IGF in Oslo: On disinformation and war

Contents

Disinformation, the blessings, curse, and regulation of AI, as well as safeguarding the resilience of the internet are on the agenda of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), which is now starting in Oslo. After two decades, the concept of the forum may be under scrutiny, but the topics from back then are still on the agenda today.

IGF: Start with Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft, Google, and Co.

Twenty years ago, 1200 representatives from governments, companies such as Oracle, Cisco, Microsoft and a much smaller Google, civil society groups and Internet experts met for the first time at an IGF. Launched at the first World Summit on the Information Society (Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2006), the new platform avoided the bitter dispute over US oversight of the Domain Name System (DNS) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). High-ranking participants described the new forum as an “open house” or “gigantic brainstorming session”, at which access to information and freedom of information, closing the digital divide, data protection and confidentiality, as well as hate speech and child protection on the Internet were discussed.

Internet broken? Disinformation and deepfakes

According to the program, the basic attitude towards the Internet has darkened. While the then Greek Minister of Transport and Communications, Michalis Liapis, spoke of the “most democratic medium in the world” at the opening of the IGF Athens 2005, a panel with Norway's Minister of Culture Lubna Jaffery and TikTok's Head of Safety Public Policy Lisa Hayes posed the question: “Are we as citizens and states losing the information space while Big Tech takes on an ever greater role in communication infrastructures?”

The topic of disinformation and its role for security and the remaining democracies is one of the top issues at – and the question of “how can we deal with it” is asked again and again in various rounds.

War on and through the internet

The geopolitical tensions that are currently escalating into wars – In 2005, the number of conflicts was still falling – is reflected in new topics of discussion. The protection of undersea cables, for example, is the subject of two rounds of discussions that are close to the heart of host Norway. The two fundamental rights organizations, “Business and Human Rights Resource Center” and “Access Now” are also inviting participants today, on day zero of the IGF, to what they see as an urgently needed update on the responsibility of companies in conflicts and conflict zones.

An “Open Forum” organized by Austria also deals with autonomous weapons systems and their regulation, and has invited the former US cyber ambassador Chris Painter and Internet “father” Vint Cerf. A very topical debate on how to protect access to the internet in conflict zones is also on the agenda in Oslo. Overall, the digital divide has narrowed, but 2.6 billion people are still offline.

AI for judges, diplomats, and police officers

Despite the search for rules for dealing with disinformation, “artificial intelligence” remains the topic that most of the individual events will focus on. In addition to fundamental questions about the advantages and disadvantages of risk-based regulation, there are numerous specific events dealing with the question of how and to what extent AI can and will be used by judges, diplomats and investigating police officers.

Future of the Internet Governance Forum

An important focus for the 20th anniversary of the IGF is the future of the forum itself. With the expiry of the current mandate by the General Assembly, the entire successor process to the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) will be subject to review. At the Giganet Symposium of Science in Oslo, US researchers ask heretical questions: Should WSIS die?

However, hardly anyone here in Oslo actually wants to do without the IGF and the hundred or so national Internet Governance Forums. Instead, they would like to continue the open form and better finance the think tank for global digital policy, which has so far been dependent on donations in addition to a tight UN budget – Perhaps the name would then also be changed.

Low Profile?

It was not possible to find out in advance how the German Digital Ministry will position itself in the debates in Oslo. A press inquiry has so far gone unanswered. This is reminiscent of the time before the international digital strategy was adopted. Until the IGF was held in Berlin, the German government had generally been very reticent about participating in the IGF.

(mack)