[Chapter-delegates] ISOC's great opportunity to inspire ethical policy discussion

Fri Jul 11 08:27:41 PDT 2014

John

Your arguments against disclosure would have been perfectly appropriate to
the motion I brought. I made a point of phrasing it as "requests
disclosure," not requires it, which would allow anyone with a major privacy
concern to deny the rquest.

    This could, and should, have been resolved by a brief discussion, and a
quick vote, which probably in this group would have gone against the
motion. *But refusing to even discuss it, enforced by shutting down the
microphone, was totally inappropriate.*

    I have a strong opinion on disclosure because I know how often
financial ties affect choices here. That includes within the Internet
Society, where hope of funding from a particular company was the reason for
a choice. The details were given me in a private discussion and I honor
that. I hope the individual involved will disclose them.

-------------------------

   You're right to ask about my own disclosure, which I have made often in
my publications and web site. I earn my living from advertising in my
publications, speaking and managing technical events, leading technical
webinars and providing outreach support to a technical non-profit (Marconi
Society) and work like writing white papers for technical companies. None
of that work involved policy. One of my clients, ASSIA, has recently
introduced a consumer product Cloudcheck, which speeds up net access. They
believe that allowing carriers to block products like theirs would harm
their business. To that end, their board member, Reed Hundt, has spoken
about how important it is to keep things open. (Including a Bloomberg
interview.) I'm not involved in that, although my consulting on marketing
communications has a (very modest) overlap.

    I have no income whatsoever from policy advocacy and at minimum would
disclose it if I did. I have turned down offers from, among others, AT&T,
because I believe they were trying to buy my opinion.

    "Multi-stakeholder" is hollow if we don't live up to it.
Dave

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 10:17 AM, JOHN MORE <morej1 at mac.com> wrote:

> Dave
>
> As Paul Brigner said the IGF USA 2014 is not essentially a DC Chapter
> event. The Chapter is coordinating the administration. There are only a few
> of us working on the event.
>
> I agree about the outsized influence of money in US politics. But I would
> have thought as a supporter of privacy you would not call for financial
> disclosure from non-politicians. It is an invasion of privacy. Further we
> ask for disclosure from politicians because their decisions can affect our
> lives. It might be a great thing if IGF USA was able to make decisions and
> implement them. It cannot.
>
> I have no financial interests here. I don't work for anyone with respect
> to any aspect if the Internet. What is your financial interest?
>
> I agree that the Internet should. Be managed for all and the US is myopic
> about the rest of the world.
>
>
> John More
> DC Chapter
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 10, 2014, at 10:29 PM, Dave Burstein <daveb at dslprime.com> wrote:
>
> Next week's US-IGF, essentially an ISOC event, is a great opportunity to
> address the power of money in policy.
>
> I'm introducing
> 
> a
>  
> simple motion
>  
> at tomorrow morning's open steering committee meeting:
> for that event. (Email me for callin if you like.)
>
>
> *1- All speakers be requested to provide information on recent financial
> ties or funding requests that might pose a conflict. In general, we hope
> everyone chooses to disclose payments from companies and their associations
> that have important policy goals*
>
> * *
> 
>     I carefully am not accusing anyone of corruption; in fact many of
> those lobbying have high personal ethics. Rather, I believe the DC policy
> debate suffers from "publication bias," with corporations and those who
> agree with them and.or take money from them able to dominate the debate.
>  
>  I phrased this carefully as a “request,” not a requirement, to make it
> easy to support. What should be disclosed was left to the speakers’
> discretion.
>
> 
>    Nearly every major medical journal requires authors to disclose ties,
> usually in a note to the article. The medical people have developed massive
> evidence that “publication bias” affects science as well. In policy, those
> with the time and money to attend events often predominate. In some recent
> D.C. events, I’ve noticed over 80% of those involved are current or former
> lobbyists and their friends in the government.
>
>   
>   Disclosure is the right thing to do, even if we don’t win this battle.
> 
> 
> ISOC c
> hoosing 
> f
> inancial
> d
> isclosure in
> t
> elecom
> p
> olicy
> c
> ould
> m
> ake a
> d
> ifference
> . Washington D.C. is rife with "astroturf" lobbyists and many others
> taking corporate money. That's spreading worldwide.  
> 
>
>      ISOC CEO Kathy Brown & NA leader Paul Brigner both post their emails
> http://www.internetsociety.org/who-we-are/staff-and-advisors , They
> understand these issues in depth.
>
>    Do reach out to them; the easiest and most profitable path in D.C. is
> to "go along to get along" but that's not the best way to deliver the
> Internet for everybody. Too many of those offering money in D.C. have a
> strong interest in raising the price of Internet access. High speed in the
> U.S. typically costs 30-60% more than our peers in Europe because broadband
> competition fell to two players, DSL & cable.
>
> *I'm also introducing another motion*
>
> *2-  We urge all speakers to concentrate on improving governance in the
> U.S. rather than Americans preaching to others what to do. *
>
> I'm on the U.S. State Department ITAC. Far too much of what I hear in
> D.C. is "White Man's Burden" thinking, ignoring the great strides being
> made around the world. China has twice as many broadband subs as the U.S.
> By around 2017, both Africa and India will have more Internet users than
> the U.S.; continued domination by U.S. companies and governments will be
> unsustainable.
>
>    Americans should first put out own house in order.
> Dave Burstein
> daveb at dslprime.com
>
> Editor, Fast Net News, Net Policy News and A Wireless Cloud
> Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley, 2002) and Web Video: Making It
> Great, Getting It Noticed (Peachpit, 2008)
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
>

-- 
Editor, Fast Net News, Net Policy News and A Wireless Cloud
Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley, 2002) and Web Video: Making It
Great, Getting It Noticed (Peachpit, 2008)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140711/4774046c/attachment.htm>