Better governance for fairer digital markets: unlocking the innovation potential and leveling the playing field (UNCTAD)
4 Dec 2023 15:00h - 16:30h UTC
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Full session report
Andreas Schwab
The analysis of different viewpoints on the regulation of digital markets reveals that the European Union (EU) has been at the forefront of advocating for fairer digital markets and recognizing the importance of innovation. In 2014, the EU started pushing the European Commission to regulate digital markets, aiming to balance global digital markets and ensure that innovative ideas have a chance, regardless of their origin. The EU was the first parliament in the world to take action on making digital markets fairer.
This push for action is supported by the belief that digital markets need to be fair and that innovative ideas should have the opportunity to be seen and implemented. Andreas, a proponent of fair markets, argues that innovative ideas can come from anywhere in the world and should be given a chance rather than being bought out by gatekeepers.
Furthermore, it is noted that current competition policy has been inadequate in responding to the challenges posed by digital markets. Other countries, such as Japan, Singapore, and Brazil, also express similar needs for regulation to ensure fairness and competition. The sentiment is positive towards the need for regulation.
The importance of regulatory strategies that balance nurturing innovation with fair competition is recognized. Admiration for impressive digital services and the recognition of their importance in current times add to the positive sentiment towards regulation. It is emphasized that regulatory strategies must be smart and sophisticated to encourage innovation while also ensuring fair competition.
The analysis also highlights the importance of international cooperation in regulating global digital markets. Similar sentiments have been encountered in countries like Brazil, and there is a need for an international response to companies that disregard national rules. Global collaboration is considered essential for making digital markets fairer, and establishing a global understanding and implementation of the rules could contribute to achieving this fairness. Additionally, there is a need for global transparency on data usage.
The analysis also recognizes that the regulation of digital markets is a shared responsibility, where winners and losers can both emerge. The cost of good regulation is acknowledged, and there is an emphasis on the notion of fairness in markets. The sentiment is neutral regarding this point.
It is also noted that effective regulation of digital markets is a complex task that demands careful thought. It is not merely a matter of implementing pre-made rules. There is a need for smart and sophisticated regulatory strategies to address the challenges posed by digital markets. The sentiment towards this point is positive.
Moreover, the recent U.S. Section 2 cases provide public proof of speculated monopoly behaviors, validating the European authorities’ suspicions from 2014. This evidence emphasizes the necessity of regulating digital markets to ensure fair competition.
Transparency in data usage is seen as a crucial aspect of fair digital markets, fostering trust. Regulation should also strive to balance with innovation and provide clarity and transparency around data usage.
Interoperability is highlighted as a tool that can contribute to creating fairness in digital markets. However, it is noted that interoperability can only be used in mature areas of technology. Successful applications of interoperability have been observed in interpersonal communication services.
Notably, the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in regulation is debated. While some argue that AI innovation does not require much regulation, others stress the need for careful consideration of regulation. It is suggested that the EU should not rush into creating separate regulations for AI, as existing rules such as the General Product Safety Regulation and the Digital Markets Act already cover AI. These regulations address competition concerns and ensure that every product offering service to a user or consumer complies with the legal framework.
In conclusion, the analysis of different viewpoints on the regulation of digital markets highlights the EU’s leadership in advocating for fairer digital markets and recognizing the importance of innovation. It emphasizes the need for effective regulation that balances innovation with fair competition. The recent U.S. Section 2 cases provide evidence of monopoly behavior, validating earlier suspicions. Transparency in data usage, global collaboration, and interoperability are considered crucial factors in creating fairness in digital markets. The role of AI in regulation is debated, with existing regulations being seen as potentially covering AI.
Andy Yen
The analysis covers various topics related to tech giants, regulation, and business models. One of the main focuses is ProtonMail, a company that offers services like email and file storage with a business model centred around user privacy and data control. Unlike many tech giants that rely on advertising, ProtonMail’s model is privacy-centric and does not involve monetising user data. This aspect sets ProtonMail apart in the industry.
The analysis also discusses the journey of passing digital market acts in the EU. While the process was slow, it is deemed relatively fast given the standards of the EU. There is cautious optimism about the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in the upcoming months, as the main work, which includes enforcement actions, is set to take place. The designation of tech gatekeepers has already been done under the DMA.
The challenges faced by big tech companies and the resources they possess are also explored. Tech gatekeepers have significant resources, including legal support, which creates challenges for any confrontations or regulations imposed on them. Their market capitalisation collectively exceeds the GDP of Germany, indicating their vast influence and power.
The analysis highlights the problem of competition in the tech industry. Tackling competition through separate regulations in different jurisdictions is what big tech companies prefer because it puts smaller companies at a disadvantage. It is argued that a form of global collaboration to establish common standards would be beneficial, especially for smaller countries that might struggle to spread their limited resources across multiple jurisdictions.
The importance of privacy and data protection is addressed through ProtonMail’s use of end-to-end encryption. ProtonMail provides users an online existence without the obligation of giving away their private personal information to big tech giants. This approach aligns with their more honest business model in contrast to the data monetisation model adopted by companies like Google.
Despite market barriers, ProtonMail has managed to grow from zero to 100 million accounts by 2021. However, it is noted that pursuing Proton’s model in the current competitive landscape is challenging due to the barriers set up by big tech companies. The analysis highlights the unfair and uneven internet ecosystem, declaring that the winners have already been chosen, which hampers the growth of companies like Proton.
Addressing another aspect, the analysis discusses the need for hybrid states in the industry, where some elements are online and others offline, especially in parts of the developing world with intermittent internet access. Solutions that can operate in both online and offline circumstances are necessary to cater to these regions.
Another observation made is the importance of considering offline use cases while developing software and technologies. Parts of the world with intermittent internet access do not always have constant connectivity, and developing software with this consideration in mind can help cater to such regions.
The analysis emphasises the need for resilience in technology to handle online and offline situations simultaneously. ProtonMail has developed resilience in the face of censorship and internet shutdowns, which allows them to meet the needs of customers in both online and offline conditions.
The analysis briefly delves into the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) and the challenges it presents. AI requires large datasets, many users, and significant funding for its successful implementation. Additionally, it is argued that AI has the potential to reinforce the status quo rather than disrupt it.
The importance of competition in the tech industry is asserted as a potential solution to prevent AI domination by tech giants. Economic inequity between big and small companies needs to be addressed, as big companies unfairly dictate policies due to their scale.
Furthermore, the analysis highlights the current policies that create an unfair advantage for tech giants. For example, app stores charging 30% of revenue from companies looking to compete is seen as creating an unlevel playing field.
The regulatory landscape is also explored, with considerations given to the challenges faced by small companies in complying with regulations. Big companies can more easily handle the regulatory burden, creating a disadvantage for smaller companies. The argument is made that regulation should not disproportionately disadvantage small companies.
Setting thresholds for gatekeeper designation is an important aspect of regulation. The analysis supports the idea that these thresholds should be appropriately set to ensure that small companies are not unfairly burdened. It also notes cases in the US where big tech companies twisted antitrust laws to mislead Congress, highlighting the need for proper regulation.
In conclusion, the analysis covers a wide range of topics related to tech giants, regulation, and business models. It highlights the unique business model of ProtonMail, the challenges faced by big tech companies, the need for global collaboration, the importance of privacy and data protection, the difficulties encountered in the current competitive landscape, and the significance of offline transactions and resilience in technology. It also delves into the implications of AI, the impact of current policies, and the complexities of regulation.
Javier Espinoza
The Digital Markets Act (DMA) is a ground-breaking regulation introduced in Europe to address the power of big tech companies and stimulate market competition. The DMA is regarded as the first of its kind and aims to open up markets while curbing the dominance of established tech giants. However, critics argue that Brussels has been too slow in supporting companies to become the next big players in digital communications, suggesting that more proactive measures should have been taken. On the other hand, proponents of the DMA believe that it has the potential to enable new tech players to enter the market and promote innovation. A recent demonstration by Amandine Le Pape’s company challenged previous claims made by Meta, showing that apps like WhatsApp can interact with similar apps. This highlights the importance of data protection and user satisfaction. Amandine Le Pape also emphasizes the significance of regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and suggests that regulators should assist smaller companies in understanding and implementing various regulations. Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI), Javier Espinoza believes that concerns about AI taking over the world are premature. He suggests that there is still time before AI becomes a significant threat. Overall, the direction of data laws and regulations in the US and Brussels is expected to promote fairness and common sense in the tech industry.
Audience
The discussion covers various topics, including the timeline for implementing off-the-web transactions, the interaction between implemented systems and current interconnection and interoperability, the influence of advanced jurisdictions’ regulations on developing countries, UNCTAD’s focus on policy options for developing countries, the benefits of regional cooperation in competition law and policy, the challenges in the AI and generative AI space, the problems of network and data monopolies in creating a fair digital market, the importance of power sharing in network and data, the extent of data sharing promoted by EU legislative proposals, and the impact of regulation on small and medium companies. The sentiment expressed throughout the discussion varies from neutral to positive and negative.
Hassan from the UAE asks about the timeline for implementing off-the-web transactions, but no supporting facts or arguments are provided in response. Another participant inquires about how implemented systems would interact with the current situation in terms of interconnection and interoperability. The discussion highlights the need for regional cooperation among developing countries in competition law and policy.
Developing countries often look to advanced jurisdictions, such as the EU’s Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act, and legal policies from OECD countries like Australia and Japan for regulatory examples. UNCTAD focuses on identifying policy options to support less advanced, less experienced, and resource-constrained countries in e-commerce and competition law.
The challenges in the AI and generative AI space are also discussed, including reliance on vast data sets, concentration of compute power in a few companies, talent attraction, and limited access to compute power for small startups.
The discussion also addresses the problems of network and data monopolies, emphasizing the importance of power sharing. EU legislative proposals, including the Digital Markets Act and Data Act, encourage data sharing, but participants question the extent to which these proposals promote real data sharing.
The impact of regulation on small and medium companies is highlighted, with the burden of regulation seen as a challenge. There is concern that regulation may favor big companies and hinder innovation from small companies, as smaller companies may struggle to meet increased regulatory requirements.
In conclusion, the discussion covers various aspects related to off-the-web transactions, competition law and policy, challenges in the AI and generative AI space, creating a fair digital market, data sharing, and the impact of regulation on small and medium companies. Regional cooperation among developing countries is seen as crucial in competition law and policy. The extent of data sharing promoted by EU legislative proposals is questioned.
Pedro Manuel Moreno
The digital economy has become the largest market in the world, but it is dominated by a small number of powerful giants. These giants, such as Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon, hold significant market consolidation and technological power. This consolidation raises concerns about competition and the potential for anti-competitive behavior.
The consolidation of these digital giants is evident in their control over mergers and distribution of goods, with Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon accounting for one quarter of all recent mergers and distributors, amounting to over $1.5 billion in value. This concentration of power in the hands of a few players diminishes the ability of smaller market players to compete and innovate.
There is negative sentiment towards this dominance due to the belief that a lack of competition hinders fair and innovative markets. To address this issue, stronger governance is necessary. Stricter regulations and policies can promote fair competition, allowing smaller market players to have an equal opportunity to participate and thrive in the digital economy.
Developing countries, in particular, require international cooperation to combat anti-competitive behavior on digital platforms. Efforts to create a more equitable digital playing field have already been initiated in various jurisdictions, including the US, UK, and some developing countries. These initiatives aim to level the playing field and ensure that smaller market players, especially those from developing countries, are not left behind.
Furthermore, international cooperation in competition law enforcement is crucial in effectively addressing this issue. By working together, countries can pool their resources and expertise to combat anti-competitive behavior on a global scale. This cooperation aligns with Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), which emphasize the need to create a fair and inclusive digital economy.
In order to shape a digital future that is equitable, innovative, and beneficial for all, better governance mechanisms are required. These mechanisms should focus on protecting consumers and smaller market players while fostering an environment that encourages technological advancement and competition. By ensuring that the digital platform serves both the private and public sectors, a balance can be achieved that benefits all stakeholders.
Overall, the analysis highlights the pressing need for stronger governance in the digital economy. It provides evidence of market consolidation, the dominance of a few key players, and the negative consequences of this dominance on fair and innovative markets. It also highlights the importance of international cooperation, particularly for developing countries, in combating anti-competitive behavior. By implementing robust governance mechanisms, a more equitable, innovative, and beneficial digital future can be shaped for everyone.
Amandine Le Pape
According to Amandine, Brussels has not been too slow in implementing regulations that help companies like hers to become leading tech platforms. This implies that the process of implementing these regulations has been quick and efficient, and they are reaching a critical point. This neutral sentiment suggests that the regulatory environment in Brussels is conducive to the growth and success of companies like hers.
Fairness, open markets, user choice, and user control are highlighted as important factors for users/customers. The Digital Markets Act (DMA) is seen as a positive step towards reinforcing fairness and open markets by encouraging platforms such as WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger to open up their networks. This is expected to provide users with more choices and control over their experiences.
However, regulation can present a mixed bag for small businesses. While it can address the disadvantages faced by small businesses due to large companies favoring their own services, heavy regulation can also be expensive and difficult for small businesses to comply with. This negative sentiment suggests that small businesses may face challenges in navigating the regulatory landscape and may need additional support to ensure their growth and success.
Access to open markets through regulation is highlighted as beneficial for small messaging companies. This provides opportunities for small messaging companies to reach billions of users by leveraging the opened networks. This positive sentiment implies that regulatory measures that promote open markets can empower smaller players to thrive and serve specific niches effectively.
Regulation is also seen as a means to address the disadvantage created by large companies favoring their own services. By choosing to use open standards as a common technical language, small companies can drive openness in the market. This positive sentiment suggests that open standards can level the playing field for small companies and enable them to compete on an equal footing with larger firms.
Cooperation between regulators and tech companies is emphasized as necessary for effective regulation. This highlights the importance of collaboration and dialogue between regulatory bodies and tech companies to ensure that regulations are practical, feasible, and address the needs and concerns of all stakeholders.
Caution is expressed about blindly trusting narratives from large tech firms. It is suggested that regulators should critically assess the narratives presented by these companies to ensure transparency and accountability. This highlights the need for regulators to maintain an independent and thorough approach to decision-making and not solely rely on information provided by tech giants.
Amandine’s collaboration with the commission on tech-based questions demonstrates the importance of involving industry experts and stakeholders in the regulatory process. By working together, regulators and industry players can gain valuable insights and knowledge to inform effective decision-making.
The positive aspects of Amandine Le Pape’s team’s work, such as app development and collaboration with big companies, are mentioned. This suggests that their efforts have resulted in successful partnerships and the creation of innovative solutions in the tech industry.
Choosing not to use WhatsApp is argued to pose no risks to users. This implies that users have alternatives available to them and are not solely dependent on one messaging app. This argument reinforces the idea that user choice and competition are essential for a healthy and diverse digital ecosystem.
The DMA is seen as enhancing the user’s ability to switch between apps, which further promotes competition and user empowerment. This positive sentiment suggests that the DMA is expected to have a positive impact on the user experience by providing more options and freedom of choice.
Decentralization of data processing is emphasized as important, highlighting the need for data to be processed in one single place instead of relying solely on the cloud. This suggests that decentralization can address concerns regarding data security and privacy and promote more efficient and effective data processing practices.
Concerns about cloud-based convergence are raised, suggesting that there is a need to move towards more localized deployment. This implies that the concentration of data and services in the cloud may have drawbacks, and a more localized approach could offer benefits in terms of security and control.
The importance of GDPR in protecting data privacy is acknowledged, highlighting the need for technological companies to proactively comply with regulations like GDPR. This positive sentiment implies that adherence to data protection regulations is crucial for safeguarding user data and privacy and may prevent the imposition of heavy regulatory burdens in the future.
Regulators are urged to assist small companies in understanding and following regulations. This suggests that small businesses often struggle to navigate the complex regulatory landscape and may require additional support and resources to ensure compliance. This positive sentiment highlights the importance of regulatory bodies providing guidance and assistance to small businesses, enabling them to thrive and contribute to economic growth.
In conclusion, the analysis highlights different perspectives on the impact of regulation on the tech industry. While leading tech platforms may benefit from quick implementation of regulations, the consequences for small businesses can be mixed. Open markets, fairness, choice, and user control are seen as crucial for a positive user experience. The DMA is expected to reinforce fairness and open markets and enhance user choice and competition. Regulatory cooperation, caution in accepting narratives from tech giants, collaboration with industry experts, app development, and data privacy regulations are also highlighted. The need for regulators to support small businesses, concerns about cloud-based convergence, and the importance of user choice and decentralized data processing are addressed.
Katie McInnis
The analysis reveals several key insights into the discourse surrounding tech regulation in the United States. One key observation is that the U.S. seems to lag behind the European Union (EU) in effectively creating rules and regulations for big tech companies. Promising bills that aimed to establish new rules similar to those in the EU failed to pass due to the influence of big tech in the congressional process. This suggests a need for the U.S. to improve its proficiency in this area.
Another significant point is the reliance on the enforcement of existing laws by government entities such as the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and state attorneys general. Enforcers are faced with the challenge of applying laws that were written over a century ago to dynamic and ever-evolving digital markets. This hurdle highlights the need for more specific and up-to-date regulations.
The analysis also indicates that the progress made in the EU may inspire action at the state level in the U.S. States may be motivated to implement their own regulations after witnessing the rights and opportunities enjoyed by EU residents that are not available to U.S. residents. A similar trend occurred when states passed enhanced privacy laws following the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU. This demonstrates the potential impact of global developments on domestic regulatory frameworks.
Furthermore, there is a notable shift in the conversation surrounding tech companies in the U.S., with an emphasis on U.S. exceptionalism. This change reflects a focus on domestic competition, particularly in relation to China. The laws and regulations being formulated appear to revolve around positioning the U.S. as a technological leader, potentially shaping the regulatory landscape.
The application of existing U.S. laws to modern-day tech giants is another significant aspect of the analysis. Laws that were initially intended for other industries, such as meat packers and railroads, are now being applied to regulate tech companies. This raises questions about the suitability of these laws and the need for specific legislation to address the unique challenges posed by the tech industry.
On a positive note, the Biden administration has made notable progress in areas related to competition and artificial intelligence (AI) rules. A whole government approach to competition has been announced, and rules surrounding AI have been introduced. These actions signify a step towards more comprehensive and effective regulation.
However, there is concern that progress in tech regulation achieved under the Biden administration may be hindered if Trump returns to power. This potential change in leadership adds a level of uncertainty to the future of tech regulation in the U.S.
Interoperability emerges as a potential solution to prevent the monopolisation of functions and data by large tech companies. Enabling smaller platforms to work with larger ones and gain access to their data or functions can help break down barriers and provide opportunities for smaller players and startups.
The importance of international cooperation in handling mega tech mergers is also highlighted. The analysis mentions the Microsoft acquisition of Activision, which underwent litigation in different markets with varying outcomes. Enhanced cooperation could streamline the process and ensure consistent handling of such mergers.
However, members of Congress appear to be resistant to international cooperation due to fears of competing with China and arguments from large tech firms regarding the preservation of the economic status quo. This pushback may hinder the progress of international cooperation in tech regulation.
Addressing the impact of artificial intelligence is a crucial aspect of tech regulation. The Biden administration has taken steps by issuing an executive order on AI, which includes requirements for government agencies. Additionally, there are concerns about the misuse of AI, including the distortion of conversations, dissemination of misinformation and disinformation, and the proliferation of fraud schemes online.
The need for a general privacy law to prevent the hoarding and misuse of information by large tech companies is another valid point raised by the analysis. This highlights the ongoing discourse around data privacy and the role of regulation in protecting individuals and their information.
Finally, it is evident that the conversation surrounding tech regulation in the U.S. has been influenced and shaped by the actions and interests of large tech companies. Their involvement has at times hindered meaningful actions and distorted the focus and priorities of discussions.
In conclusion, the analysis underscores the complexity and multifaceted nature of the conversation on tech regulation in the United States. It highlights the need for the U.S. to enhance its proficiency in creating rules and regulations for big tech, focusing on the enforcement of existing laws, and responding to global developments. The potential impact of U.S. exceptionalism, the application of outdated laws, the progress made under the Biden administration, the potential return of Trump, the importance of interoperability, international cooperation, addressing AI concerns, data privacy, and the influence of large tech companies are all critical aspects that contribute to the ongoing discourse on tech regulation in the U.S.
Tembinkosi Bonakele
The analysis identifies several key arguments and stances on the topic of digital market regulation. One prominent argument is the need for a coordinated, multilateral approach to regulation, as individual countries may struggle to effectively regulate larger tech giants. This is supported by the fact that larger companies are economically larger than some countries expect to regulate them. Africa has recognized this need and has been bringing together all its countries, led by the largest economies, for regulation. It is argued that larger jurisdictions such as the EU, US, and China are better equipped to handle regulation, whereas individual countries may face difficulties. This stance is further supported by the advocacy for competition regulation under the AU (African Union) to facilitate integration and regulation. Additionally, the importance of international cooperation is emphasized, with the mention of a similar stance taken with BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) countries for a coordinated approach towards digital markets regulation.
The analysis also highlights concerns regarding the limitations of current regulations in addressing the developments and concerns in digital markets. It is recognized that digital markets require special attention due to their unique nature, and concerns in these markets extend beyond classic competition issues. Tax authorities and data protection officers are increasingly becoming involved, indicating the need for regulations that adequately address these emerging concerns.
Another argument presented is the need to create a regulatory environment that fosters small and medium enterprises (SMEs). It is revealed that smaller businesses, particularly in the restaurant industry, have been subsidizing larger ones due to the commission structure of large food delivery companies in South Africa. Furthermore, multinational platforms are seen as hindrances to smaller businesses wanting to enter the market. The analysis suggests that the current rules are outdated for the dynamic ecosystem of SMEs, and the lack of investment in these emerging firms can lead to social problems like unemployment.
There is also a call to rethink regulations to ensure that markets work for people and to prevent larger companies from dominating the market. It is argued that if market rules allow larger companies to dominate, the emergence of challenger firms becomes difficult. Poorly functioning markets can lead to a lack of innovation and other social issues. This highlights the need to re-evaluate regulations to create a more level playing field in digital markets.
The analysis further discusses the regulatory challenges posed by rapid technological advancements. Regulators are seen as lagging behind in technology diffusion, with AI being a prime example of this. The diffusion of technology happens quite rapidly in digital markets, and regulators are struggling to catch up. This situation of uncertainty created by the advancements in technology underscores the need for proactive regulation to prevent potential disasters. The international community, in particular, is urged to take the initiative in regulating AI before any misuse occurs.
In terms of economic regulation, the analysis acknowledges its essentiality, especially in developing countries. Despite the importance of economic regulation, it is also noted that there may be other harmful areas within digital markets that are not adequately addressed by such regulation.
The analysis also highlights the role of big regional organizations, such as BRICS, in tackling data regulation and sharing. It is suggested that these organizations should take the initiative in addressing the challenges associated with data in digital markets.
In addition to these main points, the analysis finds evidence of apprehension among regulators when dealing with accessing market rules on existing platforms. The conditions imposed for plugging into an existing platform are seen as burdensome.
Lastly, the analysis emphasizes the importance of tackling price discrimination within digital markets, as it can undermine the entire system. This highlights the need for regulations that address this issue to ensure fairness for all market participants.
Overall, the analysis points to the need for a holistic and proactive approach to digital market regulation. It suggests that a coordinated, multilateral approach is necessary, as individual countries may face challenges in effectively regulating larger tech giants. Additionally, there is a call to re-evaluate and update current regulations to address the developments and concerns in digital markets. The importance of creating a regulatory environment that fosters SMEs and prevents the dominance of larger companies is also underscored. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for regulators to keep pace with technological advancements, particularly in the case of AI. The international community is urged to take the initiative in regulating AI to prevent potential disasters. Economic regulation is viewed as essential, particularly in developing countries. Big regional organizations are encouraged to address data regulation and sharing. There is apprehension among regulators when dealing with accessing market rules on existing platforms, and price discrimination is recognized as a significant issue that needs to be tackled.
Speakers
AL
Amandine Le Pape
Speech speed
184 words per minute
Speech length
1402 words
Speech time
457 secs
AS
Andreas Schwab
Speech speed
181 words per minute
Speech length
1919 words
Speech time
637 secs
AY
Andy Yen
Speech speed
199 words per minute
Speech length
2663 words
Speech time
801 secs
A
Audience
Speech speed
165 words per minute
Speech length
1002 words
Speech time
364 secs
JE
Javier Espinoza
Speech speed
173 words per minute
Speech length
1967 words
Speech time
682 secs
KM
Katie McInnis
Speech speed
163 words per minute
Speech length
2069 words
Speech time
760 secs
PM
Pedro Manuel Moreno
Speech speed
209 words per minute
Speech length
794 words
Speech time
227 secs
TB
Tembinkosi Bonakele
Speech speed
131 words per minute
Speech length
1498 words
Speech time
685 secs
Related event
