[discuss] [I-coordination] New: How do we dissect Internet

Subi Chaturvedi subichaturvedi at gmail.com
Fri Dec 20 03:14:21 UTC 2013

+1 Milton.

It is surprising why should there be #HolyCows in the IG space. Agree
entirely. Without reinventing the wheel and we shouldn't stop shy of doing
that too, if it is indeed, needed.

The definition should be relevant and contemporary and reflect the changes
that have occurred in terms of diversity and inclusiveness also .


Subi Chaturvedi
Assistant Prof. Journalism and Communication,
Lady Shri Ram College for Women (LSR), DU

PhD. Scholar,
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT-D), New Delhi

On 19 December 2013 21:51, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Ang Peng Hwa (Prof) [TPHANG at ntu.edu.sg]
>  >>Agreed. And this historical context is important. I keep insisting
> that the whole concept of roles
> >>was simply some states way of subverting the whole notion of direct
> participation in
> >>policy making by nonstate actors. If you believe in the so-called MS
> model, you have to
> >>push back against that now.
> >
>  >1. As far as I can recall (and it's practically a decade now), I
> remember it as the complete opposite. >Governments back in 2004 were saying
> that they represented everybody
> Exactly. They were saying that states represented all staekholders
> indirectly, and thus there was no need for direct representation of civil
> society (or the private sector). This is not "the opposite" of what Bill
> and I were saying. If states represent everybody perfectly, there is no
> need for anyone but states to participate in the process.
> >The words "respective roles" were therefore inserted to
> >recognise that civil society had a role to play.
> Yes, it had a role: but a _subordinate_ role to states. In this view of
> the world, states make policy, they are the deciders, and the other
> stakeholders merely inform or lobby them.
> >I expect that it would be difficult if not impossible to arrive at a New
> and Improved
> >version of the definition today.
> One does not need an entirely new definition of IG. One simply needs to
> challenge - and dispense with - the WSIS definition of roles.
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131220/3e53576b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list