Unpacking Internet Governance – And Finding Red Herrings
Arun
Mehta
PDF [92 KB]
[Article originally published on the India-gii
wiki website]
The Internet seemed to come out of nowhere.
Governments didn’t plan it, international institutions hadn’t
even discussed it, and industry largely also didn’t expect
it. Most remarkable in its growth, was the seeming absence of governance
of any kind. The US government certainly wasn’t in charge,
except for some minor areas, like domain names. Other governments,
conservative to different degrees, were horrified to discover a
lack of content control that they could do almost nothing about.
The telecom companies, which carried the traffic, were too busy
selling bandwidth at growth rates of 500% per annum, to worry that
here, for the first time, significant technological innovation
in telecommunications happened outside their control, and even
without their significant involvement. The ITU first learnt of
the power of the Internet, when its X.400 email standard was summarily
rejected. Now, Wi-Fi, a wireless Internet, you might say, is seriously
undermining Bluetooth and 3G, both technologies in which the ITU
and telecom companies have made huge investments. Once, the ITU
ruled telecom: progress took place at the rate at which lawyers
in Geneva could hammer out agreements. For governments, telecom
companies and the ITU, the situation now is akin to that of a leader
of the French Revolution, who, looking out of the window, said, “There
go my people. I better find out where they are going, so I can
lead them there.”
The Internet has not only managed furious numeric growth rate
with hardly a hitch, it has exhibited rapid technological progress
as
well. E-mail, chat, the web, e-commerce, file sharing, are
just some of the innovations that we have seen in the last
two decades,
and each have had profound impact. Once, the postman was a
much-awaited daily visitor, now who uses paper and envelopes
to send letters?
The publishing industry once published vast quantities of glossy
pamplets to distribute at exhibitions. Now, few people bother
to even visit, let alone pick up the “raddi”.
While e-commerce is transforming the way business is done in
industry after industry, file sharing in perceived as a serious
threat by
the huge entertainment industries. And technological progress
on the Internet is showing no signs of slowing down. RSS (Rich
Site
Summary) has recently made it far more attractive to keep track
of news electronically, rather than to peruse several paper
newspapers and magazines.
Perhaps the most remarkable attribute of the Internet, is that
nobody seems to know who runs it. Our only experience of
authority is our Internet Service Provider, who may be lazy,
and maintain
poor service levels and security, or authoritarian and prevent
access to certain services. But most people do not perceive
the ISP to be a serious problem, and if they do, they usually
can
switch to a better one. But other than the limited role that
the ISP plays,
who governs the Internet?
That most people are completely stumped when asked this question,
indicates, according to me, how well the Internet is run,
and cheaply at that. The governments and international
bodies seeking
to take
charge of the Internet would do well to learn from the
model of governance that the Internet practices, instead of
seeking
to enforce
their obsolete models of centralized control and command.
If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it.
Problems of the Internet
This is not to suggest that the
Internet doesn’t have problems: 1. Poor countries
pay for traffic in both directions, when connecting
to rich countries like the
US. 2. We all receive far too much junk mail, or spam.
3. There are too many viruses and worms floating around
the Internet.
That the ITU has not been able to sort out problem 1,
is an indication of how little the genuine problems
of the
Internet seem to matter
to the ITU: asymmetric bandwidth pricing is hardly
such a big
problem that some negotiation, and the setting up of
local, national and
regional bandwidth exchanges couldn’t quickly take care of.
Spam could easily be brought under control, if governments, globally,
were to hold ISPs liable for the spam emanating from their network.
The same, I would submit would work for viruses: a few fines, and
ISPs would quickly tighten their security. There could be a couple
more genuine problems that don’t occur to me at the moment,
but other than that, we have a bunch of red herrings.
The Red Herrings
Foremost
among them, is the whole discussion of domain names,
and who should control them. Internet traffic is routed using
IP addresses, similar
to phone numbers on the telecom network. People came
up with the clever idea of allowing people to use groups of alphanumerical
characters instead of these large numbers, with computers
automatically
making the conversion. Such a big deal should not
be made about who uses which name to represent a specific IP address,
and frankly,
most of us don’t care. We just use google to
find whichever company or individual we are looking
for.
Many issues being brought into the Internet Governance
discussion relate to support for the Internet – how different segments
of society may be helped to get onto the Internet. That is fine.
It is to be welcomed if international organisations and governments
engage in this. But for that, they do not need to be governing
the Internet. Likewise, governments see in the Internet ways
of better interacting with citizens, and becoming transparent.
Again,
this is welcome, but that can be done without anyone taking over
the Internet.
Governments and conservative members of society would
like some curbing of the pornography and other
objectionable material on
the Internet. However, all these years we have
been exposed to this uncontrolled information, and the
sky hasn’t fallen
on our heads. Can we not swallow this bitter pill, given all
the benefits that the Internet provides? Proponents of free speech
have long known that lots of terrible content is also able to
take
shelter under their umbrella, but none of us want to sacrifice
our fundamental rights because of this.
Another reason brought forward to justify the involvement
of governments and international institutions
in Internet governance,
is to promote
a different direction for its growth, so that
it better addresses the needs of the disenfranchized.
Again,
this is a red herring.
The Internet basically is nothing but a large
number of computers, taking to each other in a language
called TCP-IP.
This language
merely allows reliable communication between
any two computers on the network. What the two computers
do
with this facility,
is entirely up to them, just as you can use the
telephone to talk
business, or to gossip. Just because you want
to start a different kind of conversation on the phone,
doesn’t mean you need
to take on the phone company, particularly when it is making no
effort to censor you.
How is the Internet governed?
My objective
is not to discourage interest in Internet governance – but
how does one get involved? Arguably the only
significant governance the Internet enjoys, is
that of bodies like the Internet Engineering
Task Force. These people manage a process that
ensures that the Internet keeps acquiring new
abilities at a furious pace, which
leaves policy-makers and the legal system far
behind. The bureaucrats at international decision-making
bodies such as the UN must wonder
how it maintains this speed, in a process that
is remarkably inclusive, consensual, and transparent.
When presented with a problem, and
conflicting suggestions for improvement, the
IETF doesn’t
take decisions in favour of one approach or the
other: if even after thorough discussion, there
is a difference of opinion on
how a certain objective is to be achieved, all
the variants can be tried out, without fear of
doing any serious damage. In characteristic
modesty for an engineering body, the standards
that the IETF encourages the Internet to follow
are published as “Requests for Comment.” If
after some experience with the variants, one
stands out, a new RFC, pointing this out, supersedes
the earlier one, and the discussion
moves on to other objectives.
Gender and Internet
governance
If more women wish to get involved
in Internet governance, all they need
to do, is to join the mailing lists run by the
IETF and others. Of course, to understand what
is being discussed there, you need
some understanding of the technology. For your
postings to be treated with respect in such fora,
you need a keen understanding of the
issues, and the willingness to spend time discussing
them. My simple question is, how many people
are that interested in technology?
How many people seek to understand the electrical
wiring in the house before a problem has arisen?
As an engineer, I am resigned
to the fact that most people get glazed eyes
as soon as the “t” word
is mentioned.
At fora such as the IETF, women are undoubtedly
underrepresented, as is the case in most areas
of technology. In the
case of information and communications technology,
though,
this is
particularly distressing.
ICT is a new profession. It is one thing to
have to deal with a gender gap in a profession
which
has had
a long
time to build
up
prejudice, quite another to see a gap build
up in front of our eyes. In India, women
occupy less than
20 percent
of
the professional
jobs (Gender, Information Technology, and
Developing Countries: An Analytic Study By Nancy Hafkin
and Nancy Taggart, United
States Agency for International Development,
June 2001), and I bet the
percentage falls as you go up the ladder.
Noteworthy is, that women were pioneers in
this profession. Countess Ada Lovelace
was programming
before the
digital computer existed,
when it was just a concept put forward
by her friend Charles Babbage. The first working
digital
computer,
Eniac, had
mostly women programmers.
In other words, this is a profession in
which women actually abdicated their leadership
role.
ICT is particularly important as a profession
for women, because many in developing
countries have
difficulty
combining life
in a traditional household and bringing
up children with work outside.
IT would allow them to work from home,
at their convenience.
ICT professions have a good future. The
industry is changing quite rapidly, and
growing furiously
as well.
It is highly
labour-intensive.Provided you are always
willing to learn new things, ICT skills
should keep
you from being unemployed.
Certainly, the question of how more women
can be encouraged to work in the ICT
sector needs
addressing.
In the
process of solving
that problem, we will surely find increased
involvement of women in forums that
deal with Internet governance
issues. But tinkering
with the Internet before understanding
its working may be
a bit like killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
|