the English script for all uses and purposes.

Best, Sarah Jane


Dear friends,

What Kristof and Sarah say about fight against child sexual abuse online is of course very important part of empowerment but I think it is just one piece of it - protection in the broad sense. But being or feeling protected is not the main part of empowerment - it rather disempowers (if there is such a word:-) because somebody else is watching and reacting to risks and dangers and you don't feel your own responsibility to watch after your own responsible behaviour online.

When reflecting about that it seems to me that if we start by defining the keywords it would help us to imagine how we could organise the session.

I can propose three keywords - protect (this was already made clear enough by Kristof and Sarah), educate (all kind of initiatives and programmes aiming to raise awareness, train, inform about risks and ways to prevent them) and support (here I can differentiate two parts: consult and support victims, and engage all adequate actors in developing positive online content and applications for children and young people).

In such a way we could divide the session into three groups using the world cafe method: each group has a table with a host and flip-chart paper; each table takes one of the 3 keywords and participants discuss on different ways, ideas, proposals; after some intervals of time the groups change tables twice but hosts remain; in this way every participant could contribute to all three main spheres of empowerment; at the end hosts present a resume of what has been suggested and written down on the three tables.

Does it make sense to all of you?

Kind regards, Georgi


Dear all

I am writing on behalf of Yelp, the online reviews site and app, to share some thoughts about the workshop on empowerment. I have read the message thread and it seems that the workshop will focus a lot of safety of children. I would like to bring in an additional perspective; the perspective of consumer empowerment online through information filters.

Both search engines and consumer reviews are widely used by consumers to get access to information. When looking for a doctor in a city or a hotel for their holidays, consumers rely on search engines and reviews by fellow consumers to make an informed choice. Search engines and consumer reviews have become tools for consumer empowerment. A number of issues need to be addressed, including the non discriminatory treatment of sources of information by search engines, the treatment of fake reviews, the collaboration with public authorities.

If of interest, I would be happy to further discuss this idea and get involved in the preparation of the workshop.

Kind regards Kostas Rossoglou Head of EU Public Policy Yelp, Inc.


Dear all,

These days I had conversation with Hans Martens - coordinator of the Insafe network of the Safer Internet Centres. Starting from the possible youth participation we talked also about the contents and format of the panel Empowerment. As we exchanged various ideas about I think it would be helpful to continue the discussion with the whole group in order to reach a consensus on the most important points.

And as Hans pointed out we will need volunteers for moderators.

The correspondence follows below, I will post it also on the wiki-page.

Best regards, Georgi


Hi, Hans,

Thank you for calling!

I think that Eurodig is quite a visible event and a good place to advertise Insafe/INHOPE Better internet for kids activities as well as for networking.

The challenge is the 90-minutes timeline for the session.

So what I can imagine for now is something like that:

Opening and introduction by the moderator - 5 min.

Panelist 1 (INHOPE) - How protection is linked to empowerment - 5 min.

Panelist 1 (Insafe) - Education and support - main pillars of empowerment - 5 min.

Panelist 3 (industry) - How industry protects, educates and supports users - 5 min.

The moderator explains the world cafe format. Participants divide into 3 groups and gather around 3 different tables with a flip-chart paper and marker - Table Protection, Table Education and Table Support. Each group selects a table host who will be sitting all the time at the same table, writing down on the paper the key points, briefing the newcomers to the table. He will also summarize and present the key conclusions/recommendations that came out during the discussions at his/her table. The rest of participants take part in a discussion on the table topic. We have at least 3 young people participating - 1 in each group. The participants change table every 15 minutes, so overall this part of the session will take 45 minutes.

At a panel session each table host presents the key conclusions and recommendations from his table for 5 minutes, overall 15 min.

In the rest 10 minutes the session participants discuss and choose the 5 most important recommendations to be presented to decision makers, industry and other stakeholders.

How does it sound to you?

Thanks for the support,

Georgi


Hi Georgi

Based on a more in-depth reading of all contributions on http://eurodigwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Empowerment, as well as your input below, some further suggestions:

a) I haven’t seen the initial proposals, so be sure to let me know if I’m missing an important point!

b) Based on the ongoing WIKI discussion, personally, I would try to avoid getting stuck on the “education” versus “protection” discrepancy, rather turning it into a shared virtue. On the one hand, it seems important to me to acknowledge that the safer/better internet agenda is covering a wide range of issues, some of which are quite different in nature (e.g. positive use versus child sexual abuse material). On the other hand, so far, all contributors to the WIKI discussion seem to agree/emphasise that, for each of these topics, it is important to “empower” all relevant stakeholders, even if their respective roles/responsibilities across these areas may greatly vary.

c) In line with this, one way to move forward with this workshop, while integrating most contributions so far, could be to take, in parallel table discussions, a “multistakeholder/empowerment” stab at the two sides of the safer/better coin you mention, “Education and support - main pillars of empowerment” and “How protection is linked to empowerment”.

d) To make it more specific, both in terms of content and format, you could perhaps:

i. Look for an overall “chair” (perhaps you, Georgi?) who can properly set the scene, elaborating on how education and protection both fit into the safer/better internet agenda, and how empowerment is an inherent part of the solution.

ii. Look for four (two for “education”, two for “protection”) inspiring panellists/moderators to introduce the parallel table discussions:

i. Education and support - main pillars of empowerment: perhaps we could ask a Pan-EU Youth Ambassador to give the introduction and chair the workshop, making it youth-driven? For instance, (s)he could start from the ten key principles that have been identified as essential to creating a better internet for the future in the Youth Manifesto publication, explaining as well how Insafe is working on these topics together with young people across Europe. (I’ve attached our IGF background paper in attachment; this may be helpful in finding further questions/key words to address. For the full Youth Manifesto publication, see here.)

ii. How protection is linked to empowerment: it could be possible, in line with previous suggestions from both Kristof and Sarah Jane, to focus in further depth on the role (and empowerment) of relevant stakeholders to prevent the distribution of child sexual abuse material. In this regards, I quite like the link with “technological” measures here, as it will provide an opportunity to involve the technical community also. Perhaps you could ask some further input from Sarah Jane / Kristof to define in further detail how best to introduce and drive this session? Sarah Jane already mentioned the INHOPE video, while Kristof points to the CATS people. Both approaches could work well, perhaps even combined…

iii. In terms of format, world café would be one approach. But equally, we should perhaps accept that not everyone necessarily has relevant expertise to bring to each type of session? And how about increasing the time for introduction a bit, with a 10 minute introduction from the chair, explaining the focus and format of the workshop, followed by (at least) 5 minutes of introductory statements from all 4 panellists? This will help to properly introduce the topic/issue at stake, from various angles, before splitting up in parallel working groups, in trying to identifying some key insights on how best to make progress in the near future? You would then have 45 minutes of time for the parallel working groups, followed by 15 minutes of reporting back. Personally, I would leave out the voting for key actions, as we’ve been doing this for a while now, often with little follow-up after the event. That said, I do agree that something more concrete should come out of this session. Perhaps some kind of collaborative position paper to be disseminated by the various stakeholders involved?


I hope this all makes sense! Needless to say, these are only suggestions for you to take into consideration. If you would like me to post some of this directly on the mailing list, I’m happy to do as such. Most importantly, I would try to pin down the focus of the parallel table sessions as soon as possible, so you can start looking for possible panellists. If you agree about the possible link with the Youth Manifesto, I’m happy to liaise with Mirela, so we can start exploring the possibility to have a Pan-EU Youth ambassador on board. If you would like to quickly discuss online, just give me a shout!

Best regards

Hans

---------------