My Google News feed has spewed forth more reports from the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) than I could read in a lifetime (well, maybe not THAT many) but I have some catching up to do. A Cincinnati.com Enquirer editorial, Laptop to bridge 'digital divide', includes a reference to the question of most concern from the summit, recently concluded in Tunis: who will control the internet?
As for the summit's main topic, the delegates established an Internet Governance Forum, but it is a toothless group with no supervisory power or technical control. The United States retains that, at least for now. This is probably for the good. It is the "World Wide" Web and should not "belong" to any one nation or people. But it wouldn't help to put the Internet in the hands of a scandal-ridden international body rife with ideological agendas in conflict with the ideal of a free, open Internet.It's worth noting that host nation Tunisia is one of the most notorious nations for Internet censorship, and some reporters attending the summit were attacked and beaten by government forces. It's also notable that Cuba, Iran and some African dictatorships used the summit to criticize the United States for allowing too much freedom of speech on the Internet. We shouldn't put this resource into the hands of those who would control it to suppress dissent or manipulate it for narrow political aims.
If one nation actually controls the internet, even if that country is the United States, then the opportunity for infringement of electonic freedom of speech exists. I am certainly not proposing that the UN take control, but expanding the control to an international body should be something that needs careful consideration.