Internet 2013 - Shaping policies to advance media freedom

How should principles and standards of freedom of expression be applied in practice, given the complex information environment on the Internet? Social network platforms have accelerated the pace of protest movements, and recent clashes between authoritarian governments and tech- savvy protesters have also shown the restrictions of freedom of expression through and on the Internet. Governments have sponsored Internet freedom projects, including software that enables activists to break through firewalls imposed by oppressive governments. Every day, more than one million people use online tools to circumvent extensive blocking programs and government surveillance. To what extent can a free Internet prompt regime change and when is it perceived as fostering destabilization of national security and sovereignty? Is there a definitive line between national security and the right of users to receive and disseminate information anonymously?

What are the challenges of regulating not only traditional broadcasting but also new media services such as catch up TV or other on-demand services? Where must regulation stop because of the right to freedom of information? Where is regulation needed in order to promote public interests such as pluralism and diversity of content and/or services? How to balance public and commercial interests through regulation within the limits set by human rights? What, if anything, changes in how we look at these questions for new media services (as opposed to traditional broadcasting)?

The Internet is a global infrastructure that enables the free flow of information across borders. Apart from opening up new possibilities, the rapidly growing traffic on the Internet has also brought about hateful and even illegal content. Blocking and filtering are often considered to be solutions to this phenomenon. This raises a number of legal, human rights and technical questions. Should minimum principles on ethics, accuracy and personal rights be established? If so, how could this be achieved without infringing on freedom of speech and editorial freedom? This session endeavours to assess consequences of filtering or blocking on media freedom.

Freedom of expression is a cornerstone to any democratic society, and in July 2012 the UN Human Rights Council stated in a resolution that freedom of expression applies online just as it does offline. However, some argue that recent cases demonstrate that freedom of the media can be abused to humiliate values and beliefs. Others argue that freedom of expression, a core value of any democracy, must be defended even when that means letting those we disagree with have their say. Again, others argue that there are instances where freedom of expression should be restricted to common justice. How to defend freedom of expression when blasphemous speech allegedly offends 'public morality' or is said to impact the national or regional security?

Is there a universal definition to "hate speech" and should such speech when expressed online be blocked, banned, sanctioned, or challenged? Or is the issue far more complex and requires us to judge on a case by case basis? Are more than legal restrictions needed and should solutions be culture sensitized rather than general? Is it possible to combine universal freedom of expression standards and cultural sensitivities? Where are the limits of someone's right to freedom of opinion and right to free expression online? How can we effectively and swiftly counter hateful speech without restricting the free flow of information on the Internet?

This session raises questions pertaining to recent debates regarding intellectual property rights. On 4 July 2012, the European Parliament rejected ACTA in a plenary session, since the intended benefits of this international agreement were considered far outweighed by the potential threats to civil liberties. SOPA, PIPA and ACTA (among others) all demonstrate the need to reassess the design and scope for intellectual property rights in the digital age; a more comprehensive understanding whereby fundamental rights such as freedom of expression are guaranteed and copyright proportionately protected within a civil rights framework. What could such an approach look like in the OSCE region? The dynamic mix of panelists will help shed light to some aspects of the complexity of copyright in the digital age.

This session will take a look at the changing landscape of journalism in the digital age. Web 2.0 applications and social media combine different technologies and open up new ways to share information online. They serve as tools to seek, receive and disseminate information for journalists and citizens alike. The 'audience' now has all tools at hand to produce journalistic and media like content. At the same time, professional journalists are also increasingly relying on social media to publish and to gather data, e.g. through crowd sourcing. The panel will elaborate on the role of social media for citizen reporting and professional media.

This session will give a general account of the specificities regarding freedom of expression for minorities.

Specific focuses will be placed on:

1. The role of public service media, including an acknowledgement of the importance of other types of media and actors in the online environment.
2. Cultural and linguistic questions.
3. Questions of tolerance and participation.

The existing practice of allowing anonymous comments on online news sites has been problematic. Comments sections are sometimes packed with personal attacks and hateful content. Some newspapers have moved in stages toward requiring users to register before posting comments, providing personal information that is confidentially maintained. Many rely on preliminary moderation of readers' chat rooms. What are best practices, and how do large online media outlets deal with this?

This session will discuss how to foster and nurture a multi-stakeholder approach toward Internet governance; enabling openness, freedom of expression and access to information. It will assess the outcomes of the ITU 2012 World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) and a possible expansion of the scope of international telecommunication regulations. The session will also take into account the progress and future of the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF).

The term 'media self-regulation' refers to the implementation of mechanisms drafted by and for media professionals aimed at upholding the quality, responsibility and credibility of journalism. Media self-regulation has proven to be an essential safeguard of media freedom since it enables to preserve its editorial independence, and minimize political interference and legal constraints. With the rapid development of online media, it appears essential to discuss if and what spheres of the Internet should be self-regulated and to what extent existing media ethics is suitable for today's and tomorrow's news outlets. How are existing media self-regulation mechanisms adapting to the Internet?

While the Internet brings considerable benefits to children's education and development, it also exposes them to online risks such as access to inappropriate content, abusive interaction with others, exposure to aggressive marketing practices and privacy issues and other risks. What are regulatory approaches to protection of minors online can be used while not restricting freedom of expression?

The session will discuss:

1. National and European self-/co-regulatory and educational initiatives
2. Current approaches to protection of minors in video-on-demand services
3. Rights of the child to access information
4. Protection of private life
5. Parents' rights to freely educate their children.