#海外讲座直播# From the North Pole to WWW

From the North Pole to WWW

By Gregay Asmolov

a leture for Anneberg School for Communication, Univeristy of Pennsylvania

 

Notes:

 

Types of Interne Regulation:

Internal / external

Legal / informal

Attributed / not attributed

Communication focus / activity focus

 

Information Security  vs. Cyber security

Russian approach: international information security

Deal with influence of information on socio-political environment

Regulation of infrastructure & regulation of trans-border flow of content

 

Western approach: Internet governance and cyber security

Cyber security is focused on security of infrastructures of computer networks and other information system / software

Limited to the range of digital technology

 

External & internal sovereignty (Krasner)

International legal sovereignty

westphalian sovereignty

Domestic/interdependent sovereignty

 

Internet and the “basket” of “cognitive scripts”:

Regulation external:

Limiting interdependence/ isolation

Creating the borders

Differentiation between internal & external

Net neutrality

 

Regulation internal:

Censorship,

Surveillance,

Filtering

Prosecution

 

Major field of political construction:

Limiting the action of external actors

Framing the internet with westphalian context

 

Major field of action:

Legal tools for construction/ framing

Soft/ hard law

 

Contested space and the construction of statehood:

Internet is an area of limited statehood

The statehood is manifested through margins. The statehood is defined in contested areas. Constructing statehood in “new spaces” is the most fruitful and visible

New spaces are used in order relocate the attention for challenged statehood from the center to remote areas/margins

 

Internet regulation as construction of statehood:

Threat-driven policy relies on framing new spaces as dangerous areas

Internet regulation is one of case studies for addressing new and contested spaces

Internet regulation is one of the political projects for construction of symbolic statehood

Construction of presence online is a substitute to lack of capacity to control offline

The more state experience problems of limited statehood, the more focus on new spaces can be expected

Internet regulation can be associated with degree of statehood and the degree of internal contradictions between carious actors within specific state

The construction is conducted through applying geospatial model that relies on a balance between control of / authority over internal and capacity to frame external environment.

 

 

 

Cyber policy matrix

  citizen States
Citizens Cybercrime Cyber crime/ terrorism
States Attacks against bloggers by state-affiliated hackers Cyber conflicts/wars

 

 

Threats:

Orange revolution, Estonia/Russian Georgian war, Twitter revolution, Arab Spring London riots,  Cyberwars NSA

 

Framing the internet as threat

Internal:

Focus on children protection, suicide, drugs, pornography, cyber crime

Dangerous / criminal. Anti-moral/ anti-religious, Responsible for social, intellectual and other problems.

External:  information war

Conclusion:

  • The major force who can oppose the regulation is the users.
  • Internet regulation is not only a specific legislation but also what people think about the regulations.

Comments are closed.



无觅相关文章插件