[CPWG] Suggested reading: "Hegemonic practices in multistakeholder Internet governance: Participatory evangelism, quiet politics, and glorification of status quo at ICANN meetings"

Tue Apr 18 13:34:14 UTC 2023

Joanna,

Many thanks for sharing the article at:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295
[https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showOpenGraphCoverImage?journalCode=utis20]<https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295>
Hegemonic practices in multistakeholder Internet governance: Participatory evangelism, quiet politics, and glorification of status quo at ICANN meetings<https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295>
In this exploratory study we examine a less scrutinized aspect of multistakeholder arrangements: the presence and directionality of hegemonic power in the language used in the stakeholder deliberat...
www.tandfonline.com

"However, as the users of the Internet increased exponentially since the 1990s, the “technical regime” (Hofmann Citation2009<https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295#>) came to be seen as ill-suited for dealing with the consequent economic, legal, political, and social issues (Goldsmith and Wu Citation2006<https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295#>)." - My choice excerpt from this article.

I was very actively with Internet Governance through ICANN until the end of 2007. I think that the DNS Wars were largely the outcome of the pronounced shift to make technology sublime and hope that is the best way of catering to the end-users who keep increasing exponentially.

To my mind, IDNs was a great idea to restore the balance. "Language" is the stiffest challenge in this approach till today. It is thus very understandable that factors associated with Language and Governance do manifest. Some of them are briskly outlined in this article.

It is a good article to read but no real surprise factors for me. The ICANN multi-stakeholder model is worth working with systemic ideas such as resilience and an elucidation on the fact that a "Personal" computer does warrant "Personal" focus with a set of "Personal" Aspects going down the wire and into the world connected by the Internet. A device / thing in any form has a "Personal Ownership" tag [Not all of this is necessarily what we call "Data"].

The ICANN Model for Mutli-stakeholder may have to foster "Collaboration of Civilizations" at large. The economics at the edge are the serious concern. It is time to get the technology - edge in ICANN yet again.

Your thoughts....

Sincerely,

Gopal T V
0 9840121302
https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. T V Gopal
Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
College of Engineering
Anna University
Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
       (Res) 24454753
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

________________________________
From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of jkuleszaicann--- via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Sent: 18 April 2023 14:47
To: 'CPWG CPWG' <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: [CPWG] Suggested reading: "Hegemonic practices in multistakeholder Internet governance: Participatory evangelism, quiet politics, and glorification of status quo at ICANN meetings"

Hi all,

Thought this might be a useful reference for our MSM discussions:

“Hegemonic practices in multistakeholder Internet governance: Participatory evangelism, quiet politics, and glorification of status quo at ICANN meetings” https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01972243.2023.2194295

The authors found that: “three primary rhetorical devices – participatory evangelism, quiet politics, and glorification of the status quo – were present, which reinforce the entrenched power structure that favors some stakeholders and interfere with other stakeholders’ efforts to influence Internet governance decisions.”

Particularly interesting when compared with the commissioned ICANN study on its legitimacy and accountability, summarized by the authors e.g. here:

https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/3204233

and here https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/3446984

We might wish to use these when attempting to ensure more diversity, stronger end user representation, multilingualism and UA, optionally also in SubPro and PICs debates, given the paper’s focus on GNSO and PDPs challenges.

Just a thought, with all best wishes,

Joanna

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20230418/e647068b/attachment-0001.html>