Centre for Internet and Society

'Privacy Matters', Ahmedabad: Conference Report

praskrishna — 2011-04-04T04:45:49Z

On 26 March 2011, civil society, lawyers, judges, students and NGO’s, gathered together at the Ahmedabad Management Association to take part in 'Privacy Matters' – a public conference organised by Privacy India in partnership with IDRC and Research Foundation for Governance in India (RFGI) — to discuss the challenges of privacy in India, with an emphasis on national security and privacy. The conference was opened by Prashant Iyengar, head researcher at Privacy India and Kanan Drhu, director of RFGI. Mr. Iyengar explained Privacy India’s mandate to raise awareness of privacy, spark civil action, and promote democratic dialogue around privacy challenges and violations in India. RFGI is a think tank established in 2009 which aims to research, promote, and implement various reforms to improve the legal and political process in Gujarat and across India. ‘Privacy Matters – Ahmedabad’ is the third conference out of the eight that Privacy India will be hosting across India. The next conference will take place in Hyderabad on 9 April 2011. It will focus on human rights and privacy.

The keynote speech, delivered by Usha Ramanathan, focused on links not often made between privacy and social phenomenon.

Ms. Usha Ramanathan opened the conference by examining the links not often made between privacy and personal security, between databases and national security, and the centrality of dislodging privacy in projects of social control. In her presentation she spoke about the inverse relationship between national and personal security, making the point that an important part of privacy is the ability of an individual to secure their own person. Today, because national security follows a policy of ubiquitous surveillance, it is almost impossible for an individual to secure their person from the state. Ms. Ramanathan also traced the beginnings of ubiquitous surveillance to the increasing global fear of terrorism, and the national break down of the criminal justice system in India. Instead of looking to the roots of terrorism and the roots of failure in the criminal justice system, the Indian State has responded to both these factors by superimposing a system of surveillance on top of the existing rule. Consequently, the state has become pan-optical — closely following the movement of its entire population. The state has been able to achieve this level of surveillance through technology, which it has used to create identifiers for its population. The use of technology by the state mediates a link between corporate interest and state interest. Thus, by facilitating the easy and ubiquitous creation of identifiers and surveillance, technology is changing the idea and the nature of privacy. For example, it is now important that a privacy law allows for individuals to protect and secure their identity, something that every individual has and every individual controls, while regulating the creation and external use of identifiers — something that is used by another (not you) to distinguish a person from the rest of the population.

Questions to Consider

How can privacy legislation work to positively regulate the use of technology by the government, so that invasion of privacy does not consequently become state policy?

How can privacy legislation distinguish between and work to protect an identity while regulating the creation and use of personal information as identifiers?

Session I of the Conference featured a Judicial Perspective of Privacy and a Presentation on the Connections between Privacy and the Federal Income Tax Regime in India.

Privacy and the Constitution

J N Bhatt, the former Chief Justice of Gujarat and Bihar, and currently the head of the Gujarat State Law Commission, spoke about privacy as a fundamental right that has been written into articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Important points from his presentation include:

As privacy is already a recognized fundamental right, the question at hand is not if there is a right to privacy, but instead how can the right to privacy be best proliferated.

Within the question of how a privacy can best be proliferated, is a question about rights and duties. Wherever there is a right to privacy there is also a corresponding duty to privacy — as rights and duties are interdependent.

Though privacy has been recognized as a fundamental right in India, when looking at the actual assertion of the right, it is important to be aware of the cultural realities of India. India is a country with 39 per cent of her population living below the poverty line, with an even lower literacy rate, and there is a direct connection between the assertion of civil liberties, an individual’s civic sense, and education.

When looking at how to best proliferate the right to privacy, governance and common law, a methodology to reach the poorest of the poor should be laid out first.

Questions to Consider

What is the best way to proliferate the right to privacy ?

What legal structures need to be in place to ensure that the poor can assert their right to privacy?
What social structures need to be in place to ensure that the poor can assert their right to privacy?

Privacy and the Indian Tax Regime

Professor Amal Dhru, visiting professor from the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad and a practicing Chartered Accountant spoke on the connections between privacy and the federal income tax regime in India. In his presentation he explained how the information collected by the federal income tax regime in India can be both useful in holding a citizen accountable, and invasive of one’s personal privacy if mis-used. Important points from his presentation include:

The Indian tax regime highlights the tension between public interest as tax evasion is considered an exception to the right to privacy as it is a matter of public interest.

There is a lack of confidence in the existing banking and tax system in India. For example in the business sector, Indian investors have deposited over 700 billion dollars abroad as they are given complete privacy and security over their money.

Though there is a lack of confidence in the current banking and tax system, a tighter law is not necessarily the solution. For example, studies have found that tighter tax regimes lead to greater evasion, while looser tax regimes have higher compliance rates.

On April 1, 2011 the new tax codes for India will be implemented. The reform will give enormous power to tax offices, and as the tax authorities will become equipped to do taxes smarter – this will come at a cost to citizen’s privacy.

Questions to Consider

Just as a tighter tax law leads to a higher percentage of tax evasion, will a tight privacy law simply lead to greater numbers of privacy violations?

What creates public confidence in a law?

Should a privacy legislation be responsible for defining the public good?

Should privacy protection of tax-related information be incorporated into a privacy legislation or contained only in tax law?

To what extent should tax authorities be allowed to investigate potential tax evasion i.e., one’s computer, house or e-mail?

How does one balance the private vs. the public good?

Session II of the Conference focused on National Security and Privacy, and Cultural Conceptions of Privacy

National Security and Privacy

In the second session on Privacy and National Security, Colonel Mathew Thomas spoke on privacy and national security. Colonel Thomas is a management consultant and activity leader for development centers and has held top positions in the Indian Army, and the Defence Research and Development Organisation, where he headed the missile manufacturing facility. Sharing his personal experiences in the army he explained the connection between privacy and national security. Important points from his presentation include:

National Security is often not an internal threat, but instead an external threat.

There is a connection between the increase in surveillance and liberalization of Government.

More surveillance does not bring more security.

Foreign software poses as a threat to national security.

Greater security is gained through intelligent use and analysis of data.

A strong national security plan should not rely solely on surveillance of its citizens. Instead national security should be brought about through strong economic policies, non-reliance on foreign software, neutrality in foreign policy, fair trade policies, rural development and prevention of migration to cities, and having a politically honest and accountable governance.

Questions to Consider

Is it effective for privacy to be compromised in the name of anti- terror laws?
Can the development and distribution of indigenous software protect national privacy?
How can strong economic policies indirectly protect an individual's privacy?
How can a strong foreign policy protect an Indian citizen's privacy when it is stored or sent abroad?

Privacy as a Cultural Construct

Gagan Sethi from the Centre for Social Justice, Ahmedabad shared his opinion on privacy. Important points from his presentation include:

Privacy is a cultural construct that changes with context, perspective, and time.
When considering a privacy policy it is important to create a policy that does not strictly define what privacy is and what it is not, but instead create a policy that defines and promotes a common respect for human dignity.

Questions to Consider

If a privacy policy is developed to promote a common respect for human dignity – will it be effective?

Can you develop a policy that has a loose definition and mandate, but has strong legal teeth?

Session III of the Conference focused on Minority Identities and Privacy, Prisoner Rights, and Cyber Security.

Privacy and Minority Identities

Bobby Kuhnu, a lawyer and activist, presented in the third session on Privacy, Minority Identities, and Security. In his talk Mr. Kuhnu through the use of three examples examined the ideological underpinnings of the discourse on privacy and its bearings on socially marginalized identities in the context of the Indian State and the constitutional right to privacy. Important points from his presentation include:

In India, names can be sensitive and personal information like one’s religion, family, caste, and background can all be known through a name.
Because of the sensitivity of a person’s name, many people do not feel safe or comfortable in their own identity.
Reservation lists and public postings of information, can and have been used to discriminate and violate another’s privacy.

Questions to Consider

Should a privacy legislation requirement throughout institutions and government bodies that names should not be publicly displayed to the point of identification?
What is the most effective way of legally protecting an individual from discrimination based on their name?

Perspectives of Privacy

In the last portion of the day, Yash Sampat and Aditya Yagnik spoke on the origins of privacy and privacy in the cyber world. Vimmi Surti spoke on prisoner's rights and privacy and Ramswaroop Chaudhary presented on minority identities in South Asia and privacy. Important points from their presentation include:

Internet has led to an increase in privacy violations.
The result of privacy infringements is often the deprivation of individuals from safe access to services availed to them.
When looking at privacy as the protection of human dignity, prisoner’s rights are violated through overcrowding in prisons, poor health, and poor sanitation.

Questions to Consider

Are there legal mechanisms that can be put in place to ensure the least amount of deprivation to services when an individual’s privacy is invaded?

To what extent should prisoners be availed the right to privacy?

The concluding session was a time for discussion and opinion sharing

From the closing session, and the above sessions many themes and questions pertaining to privacy came out that will need to be addressed when considering the way forward for a privacy legislation including:

Regulation of ubiquitous surveillance in the name of national security
Regulation over public display of names and personal information
The need to distinguish between identity and identifier.
The need to protect an individual's identity while regulating the production and use of identifiers.
Privacy rights and prisoners: what does the right to privacy mean to a prisoner, i.e., clean facilities and health care.
Can the right to privacy be a platform for individuals to claim sanitary/safe working and living conditions.
Recognize the changing nature of privacy rights in a technological society.
Privacy implications of biometric usage.
Creation of a definition of when privacy rights will supersede identification needs.
How can government institutions, like the tax department, incorporate and protect the right to privacy with the collection of large amounts of data for more efficient services.
Privacy and the family

Download the report and agenda here [pdf - 452kb]

Also see Matthew's presentation [powerpoint file 116kb]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/privacy-matters-report-from-ahmedabad

India's untapped potential: Are a billion people losing out because of spectrum?

Shyam Ponappa — 2012-12-14T10:31:43Z

As one of the world’s fastest growing economies and with over 65% of its billion-plus population under 35, India has huge potential. But according to Shyam Ponappa of the Centre for Internet & Society, its spectrum management – the electromagnetic waves that are used from home appliances like microwaves and remote controls, to radios, cell phones, and of course, the internet – could be a huge barrier to the country’s economic and social development.

Until the global economic downturn that began about two years ago, the economic model for spectrum distribution in India and many developing countries was based on the free market. But Ponappa demonstrates in a new report for APC that spectrum is worth treating as a public utility the way we do roads, electricity and other basic infrastructure, which would allow for people in rural areas to access spectrum-dependant services like mobile phones and wifi and increase quality of services for all.

Currently in India, as in most other countries, spectrum is being treated as a property, where “chunks” of spectrum are sold to the mobile phone and telecommunications operators with the highest bid. Commonly there are 3 – 4 operators in a developed country; however, in India there are up to sixteen. The extreme competition has resulted in the Indian bidders paying outrageous fees that they are never able to recuperate. So while the government makes a profit on the sale, this profit comes at a societal cost.

Ponappa proposes pooling spectrum and to have a set of network providers, who in turn serve operators for retail users. This effectively opens up the spectrum and could make costs ten or fifteen times cheaper than they are now.

“It is appropriate to push the concept of open spectrum in developed markets who underwent their development phase some 60 – 100 years ago and put in place basic infrastructure systems. But in countries like India and the Asian sub-continent, it does not make sense to do this because we are not at the same stage of economic development,” Ponappa told APCNews.

“When markets are well structured and organised,” he continues, “[government control] can be less effective and efficient for society as a whole, compared with open competition. However developing economies don’t have the integrated systems in place that advanced economies do. India does not have an adequately developed network of copper, optical fibre or microwaves covering most of its population. And we are at a stage of development at which infrastructure is a fundamental determinant of productivity, as well as of a reasonable quality of life.”

Ponappa argues that in India’s case it would be advisable for governments to work with other stakeholders – corporations, state-owned agencies, and civil society – on a collaborative solution. “It would be much more conducive to a sound economy to have either the government step in and open up the commercial spectrum, or to have two to three main operators (possibly subsidised, but not necessarily) as we do with the provision of utilities,” he says. Yet, the free market mentality continues to reign, and a surfeit of operators is trying to make a profit in the telecommunications wireless sector.

Everybody wants a piece of the pie

In India, every operator is assigned a sliver of spectrum for their exclusive use and the rest is assigned to the government, the public sector and defence.

The result is high-cost infrastructure for operators (setting up networks with multiple sets of more advanced equipment because of the limited spectrum, with the capital constraints resulting in less extensive networks in rural areas) as well as for users (who have to pay for all this equipment).

“Too many operators make for increased capital costs for each operator, and cumulatively for all operators,” Ponappa explains.

And these higher costs are increasingly difficult to recover from consumer-generated revenue, as India undergoes huge price wars. Many operators may eventually go bankrupt. While no consumers ever complain about low costs –and India has some of the world’s lowest mobile rates– they will complain about poor quality and unreliable service. Consequently, consumers may not have to pay much to use mobile services, but they may not always be able to make or receive calls when they need to, and do not have access to broadband.

While most countries have moved on to 3G networks (which has more capacity for a given spectrum band than 2G, meaning better call quality) as many as four of India’s sixteen operators have not even developed their 2G networks. Making the switch to 3G seems like a good idea, but there are substantial costs associated with deploying these more advanced techniques to both operators (for network upgrades) and for end users (in terms of new handsets).

Too much competition in this case has made operators inefficient.

Spectrum as a national common good

If spectrum were treated as if it were a public utility, posits Ponappa, each operator would have access to a bigger chunk of spectrum, and the traffic-handling capacity of each would increase at a lower cost.

“With the current model the capacity of networks is suffering because networks cannot afford to expand or make technical improvements without economic losses. Other infrastructure services such as electricity and water supply are managed by utility companies, which are typically monopolies for a product-segment, or duopolies for purposes of competition. So why not treat spectrum the same way?” suggests Ponappa.

Ponappa suggests treating networks, and spectrum as a part of networks, as we would an oil pipeline, where everyone accesses the same one, and pays a fee for its use.

This would bring more people onto the network and increase revenues, since operating costs would be shared. The more revenue it can generate, the more efficient operators will be, using the same high-capacity circuits. The more revenue the main operators have, the more they could invest in up-to-date technology to extend their networks and provide a better service to clients. The better the technology, the more people could access the internet and other now vital sources of information, as well as focus on broadband and infrastructure to the country’s isolated rural areas, which today have rudimentary communications infrastructure.

India’s rural populations, the lost resource

As a predominantly rural country, lack of basic IT infrastructure means that the largest segment of India’s population has no access to information and communications technologies.

Ponappa grew up on a farm in a rural area some 200 km from Bangalore where even fixed line phone networks were unreliable. “We have multiple telephone lines because we never know which one will work,” he says.

Given India’s massive rural population, this means that there are hundreds of millions of people that are unable to access the internet. Services like quality distance education are not even an option if basic infrastructure such as fixed telephone lines is not in place and the country itself is losing out on the incalculable potential of this untapped human resource.

Download the report here [pdf - 280 kb]

See the report in the APC website

This article was written as part of the APC’s project work on Spectrum for development, an initiative that aims to provide an understanding of spectrum regulation by examining the situation in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Photo by kiwanja. Used with permission under Creative Content licensing.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/untapped-potential

Google Policy Fellowship Program: Asia Chapter

praskrishna — 2011-08-02T07:34:24Z

For the ardent followers of free and open Internet and for those who love to debate on technology, media law and Internet-related policy issues, there is some good news. The Centre for Internet and Society, India is conducting a Google Policy Fellowship program this summer!

Offered for the first time in Asia Pacific, the Google Policy Fellowship offers successful applicants the opportunity to develop research and debate on issues relating to freedom of expression for a minimum of ten weeks from June to August 2011. The applicants will be selected in Australia, India and Hong Kong respectively.

The Centre for Internet and Society will select the India Fellow, and is accepting applications for the position before March 27, 2011. Google is providing a USD 7,500 stipend to the India Fellow, who will be selected by April 18, 2011.

To apply, please send to google.fellowship@cis-india.org the following materials:

Statement of Purpose: A brief write-up outlining about your interest and qualifications for the programme including the relevant academic, professional and extracurricular experiences. As part of the write-up, also explain on what you hope to gain from participation in the programme and what research work concerning free expression online you would like to further through this programme. (About 1200 words max).
Resume
Three references

More information about the focus of the work that the Google Policy Fellow will take on is described below1. More information about the Google Policy Fellowship program is available in the FAQ2.

Research Agenda Outline

The research proposals, and the fellowship itself, are to be anchored in the reality of the growing threat to civil liberties in cyberspace, with the consequent curbs on free expression that arise. The aim of the research is to chart out a comprehensive map of the legal and policy frameworks relating to free expression within the Asia-Pacific region and also examine people’s attitudes and ground-level movements relating to the same. This second component will necessarily involve some amount of empirical research: the fellows across different regions (for 2011, there will be fellows from India, Australia and Hong Kong) will be expected to use a survey on similar lines, so that the results could be adequately contrasted.

The research would involve but not necessarily be limited to the following areas:

Understanding Dissent

This component would involve looking at how dissent is negotiated in the region by the legal system and the ways in which governments seek to stifle and control online dissent. Specific points of interrogation would include:

The extent to which the constitution and other laws in the region protect freedom of expression and the extent to which they are enforced.
Judicial decisions relating to free expression, censorship and dissent. Have they examined how speech and other activities on the Internet should be afforded free speech protection?
The kind of material deemed objectionable and subject to censorship and/or penalization.
The kind of penalties placed on writers, commentators and bloggers for posting objectionable materials on the Internet.
Understanding the economic environment in which free expression operates: chains of media ownership, state restrictions on the means of journalistic production and distribution, and the levels of state control through allocation of advertising or subsidies would be part of this question.
Further, what are the laws relating to encryption and telecom security, as well as to intermediary liability, and how do they affect free expression?

Understanding Free Expression

To be examined here is the question of how freedom of expression is perceived by people. What is the extent to which people believe the right is available to them — as balanced by conceivably conflicting rights such as privacy?

One part of proceeding on this would be to track a set of activist bloggers, gauging their take on various issues.
Another part would include tracking public opinion through comments pages on articles relating to free speech issues; taking a survey or coordinating focus group research. However, this is by no means the most reliable way to gauge the same and is, in particular, one area that will require an appropriate methodology to be developed by the fellows in consultation with the partner organizations.

Both these components are essential in being able to proceed with the third aspect, mentioned below.

Understanding and Facilitating Movements

This final aspect will involve looking at how free expression advocates come together, or fail to do so.

Is there a defined activist community in the region?
If not, what are the possible reasons behind failure of collaboration or organization? Have there been attempts towards the same?

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Google Policy Fellowship program?

The Google Policy Fellowship program offers students interested in Internet and technology related policy issues with an opportunity to spend their summer working on these issues at the Centre for Internet and Society at Bangalore. Students will work for a period of ten weeks starting from June 2011. The research agenda for the program is based on legal and policy frameworks in the region connected to the ground-level perception of free expression.
Applications for the Fellowship should carry these:

Statement of Purpose: A brief write-up outlining about your interest and qualifications for the programme including the relevant academic, professional and extracurricular experiences. As part of the write-up, also explain on what you hope to gain from participation in the programme and what research work concerning free expression online you would like to further through this programme. (About 1200 words max).
Resume
Three references

Important Dates
What is the program timeline?

March 27, 2011:	Student application deadline; applications must be received by midnight 00:00 GMT.
April 18, 2011:	Student applicants are notified of the status of their applications.
June 2011:	Students begin their fellowship with the host organization (start date to be determined by students and the host organization); Google issues initial student stipends.
July 2011:	Mid-term evaluations; Google issues mid-term stipends.
August 2011:	Final evaluations; Google issues final stipends.

EligibilityI am an International student can I apply and participate in the program?

Are there any age restrictions on participating?

Yes. You must be 18 years of age or older by 1 January 2011 to be eligible to participate in Google Policy Fellowship program in 2011.

Are there citizenship requirements for the Fellowship?

For the time being, we are only accepting students eligible to work in India (e.g. Indian citizens, permanent residents of India, and individuals presently holding an Indian student visa. Google cannot provide guidance or assistance on obtaining the necessary documentation to meet the criteria.

Who is eligible to participate as a student in Google Policy Fellowship program?

In order to participate in the program, you must be a student. Google defines a student as an individual enrolled in or accepted into an accredited institution including (but not necessarily limited to) colleges, universities, masters programs, PhD programs and undergraduate programs. Eligibility is based on enrollment in an accredited university by 1 January 2011.

I am an International student can I apply and participate in the program?

In order to participate in the program, you must be a student (see Google's definition of a student above). You must also be eligible to work in India (see section on citizen requirements for fellowship above). Google cannot provide guidance or assistance on obtaining the necessary documentation to meet this criterion.

I have been accepted into an accredited post-secondary school program, but have not yet begun attending. Can I still take part in the program?

As long as you are enrolled in a college or university program as of 1 January 2011, you are eligible to participate in the program.

I graduate in the middle of the program. Can I still participate?

As long as you are enrolled in a college or university program as of 1 January 2011, you are eligible to participate in the program.

Payments, Forms, and Other Administrative Stuff

How do payments work*?

Google will provide a stipend of USD 7,500 equivalent to each Fellow for the summer.

Accepted students in good standing with their host organization will receive a USD 2,500 stipend payable shortly after they begin the Fellowship in June 2011.
Students who receive passing mid-term evaluations by their host organization will receive a USD 1,500 stipend shortly after the mid-term evaluation in July 2011.
Students who receive passing final evaluations by their host organization and who have submitted their final program evaluations will receive a USD 3,500 stipend shortly after final evaluations in August 2011.

Please note: Payments will be made by electronic bank transfer, and are contingent upon satisfactory evaluations by the host organization, completion of all required enrollment and other forms. Fellows are responsible for payment of any taxes associated with their receipt of the Fellowship stipend.

*While the three step payment structure given here corresponds to the one in the United States, disbursement of the amount may be altered as felt necessary.

What documentation is required from students?

Students should be prepared, upon request, to provide Google or the host organization with transcripts from their accredited institution as proof of enrollment or admission status. Transcripts do not need to be official (photo copy of original will be sufficient).

I would like to use the work I did for my Google Policy Fellowship to obtain course credit from my university. Is this acceptable?

Yes. If you need documentation from Google to provide to your school for course credit, you can contact Google. We will not provide documentation until we have received a final evaluation from your mentoring organization.

Host Organizations

What is Google's relationship with the Centre for Internet and Society?

Google provides the funding and administrative support for individual fellows directly. Google and the Centre for Internet and Society are not partners or affiliates. The Centre for Internet and Society does not represent the views or opinions of Google and cannot bind Google legally.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/google-policy-fellowship

Digital Natives with a Cause? —Workshop in Santiago — an Afterthought

tettner — 2012-01-03T10:16:18Z

The Digital Natives had their third and final workshop in Santiago, Chile from 8 to 10 February 2011. Once again CIS and Hivos joined hands to organise the event. Samuel Tettner, Digital Natives Coordinator from CIS narrates his experiences from the workshop in this blog post.

For three days, from 8 to 10 February, I spent most of the days and almost one full night at the Digital Natives with a Cause? Workshop. The day before the workshop, I met the facilitators: Kara, Pedro and Juan-Manuel. All three of them were quite enthusiastic with each one specializing on an aspect of the research objectives. That night, I had my first formal meeting with the participants in the conference room of Hotel Windsor in Santiago. It is always fascinating to meet a large group of people, especially since you have been corresponding with them for a couple of weeks, have read about them and their projects, made images in your head of how they look, how they act, how they will get along with each other and so on.

I was particularly excited about the workshop in Santiago since it presented itself to me an opportunity to re-connect with a side of Latin America that I had not experienced. I moved from Venezuela to the United States at the age of 15. I don’t know about everyone else, but when I was 15, I was mostly interested in music, movies, my friends, fast cars, video games, and a whole lot of the nonsense stuff. Meeting these highly motivated young men and women from all over the American continent and the Caribbean islands allowed me to connect with the more nuanced and matured side of my identity— a side that had only heard English spoken to it.

The actual workshop took place at the Biblioteca de Santiago, a library in Santiago, a beautiful modern building, with an architecture that rivalled the best libraries I ever saw in the world. Our local partner Rising Voices, had done an incredible job of organizing the logistics. The workshop opened with an ice-breaking exercise that unlike most ice-breaking exercises required some neural movement. Participants were asked to come up with a word that described their practice, politics or ideology. You see the workshop participants were young people who engage with digital technologies to create social and political change. I chose my word ‘innovation’ mainly because it’s an idea that’s been hunting my day-dreams lately, but also because I knew it would elicit interesting responses. I briefly sat down with Luis Carlos from Peru and Joan from the Dominican Republic, whose words were ‘stories’ and also ‘creative’. A blog post about that experience can be found here.

Afterwards we had the pleasure of hearing from Juan-Manuel, the facilitator from Mexico. Juan-Manuel talked about issues of participation, motivation to do social change, impact of our engagements and other social change related processes. He left us with three big questions that stayed with us for the rest of the afternoon:

What is our motivation to do social work? Where does it come from? Where does it end? How did it start? Can it be replicated?
What is incidence / impact? How can one measure impact?
What does one need to know to create social impact?

I got in a group with Adolfo from Nicaragua, Maria Del Mar from Paraguay, Karl from Haiti and Julio from Chile. Kara was our facilitator for the discussion. A blog post about that experience by Maria Del Mar can be found here. After discussing for about one hour, we made a white paper that visually illustrated` our discussion. We decided to make a word / concept cloud and mix it with a collage. That was it. With a lot of anticipation and nervousness the first day of our workshop ended.

Oh wait! I forgot to add a small detail, that day Nishant also taught us how to do a Bollywood dance. I didn’t take any pictures, but I hope someone did!

On the second day, Pedro Markun from Brazil opened the floor with a thought-provoking presentation. Unfortunately, I missed most of the presentation, but if one is to judge by the tweets, it was very inspiring. After the presentation, we participated in a bar camp. During this activity participants proposed the topics for discussion, out of which we selected five to focus on. I decided to join the conversation about ‘digital rights’, a topic proposed by Andres from Venezuela. Brendon from Trinidad and Tobago, Luis Carlos and Roberto from Peru, and Joan from the DR also participated in this discussion. I wrote a small blog about my opinion on this conversation here.

During the second half of the day, the process was reversed and instead of us participants writing down concepts we wanted to talk about, five words were written on the board: mobilization, network building, awareness, campaigns, and representation. This activity, called HOW DO YOU SPELL PROCESS? asked us to choose the word with which we identify the most; it could be the word we know the most about, or the least about, or the word we’re most interested in implementing in our practice. I joined the mobilization group, because part of the job as the community manager for the Digital Natives project involved motivating the members, involving them in other’s ideas, helping them connect with greater initiatives – all ideas that I think connect with mobilization issues. I sat down with Maria Carmelita from Argentina, Brendon from T&B and Francisco from Chile.

After we were all settled in the group plenary after this activity, Fieke had a dictatorial proclamation to make: we then had around 12 hours to make a visual presentation (a video, a play, a sketch and others) about our discussions during HOW DO YOU SPELL PROCESS?

I met Brendon, Francisco, and Carmelita shortly after for dinner and the planning of our video. We decided to have an Indian night, which is ironic since I now live in India, yet the experience was very interesting: I tried ‘curry’ for the first time in my life! For our video, we decided to make a cheesy, 1984-esque “how to” video to change the world through mobilization. The video can be found here. Check out the other videos as well, they all are quite interesting and thought-provoking.

Finally, on the third day after a showing of the videos and plays, the last facilitator, Kara from Guatemala, shared with us her personal journey into her social commitment. From growing up in a banana plantation in Guatemala, to her use of digital technologies to raise funds to build a house for her uncle, Kara’s story inspired all in attendance. Kara told her story through a specific framework, which was named the Matrix. The Matrix consisted of re-framing one’s story through four lenses: dream, discovery, design and destiny. We then broke into groups and reflected into our own journeys with technology using the same framework.

In the end, we all went to a nice restaurant and had a common dinner. I love those tables of over 20+people; you can switch seats and change conversations instantly. Overall, the workshop was a huge learning experience. I was able to meet some similar people from Latin America, and better understand the cultural context of the intersection of technology and the social and the political spheres. With the last workshop now over, we have collected a plethora of research materials which we will analyze during the second phase of the Digital Natives with a Cause? project. The journey still continues.

Thanks to all of you who made the experience Possible!.

For info on schedule of events, organisers and participants, click here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/santiago-workshop-an-after-thought

Privacy Matters — Conference Report

praskrishna — 2011-01-27T10:22:55Z

A one-day conference on Privacy Matters was held on Sunday, 23 January 2011 at the National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS) Law School in Kolkata. This was the first of a series of eleven conferences on ‘privacy’ that Privacy India is scheduled to host in different Indian cities from January to June this year. Members of Parliament, Sri Manoj Bhattacharya from the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) and Sri Nilotpal Basu from the Communist Party of India (Marxist) CPI (M) spoke in the conference. Students, the civil society and lawyers also participated in it.

Introduction

The conference was held to discuss elements of the privacy legislation that has been proposed to the Parliament of India, and the UID Bill and project. The conference focused on the tensions between privacy and society that exist in India today, and acted as a space for opinion sharing and discussion. Privacy India which was formed under the auspices of Privacy International, a UK based organization that works to protect the right of privacy around the world, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), an NGO based in Bangalore, and Society in Action Group (SAG), an NGO based in Delhi joined hands to host this event.

Rajan Gandhi, founder of SAG opened the conference with an explanation of the mandate of Privacy India, the objective of which is of raising awareness, sparking civil action and promoting democratic dialogue around privacy challenges and violations in India. One of Privacy India's goals is to build consensus towards the promulgation of comprehensive privacy legislation in India through consultations with the public, legislators and the legal and academic community.

Keynote

The keynote speech was delivered by Dr. Sudhir Krishnaswamy professor of law and governance. Dr. Krishnaswamy began by outlining the present situation of privacy in India. The right to privacy has been read into Sections 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India through case law, which has defined privacy — among other things — as the right to personal autonomy, the right against unreasonable search and seizure, and as a fundamental right that is critical to the person, but does not supersede public or national interest. Dr. Krishnaswamy also raised many intriguing questions including: what does privacy mean to India — is it linked to a person’s dignity and their honour? Or is it purely concerned with misappropriation of information, and further is privacy in India an issue of the individual or an issue of the family and the community? He also described the philosophical groundings of privacy as being in the right to dignity, the right to autonomy, and the misappropriation of information.

Privacy Challenges

The conference was spread into three sessions. In the first session Prashant Iyengar, head researcher of the project at Privacy India, spoke about the challenges that India specifically is facing in shaping a privacy legislation including: the need to balance the right to information/transparency and privacy, the need to create a definition of privacy that does not exclude lower classes and is not a negative right, but instead a positive right, and the problem of ubiquitous surveillance that is happening in society today. Elonnai Hickok, policy analyst at Privacy India, spoke specifically on wire tapping, and the Nira Radia tapes. In her presentation she first outlined other countries definitions of privacy which include: the right to be left alone, the protection from unauthorized searches, and the right to control information about oneself through consent. Using the case study of Nira Radia and Ratan Tata she spoke about the rising concern of wire tapping in the country as being indicative of a social change and relationship of the state and government. Elonnai also raised questions concerning whether privacy should be made inversely proportional to public figures, and if public interest will always supersede the private right of individuals.

UID and Privacy

The second session of the conference focused on the UID Bill and privacy. Presentations from NUJS student Amba Kak and Sai Vinod raised concerns about the UID project and privacy. Their presentation also compared and contrasted identity schemes of other countries with the UID. A few similarities that they found amongst all scheme were: the collection of data, the processing of data, and the storing of data. Deva Prasad from the National Law School of Bangalore presented on constitutional elements of the UID scheme ranging from loopholes in the Bill to connections that can be made when the UID Bill is placed in the larger picture. Sri Manoj Bhattacharya (MP) from RSP voiced his concerns of the UID, and emphasized that by giving an individual a number which acts as their fundamental identity which they use to function in society, the government in fact is eroding an individual’s actual identity, and that is an invasion of privacy. Sri Nilotpal Basu (MP) from CPI (M) spoke out strongly against the UID, voicing that his greatest concern with the UID is that it will be a way for corporate bodies to target individuals as consumers, and that privacy legislation could be used as a way for corporate bodies to hide from the public eye.

Conclusion

In the concluding session the floor was opened up to the public for questions and opinion sharing. Many participants shared what they believed needed to be included in privacy legislation, and what issues a privacy legislation needs to address. A few of these include: privacy rights and the media, privacy and the right to information, the privacy rights of minorities, and the privacy rights of the government. Also types of regulatory models for privacy were discussed. For instance, should privacy in India be represented and protected through a data protection law, or should privacy be seen as a fundamental right to privacy? Should privacy be represented through a broad framework, or through sector specific statutes? What should the redressal and enforcement mechanisms look like?

As seen from the presentations and the comments at the conference one thing which is clear is that privacy is an issue that concerns every person in India. Over the next six months Privacy India will be conducting ten more conferences in different Indian cities to engage the public in dialogues of privacy and raise awareness around the issues of privacy. The next workshop will be held on 5 February 2011 in Bangalore.

Download the conference summary here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/privacy-nujsconference-summary

Call for Comments for Report on Open Government Data in India

praskrishna — 2013-03-01T05:50:49Z

The Centre for Internet & Society is pleased to announce a public call for comments on the Report on Open Government Data in India prepared by Glover Wright, Pranesh Prakash, Sunil Abraham and Nishant Shah.

This report situates the current move towards open government data in India in the context of the country’s growingly sophisticated information and communications technology (ICT) practices as well as the Right to Information Act. It relies primarily on conversations—both on the record and off—with government officials, businesses, civil society organizations, and individual activists. For background it relies on a review of the literature relevant to OGD and RTI generally, to present a snapshot of where India stands now in respect to OGD, and to predict where it is likely to go in the near future. It seeks to understand what “open government data” means in an Indian context, and what effects institutionalized open data practices and ideas might have on Indian society. Finally, it suggests certain technical and policy strategies for developing, promoting, and implementing, and maintaining a robust open government data policy in India.

Please do write in to Pranesh Prakash (pranesh at cis-india.org) with any suggestions, criticisms, or general comments that you have by 30 January 2011.

Download the complete report here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/open-government-data-report

Call for Comments for Report on the Online Video Environment in India

pranesh — 2012-12-14T12:12:14Z

The Open Video Alliance, the Centre for Internet and Society and iCommons are pleased to announce a public call for comments on version 1 of "Online Video Environment in India: A Survey Report".

This report is an outcome of a research project that seeks to survey the online video environment in India and the opportunities this new medium presents for creative expression and civic engagement. This report by Siddharth Chadha, Ben Moskowitz, and Pranesh Prakash seeks to define key issues in the Indian context and begins to develop a short-term policy framework to address them.

The basic assumption of this paper is that the online video medium should support creative and technical innovation, competition, and public participation, and that open source technology can help develop these traits. These assumptions are not elaborated upon here. Instead, this report looks at questions of “openness” that are not strictly technological and legal; that are specific to video in India; and that provide points of entry to a simple policy framework.

Please do write in to Ben Moskowitz (ben at openvideoalliance.org) and Pranesh Prakash (pranesh at cis-india.org) with any suggestions, criticisms, or general comments that you have by January 20, 2011.

Download the paper.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/comments-online-video-report

Digital Natives with a Cause? - workshop in Santiago Open Call

tettner — 2011-09-22T11:40:12Z

The third and final workshop in the Digital Natives with a Cause? research project will take place in Santiago, Chile, from the 8 to 10 February. An open call for participation follows.

An Open Call for Participation

As the Internet and digital technologies become more widespread, the world is shrinking: we are constantly connected to our contexts, our people, our cultures and our networks. And you, yes YOU are a part of this change. In fact, as a digital native– someone to whom digital technologies are central to life – you are directly affecting the lives of many, sometimes even without knowing about it.

The Centre for Internet and Society and Hivos in collaboration with Rising Voices is calling out to young users of technology to join a global conversation. The 3-day workshop titled “From Face to Interface” will focus on how youth utilize new platforms, media and spaces of communication and expression in the digital age. If you have used digital technologies to make your voice heard, to express your opinion in creative ways or to create new knowledge online, we want to hear from you. These can be stories where you have used a mobile phone, GPS or PDA to access the Internet and reduce the online-offline divide, stories where you accessed interactive platforms like user-generated content websites, stories where the use of technology has become part of your identity, or stories where you have been part of a collaborative method of research, production, shared learning process, participation network etc.

We invite you to share your perspectives in an informal conversation along people with similar approaches from neighboring communities. The workshop is open to applicants from, in and around Latin America and the Caribbean who are interested in an interactive and engaging dialogue that marks the beginning of the “Digital Natives with a Cause?” research inquiry into the region. “From Face to Interface” is part of a greater international research project with aims to produce a book in the English language, consolidating Digital Natives knowledge from the Global South. Moreover, the workshop aims at building a Knowledge Network in collaboration with the other participants and partners at previous workshops in Taipei and Johannesburg. Hence, a good working knowledge of English is necessary. This workshop will include the organizers based in India and the Netherlands, and participants will also come from countries where Spanish is not the primary language. Hence, a good working knowledge of English is necessary.Communication during the workshop will be English with Spanish language translations made available in selected parts of the workshop.

Participants can register by filling in an online application

form by January 4th, 2011.

Selected participants will be contacted by 8th January 2011. Travel expenses and accommodation will be provided to the selected participants. For more information do check out the frequently asked questions (FAQ) here. For any questions, concerns or comments please contact digitalnatives@cis-india.org

Dates: February 8-10th, 2011

Venue: Central Library of Chile, Santiago, Chile

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/digital-natives-with-a-cause-workshop-in-santiago-open-call

Digital Natives with a Cause? Thinkathon: Position Papers

praskrishna — 2015-05-15T11:34:35Z

The Digital Natives with a Cause? Thinkathon conference co-organised by Hivos and the Centre for Internet and Society is being held from 6 to 8 December at the Hague Museum for Communication. The position papers are now available online.

The emergence of digital and Internet technologies have changed the world as we know it. Processes of interpersonal relationships, social communication, economic expansion, political protocols and governmental mediation are all undergoing a significant translation, across the world, in developed and emerging Information and Knowledge societies. These processes also affect the ways in which social transformation, political participation and interventions for development take place.

The Digital Natives with a Cause? research inquiry seeks to look at the potentials of social change and political participation through technology practices of people in emerging ICT contexts. It particularly aims to address knowledge gaps that exist in the scholarship, practice and popular discourse around an increasing usage, adoption and integration of digital and Internet technologies in social transformation processes.

The programme has three main components. The first is to incorporate the users (often young, but not always so) as stakeholders in the construction of policies and discourse which affect their lives in very material ways. The second is to capture, with a special emphasis on change, different relationships with and deployment of technologies in different parts of the world. The third is to further extend the network of knowledge stakeholders where scholars,practitioners, policy makers and the Digital Natives themselves, come together in dialogue to identify the needs and interventions in this field.

In the late summer of 2010 two workshops, in Taiwan and South Africa, brought together 50 Digital Natives from Asia and Africa to place their practice in larger social and political legacies and frameworks. The ‘Talking Back’ workshop in Taiwan looked at the politics, implications and processes of talking back and being political and the ‘My Bubble, My Voice and My Space’ workshop in Johannesburg looked at change, change processes and the role of Digital Natives in it.

For the Digital Natives with a Cause? Thinkathon that will be held in The Hague, The Netherlands from 6 to 8 December 2010, Digital Natives from the workshops in Taipei and Johannesburg have provided us with their take on social change and political participation in the following position papers. They look at issues of: what does it mean to be a Digital Native? What is the relationship of people growing up with new technologies and change? What are the processes by which change is produced? Can you institutionalize Digital Natives with a Cause Activities? How do you make it sustainable in each context?

We hope you will find the Digital Natives with a Cause? position papers inspiring, thought-provoking and challenging.

Download the position papers here [PDF, 1173 KB]

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/position-papers

My Bubble, My Space, My Voice workshop - Perspective and future

tettner — 2012-01-03T10:32:41Z

The second workshop for the “Digital Natives with a Cause?” research project named “My Bubble, My Space, My Voice” took place at the Link Center of Wits University, in Johannesburg, South Africa from 6 November 2010 to 9 November 2010. Samuel Tettner, Digital Natives Co-cordinator shares his perspective on the workshop.

The workshop was organized by the Center for Internet and Society, Bangalore in partnership with Hivos, Netherlands and put together with indispensable help from The African Commons Project

. The workshop saw the coming together of 21 people, in the age bracket of 20 to 35, from eight African countries, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Uganda, Rwanda, Morocco, Egypt and Kenya.

They came in answer to a call; they came because they all felt they were represented in some way or manner by one term whose simple nature hides a myriad of socio-cultural nuances: Digital Native. They came thinking these nuances were going to be explained to them, and they were wrong. The spirit of the workshop can be summarized in one moment, where one Kenyan participant Simeon Oriko commented after a bar camp session: “I have more questions than I came in with!” Some of these questions were: "Who is a Digital Native?" "What is a cause" " What is the difference between information and knowledge" "How can a globalized world account for questions of indigenous cultural productions" " What are the necessary skills to use the internet" " How can the effects of an online campaign be assessed" and "is the information age a revolution"?

They, who at first so adamantly claimed to be digital natives, found themselves question their assumptions and the labels assigned to them externally. Through a series of informal and unconference style engagements, participants were able to reflect on their ideology and practice. These engagements were facilitated by a team of more experienced practitioners, Marlon Parker, Shafika Isaacs and Adam Haupt, who offered their insight and perspective to elicit relevant ideas and conversations.

The conversations centered around inquires on three focus areas: practice, politics and ideology. Through the practice of Marlon at Rlabs we learned about the key role of “champions”, or people who have a vested interest in the organization and are instrumental in crafting progress. Marlon also facilitated a group activity in which participants broke into small sub-groups and had discussions around five process-related keywords: Mobilization, Representation, Awareness, Campaign, and Network Building.

We discussed politics with Adam Haupt who made us aware that the use of technology for social change is not a practice which originates in the information age, as exemplified by South African hip-hop artists who utilized mix tapes to spread socially conscious messages. Adam's presentations inspired participants to think of words that described their perspective and then break into groups, in an activity called "birds of a feather". In these groups, participants were able to discuss back and for about common ideas and identify differences in practice.

Lastly, we discussed ideology and the power of having strongly strucutred convictions, dreams and ideals with Shafika Isaacs who invited us to frame our journey with technology in our respective projects through a 2-2 Matrix: Dream, Design, Discover and Destiny. James Mlambo, one of the participants from Zimbabwe, has written an inclusive account of the day to day events here.

Post the workshop, participants have started pouring their perspectives, stories and anecdotes on the website. At the time of this writing, they have already started pouring all this new knowledge onto the website: congealing new perspectives derived not only from their own practice but also form shared lessons, within this workshop and as connected with the Asian workshop which took place in Taiwan. Some of these new perspectives will help us to better understand many questions about digital natives, many others will provide insight into the knowledge gaps identified by Sunil Abraham and Nishant Shah.

If I have learned something from my experience with the Digital Natives project so far is that the idea that young people who utilize technology are doing so for self-gratifying reasons, are selfish and immature, and are disengaged from the political context is not simplistic but plain wrong. At least some considerable portion is motivated and engaged with their respective social and political context. Through their practice they are challenging previously established conceptions and are creating their own definitions of engagement. I now see it as crucial to the future of our information society to listen to these people and provide them with the necessary platforms and support so that they can have the positive impact they so want to achieve and strive for.

Proceedings from the workshop are available online

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/my-bubble-my-space-my-voice-workshop-perspective-and-future

Digital Natives with a Cause?— Workshop in South Africa—FAQs

tettner — 2015-05-15T11:35:11Z

The second international Digital Natives Workshop "My Bubble, My Space, My Voice" will be held in Johannesburg from 7 to 9 November 2010. Some frequently asked questions regarding the upcoming workshop are answered in this blog entry.

1. When and where is the workshop going to be held?

The workshop will take place over three days from 7 to 9 November 2010, in Johannesburg, South Africa.

2. Who should apply?

The organizers, The African Commons Project, Hivos and the Centre for Internet and Society are interested in hearing from young people, who utilize digital technologies to create social change in their societies or social circles.

Further, the regional focus of the workshop is on Africa, hence, only African citizens or those in an African setting should apply.

3. How can I apply?

You can fill an online application. Alternatively, you can email digitalnatives@cis-india.org and ask for an email application.

4. What is Digital Natives with a Cause?

"Digital Natives with a Cause?" is an international, collaborative research project which aims to increase the current understanding of Digital Natives (there is not one single definition, that’s why we’re doing this project! – but it could be understood as people who interact naturally with digital technologies) and their role in their particular societies.

5. What are the objectives of Digital Natives with a Cause? How does this workshop fit in?

"Digital Natives with a Cause?" aims to incorporate a first-person narrative of the use of technology by youth for social change into the ongoing dialogue. To do this, several case studies of varying cultural backgrounds and diverse methodologies will be compiled into a book. The case studies will be the result of three-day workshop conducted across the developing world. Last summer the Asian workshop happened in Taiwan. Next spring the South American workshop will take place in Chile.

"Digital Natives with a Cause?" also aims to incorporate the participants into a broad network of Digital Natives from around the world, with similar methodology and approach. Through this network, Digital Natives will be able to express concerns, share resources, stay connected with peers and learn from each other.

You can read a report on "Digital Natives with a Cause?" here.

6. OK, so what can I expect from this workshop?

You can expect an informal setting where interactive methods of communication help you gain a better understanding of the context of your project. For example, you will get to meet and interact with the participants of the previous workshop in Taipei. You can expect to reflect about your project: Your motivation, methodology, focus, and context, to name a few, and to draw parallels into other projects in the region. You can expect to interact with a varied and diverse group of young people from around Africa, who like you, use technology for social causes. Overall, you can expect to gain a new perspective about yourself, and the importance of your work.

7. Will I learn any new skills in this workshop?

The short answer is no. The "Digital Natives with a Cause?" project does not aim to train or to build existing capacities among youth users of technology. That said, you will definitely gain a lot of perspective on your individual project and you will learn how it relates to ongoing development processes in the region. You will also meet, interact and hopefully befriend other young users of technology like yourself, enlarging your scope and enriching your experience.

8. Will expenses be covered?

Yes. Expenses associated with the workshop (travel and accommodation) will be provided for selected participants.

9. When is the last date to apply?

The last day to apply is Tuesday, 12 October 2010.

10. Where can I get more information?

Do check out www.digitalnatives.in for more information, and please email digitalnatives@cis-india.org for questions and concerns.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/digital-natives-workshop-faqs

Digital Natives Workshop in South Africa - Call for Participation

tettner — 2011-08-04T10:31:05Z

The African Commons Project, Hivos and the Centre for Internet and Society have joined hands for organising the second international workshop "My Bubble, My Space, My Voice" in Johannesburg from 07 to 09 November 2010. Send in your applications now!

An Open Call for Participation

As the Internet and digital technologies become more widespread, the world is shrinking: we are constantly connected to our contexts, our people, our cultures and our networks. And you, yes YOU are a part of this change. In fact, as a Digital Native – someone to whom digital technology is central to life – you are directly affecting the lives of many, sometimes even without knowing about it.

The organisers are calling out to young users of technology to join this global conversation. The three-day workshop will focus on how the young people use the tools and platforms at their disposal to create social change in their environments. We want to hear from you: If you have used digital technologies to respond to problems, crises, or needs in your community or social circles, we want to hear your story. These can be stories where you have made a significant impact by initiating campaigns or movements for a particular cause, stories where you have used technologies for learning, sharing, exchanging and disseminating information, stories where you have either organized or been part of a digitally organized event (online or offline) such as a petition or campaign, or stories where you used social media like blogs, social networks, discussion group, etc., which led to an interesting social outcome.

We invite you to share your perspectives in an informal conversation with people having a similar approach from the neighbouring community. The workshop will involve participants from around Africa, who will be guided by facilitators in an interactive and engaging dialogue. Results from the workshop will be used to establish a network of collaboration and support for Digital Natives.

Participants can register by filling in an online application form by 12 October 2010.

Expenses relevant to the project will be granted to the selected participants. For any questions, concerns or comments please contact digitalnatives@cis-india.org.

Dates: November 07 to 09, 2010
Venue: Johannesburg, South Africa

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/workshop-in-south-africa

On Talking Back: A Report on the Taiwan Workshop

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:35:34Z

What does it mean to Talk Back? Who do we Talk Back against? Are we alone in our attempts or a part of a larger community? How do we use digital technologies to find other peers and stake-holders? What is the language and vocabulary we use to successfully articulate our problems? How do we negotiate with structures of power to fight for our rights? These were the kind of questions that the Talking Back workshop held in the Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica in Taiwan from 16 to 18 August 2010 posed.

Twenty-two Digital Natives were selected from regions as varied as Kyrgyztan, Pakistan, Vietnam, Jakarta, India, China, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Moldova and Thailand to come together and share their stories at the 'Talking Back' workshop. While we already began pinging everyone on the phone, and online through emails and chat, the participants themselves were encouraged to fraternise digitally before they even met IRL (in real life).

The Great Fire Wall

Two participants were lost to border authorities as they not only disallowed their entry into Taiwan from China but also permanently blocked their movement out of China. Another one from Burma missed out on being present at the workshop as much as we missed not having her with us.

Though admittedly on the first day of the workshop we did have them in on our secret group chat that we infamously termed as a coup d'état. A facilitator also on her way from Egypt was unable to make it through to us. Our Taipei team learned that a certain Chinese Airlines had omitted clearing the visa on arrival for a number of our invitees to the connecting airlines. While some we did insistently manage to pull across, the aforementioned were lost to the borderlines.

In Academia Sinica

So were we all in Academia Sinica, Taipei and under one roof by the night before the workshop? No, not yet. As mentioned above, three participants and a facilitator were unable to make it. On the Monday morning of 16 August 2010, Ritika Arya, a 20 year old Indian national had not yet arrived. She was to come as a participant and had on the previous day arranged for an event by her NGO, My India Empowered, Mumbai, India (MIE). She had already intimated us about her meticulous plans for Independence Day. However, it was Monday and she wasn’t yet there in the workshop! A call made it known that she was in fact at the Taipei airport with luggage transfer issue to be resolved. Ritika shared with us later how she grappled with the thought of losing her luggage and also spending a lot on the taxi fare instead of getting on a bus from the airport to Academia Sinica. Ritika, founder of MIE came in the nick of time really. Kudos to Ritika for the grand success of her event on India's Independence Day and for her landing smack on Day One; just in time for the Birsds of a Feather (BoF) meetings.

The First Day

On the first day of the workshop many presentations were made in quick succession. At end of presentations by facilitators and participants it was apparent that there was a language issue. We had Som Monorum from Vietnam who'd write down in English what he had to say and then say it out aloud to us. He continued adding all his responses to the group at large this way. Pichate from Thailand not only heard out every single presentation from start to end but also shared instances from his country with relevance to topics mentioned. For instance, when Seema Nair spoke of the Pink Chaddi Campaign, India, Pichate was quick to share links to the union labourers who were members of Triumph Employee's Union

An impromptu wake up call for some who were in jetlag daze was the coup de tat which was but a group chat initiated by most of us on whom no amounts of coffee could shake off jet lag. Hardly were we five minutes into the coup d'état when chat members being refreshed from it, one by one returned to 'workshop mode' and slipping out of the group chat resumed focus on the workshop. The smileys and lols remaining in the group chat RAM.

Same Same - But Different

As per the workshop schedule the first day we worked in BoF format. BoF is a type of un-conference model wherein members are grouped by what they share in common, be it the use of technology or the topics of work, each group of participants being assigned one guide.

Later the participants were assigned partners to discuss

What is my political legacy?
Who are the people I engage with?
Who are the others that I am engaging in this?

and make a presentation of the other's work.

Some initial responses briefly in the beginning:

"What do you mean my political legacy? I am apolitical."

“My work is very much so in the realm of the 'political'. I report on politics so of course I understand that I am engaging citizens reporting via mobile tools and the Internet. This is my legacy.”

“But I tell stories and I teach people to depict their own stories using such and such software and the Internet yes. These are any stories and lie in the creative realm and not political really. So how is my work political?”

“I organise teaching slum children and we enroll them into government schools. I do this to help them and have always wanted to help them. What do you mean by my legacy?”

“I feel strongly especially for women’s rights and I research into the changing face of political feminist activism.”

The intense ice breaking BoF meetings were certainly fruitful.


On the second day an impromptu exercise which took us briefly away from the scheduled Barcamp model of conferencing. We were made into random groups and assigned one Global Crisis to each group. We were to plan a solution via campaigning for the crisis with a plan which we were to present at end. The topics assigned varied from Violence to Global Warming.

The last day had a flurry of activities from participant Prabhas Pokharel's birthday to more Barcamped discussions, presentations of our campaigns to solve Global Warming et al. At the end after the vote of thanks we had an open feedback session. Here most importantly was brought to the table the need for sensitivity to language and vocabulary hindrances.

Chips Ahoy!
	Over the three days of discussions, presentations and reflections also at the end, the Taipei team organised visits to the 101 – the tallest building in the world to date, the night market and the participants themselves explored a lot of it on their own.

Travellers who plan to travel to places with cuisines unacquired by their own palate came prepared with a 'Help! What can I eat!' and 'OMG I need a Burger!' and 'Where's the closest Starbucks?' Well we all did dive into the hot pot outlets, mama-papa set meal restaurants and iced oolong tea shops with broad grins. Taiwan has been spoken well of for its Taiwanese cuisine and being an Indian-Chinese I must say even I can’t label it as Chinese food, for it honestly has a style of its own. Parathas on the streets!

The Taipei Team were as attentive to the dietary preferences as anyone could be. On Prabhas's birthday for instance, Miss Mengshan Lee got us three cakes! She said, “We wouldn't want anyone to be left out and to celebrate altogether. With everyone's needs met; eggless and with the egg we made a pretty picture.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/talking-back

Enabling Access to Education through ICT - A Conference in Delhi

praskrishna — 2013-02-04T09:24:20Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore in cooperation with the Global Initiative for Inclusive ICT (G3ICT), a flagship advocacy organization of the UN Global Alliance on ICT and Development (UN-GAID), the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), UNESCO, Digital Empowerment Foundation, Society for Promotion of Alternative Computing and Employment and the Deafway Foundation is organizing an international conference "Enabling Access to Education through ICT" in New Delhi from 27 to 29 October 2010. The event is sponsored by Hans Foundation.

How can accessible information and communication and assistive technologies for persons with disabilities be best deployed in schools and universities?

Background

Education is a fundamental right for all persons. In the information society, access to knowledge and information is of vital importance to ensure that all persons are able to participate as creative and productive members of the society. The UNCRPD recognizes that persons with disabilities also have a right to education and life long learning. Countries around the world have recognized the importance of education and have identified universal primary education as one of the millennium goals to be achieved by them within 2015. While definitive steps are being taken to achieve and promote universal inclusive education, there are still some grey areas remaining with respect to addressing the special needs of some groups like disabled children. The World Health Organisation estimates that 70 per cent of the world’s disabled live in developing countries like India. The advancement of persons with disabilities is impeded by several factors such as an inadequate legal framework for protecting their rights, lack of financial and skilled human resource to carry on their activities, high cost of assistive technologies, lack of training and capacity building activities, the absence of large networks of disability groups to share resources with each other and above all the lack of awareness and a collective intent on the part of educational institutions to enable the right to education for persons with disabilities. India alone is a large country with 18 official languages and many more regional variances and for any technology and content to reach the masses it has to be made available in several Indian languages. All these factors combined together make it difficult for persons with disabilities to exercise their right to education in developing countries.

The specific focus of the conference will be to look at various technologies, tools and practices which are necessary to bring education, especially distance and online education within the reach of all children with disabilities.

Children with disabilities in India are often left out of mainstream schools due to a variety of reasons, primarily the lack of awareness amongst educational organizations and teachers, near absence of infrastructural resources and lack of training in this regard. It is believed that barely two per cent of the 70 million disabled persons have access to education in India. Technological advancement in the form of assistive technologies, ubiquitous Web, multiple platforms, social networks, online libraries and digital resources, etc., have now made it possible for disabled persons to access information in accessible formats. It is therefore, important that students, teachers and educational institutions are adequately equipped to leverage the power of the Internet and ICTs to enable inclusion for persons with disabilities.

The present conference will focus on highlighting existing problems and challenges for students and educational institutions in developing countries, showcase ICT based solutions which are presently being adopted in different countries, point to existing knowledge resources and emerging trends in education. This conference is unique in so far as it is probably the first one of its kind on such a large scale in India and involves participation of various UN organizations such as the WIPO, UNESCO, ITU and the G3ICT. Amongst the various deliverables of the conference is also to document some best practice case studies on the use of ICTs in education for the disabled in neighbouring countries like Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Thailand, evolve a set of recommendations for educators on best practices, as well as to evolve a draft for a White paper on education and ICTs for persons with disabilities for governments and educators in different countries.

A print version of the E-accessibility toolkit for policymakers which was jointly brought out by the G3ICT and ITU earlier this year will be launched for the first time at the conference.

Dates: October 27, 28 and 29
Venue: Magnolia Hall, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi

Download the agenda

For further reading

Videos

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/education-through-ict

Political is as Political does

nishant — 2011-08-04T10:30:51Z

The Talking Back workshop has been an extraordinary experience for me. The questions that I posed for others attending the workshop have hounded me as they went through the course of discussion, analysis and dissection. Strange nuances have emerged, certain presumptions have been questioned, new legacies have been discovered, novel ideas are still playing ping-pong in my mind, and a strange restless excitement – the kind that keeps me awake till dawning morn – has taken over me, as I try and figure out the wherefore and howfore of things. I began the research project on Digital Natives in a condition of not knowing, almost two years ago. Since then, I have taken many detours, rambled on strange paths, discovered unknown territories and reached a mile-stone where I still don’t know, but don’t know what I don’t know, and that is a good beginning.

The researcher in his heaven, all well with the world

This first workshop is not merely a training lab. For me, it was the extension of the research inquiry, and collaboratively producing some frames of reference, some conditions of knowing, and some ways of thinking about this strange, ambiguous and ambivalent category of Digital Natives. The people who have assembled at this workshop have identified themselves as Digital Natives as a response to the open call. They all have practices which are startlingly unique and simultaneously surprisingly similar. Despite the great dissonance in their geo-political contexts and socio-cultural orientations, they seem to be bound together by things beyond the technological.

Each one chose a definition for him/herself that straddles so many different ideas of how technologies interact with us; there are writers who offer a subjective position and affective relation to technologies and the world around them; there are artists who seek to change the world, one barcode at a time; there are optimist warriors who have waged battles against injustice and discrimination in the worlds they occupy; there are explorers who have made meaning out of socio-cultural terrains that they live in; there are leaders who have mobilized communities; there are adventurers who have taken on responsibilities way beyond their young years; there are researchers who have sought higher grounds and epistemes in the quest of knowledge. The varied practice is further informed by their own positions as well as their relationship with the different realities they engage with.

How, then, does one make sense of this babble of diversity? How does one even begin to articulate a collective identity for people who are so unique that sometimes they are the only ones in their contexts to initiate these interventions? Where do I find a legacy or a context that makes sense of these diversities without conflating or coercing their uniqueness? This is not an easy task for a researcher, and I have struggled over the two days to figure out a way in which I can start develop a knowledge framework through which I can not only bring coherence to this group but also do it without imposing my questions, suggestions or agendas on you. And it is only now, at a quarter to dawn, as I think and interact more with the different digital natives that things get shapes for me – shapes that are not yet clear, probably obscured by the blurriness of sleep and the rushed time that we have been living in the last few days – and I now attempt to trace the contours if not the details of these shapes.

Questioning the Question

The first insight for me came from the fact that the Digital Natives in the workshop talked back – not only to the structures that their practice engages with, but also the questions that I posed to them. “What does it mean to be Political?” I has asked on the first day, knowing well that this wasn’t going to be an easy dialogue. Even after years of thinking about the Political as necessarily the Personal (and vice versa), it still is sometimes difficult to actually articulate the process or the imagination of the Political. It is no wonder that so many people take the easy recourse of talking about governments, judiciaries, democracies and the related paraphernalia to talk about Politics.

I knew, even before I posed the question, that this was going to lead to confusion, to conditions of being lost, to processes of destabilising comfort zones. However, what I was not ready for was a schizophrenic moment of epiphany where I tried to ask myself what I understood as the Political. And as I tried to explain it to myself, to explain it to others, to push my own knowledge of it, to understand others’ ideas and imaginations, I came up with a formulation which goes beyond my own earlier knowledges. There are five different articulations of the legacies and processes of the Political that I take with me from the discussions (some were suggested by other people, some are my flights of fancy based on our conversations), and it is time to reflect on them:

Political as dialogue

This was perhaps, the easiest to digest because it sounds like a familiar formulation. To be political is to be in a condition of dialogue. Which means that Talking Back was suddenly not about Talking Against or Being Talked To. It was about Talking With. It was a conversation. Sometimes with strangers. Sometimes with people made familiar with time. Sometimes with people who we know but have not realised we know. Sometimes with the self. The power of names, the strength of being in a conversation – to talk and also to listen is a condition of the Political. In dialogue (as opposed to a babble) is the genesis of being political. Because when we enter a dialogue, we are no longer just us. We are able to detach ourselves from US and offer a point of engagement to the person who was, till now, only outside of us.

Political as concern

This particular idea of the political as being concerned was a surprise to me. I have, through discourses and practice within gender and sexuality fields, understood affective relationships as sustaining political concerns and subjectivities. However, I had overlooked the fact that the very act of being concerned, what a young digital native called ‘being burned’ about something that we notice in our immediate (or extended) environments is already a political subjectivity formation. To be concerned, to develop an empathetic link to the problems that we identify, is a political act. It doesn’t always have to take on the mantle of public action or intervention. Sometimes, just to care enough, is enough.

Political as change

This is a debate that needs more conversations for me. Politics, Knowledge, Change, Transformation – these are the four keywords (further complicated by self-society binaries) that have strange permutations and combination. To Know is to be political because it produces a subjectivity that has now found a new way of thinking about itself and how it relates to the external reality. This act of Knowing, thus produces a change in our self. However, this change is not always a change that leads to transformation. Knowledge for knowledge’s sake can often be indulgent. Even when the knowledge produces a significant and dramatic change, often this change is restricted to the self.

When does this knowing self, which is in a condition of change, become a catalyst for transformation? When does this knowing-changing translate into a transformation for the world outside of us? Just to be in a condition of knowing does not grant the agency required for the social transformation that we are trying to understand. Where does this agency come from? How do we understand the genesis and dissemination of this agency? And what are the processes of change that embody and foster the Political?

Political as Freedom

On the first thought, the imagination of Political as Freedom seemed to obvious; commonsense and perhaps commonplace. However, I decided put the two in an epistemological dialogue and realised that there are many prismatic relationships I had not talked about before I was privy to these conversations. Here is a non-exhaustive list: Political Freedom, Politics of Freedom, Free to be Political, Political as Freedom, Freedom as Political... is it possible to be political without the quest of freedom? Is the freedom we achieve, at the expense of somebody else’s Political stance? How does the business of being Political come to be? Not Why? But How? If Digital Natives are changing the state of being political what are they replacing? What are they inventing? Where, in all these possibilities lies Freedom?

Political as Reticence

We all talked about voice – whose, where, for whom, etc. It was a given that to give voice, to have voice, to speak, to talk, to talk back were conditions of political dialogue and subversion, of intervention and exchange. So many of us – participants or facilitators – talked about how to speak, what technologies of speech, how to build conditions of interaction... and then, like the noise in an otherwise seamless fabric of empowerment came the idea of reticence. Is it possible to be silent and still be political? If I do not speak, is it always only because I cannot? What about my agency to choose not to speak? As technologies – of governance, of self, and of the social constantly force us to produce data and information, through ledgers and censuses and identification cards – make speech a normative way of engagement, isn’t the right of Refusal to Speak, political?

Sometimes, it is necessary to exercise silence as a tool or a weapon of political resistance. The non-speaking subject holds back and refuses to succumb to pressures and expectations of a dominant erstwhile, and in his/her silence, produces such a cacophony of meaning that it asks questions that the loudest voices would not have managed to ask.

The Beginning of a Start; Perhaps also the other way round

These are my first reflections on the conversations we have had over the two days. I feel excited, inspired, moved and exhilarated as I carry myself on these flights of ideation, thought and conceptualisation. It is important for me that these are questions that I did not think of in a vacuum but in conversation and dialogue with this varied pool of people who have spent so much of their time and effort to not only make their work intelligible but also to reflect on the processes by which we paint ourselves political. I have learned to sharpen questions of the political that I came with and I have learned to ask new questions of Digital Natives practice. I don’t have a definition that explains the work that these Digital Natives do. But I now have a framework of what is their understanding of the political and what are the various points of engagement and investment.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/political

Centre for Internet and Society

'Privacy Matters', Ahmedabad: Conference Report

The keynote speech, delivered by Usha Ramanathan, focused on links not often made between privacy and social phenomenon.

Questions to Consider

Session I of the Conference featured a Judicial Perspective of Privacy and a Presentation on the Connections between Privacy and the Federal Income Tax Regime in India.

Privacy and the Constitution

Questions to Consider

Privacy and the Indian Tax Regime

Questions to Consider

Session II of the Conference focused on National Security and Privacy, and Cultural Conceptions of Privacy

National Security and Privacy

Questions to Consider

Privacy as a Cultural Construct

Questions to Consider

Session III of the Conference focused on Minority Identities and Privacy, Prisoner Rights, and Cyber Security.

Privacy and Minority Identities

Questions to Consider

Perspectives of Privacy

Questions to Consider

The concluding session was a time for discussion and opinion sharing

India's untapped potential: Are a billion people losing out because of spectrum?

Everybody wants a piece of the pie

Spectrum as a national common good

India’s rural populations, the lost resource

Google Policy Fellowship Program: Asia Chapter

Research Agenda Outline

Understanding Dissent

Understanding Free Expression

Understanding and Facilitating Movements

Frequently Asked Questions

EligibilityI am an International student can I apply and participate in the program?

Payments, Forms, and Other Administrative Stuff

Host Organizations

Digital Natives with a Cause? —Workshop in Santiago — an Afterthought

Privacy Matters — Conference Report

Introduction

Keynote

Privacy Challenges

UID and Privacy

Conclusion

Call for Comments for Report on Open Government Data in India

Call for Comments for Report on the Online Video Environment in India

Digital Natives with a Cause? - workshop in Santiago Open Call

Digital Natives with a Cause? Thinkathon: Position Papers

My Bubble, My Space, My Voice workshop - Perspective and future

Digital Natives with a Cause?— Workshop in South Africa—FAQs

Digital Natives Workshop in South Africa - Call for Participation

An Open Call for Participation

On Talking Back: A Report on the Taiwan Workshop

The Great Fire Wall

In Academia Sinica

The First Day

Same Same - But Different

Chips Ahoy!

Enabling Access to Education through ICT - A Conference in Delhi

Background

Political is as Political does