Their work yielded four starkly different future scenarios, ranging from intensified geopolitical rivalry and internet fragmentation to overregulation and a transformative turn toward treating the internet as a public good. A central takeaway was the resurgence of state power as a dominant force shaping digital futures.
According to Pohler, geopolitical dynamics—especially the actions of the US, China, Russia, and the EU—emerged as the primary drivers across nearly all scenarios. That marked a shift from previous foresight efforts that had emphasised civil society or corporate actors.
The panellists underscored that today’s real-world developments are already outpacing the scenarios’ predictions, with multistakeholder models appearing increasingly hollow or overly institutionalised. While the scenarios themselves might not predict the exact future, the process of creating them was widely praised.
Panellists described the interviews and collaborative exercises as intellectually enriching and essential for thinking beyond conventional governance paradigms. Yet, they also acknowledged practical concerns: the abstract nature of such exercises, the lack of direct implementation, and the need to involve government actors more directly to bridge analysis and policy action.
Looking ahead, participants called for bolder and more inclusive approaches to internet governance. They urged forums like the IGF to embrace participatory methods—such as scenario games—and to address complex issues without requiring full consensus.
The session concluded with a sense of urgency: the internet we want may still be possible, but only if we confront uncomfortable realities and make space for more courageous, creative policymaking.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, the ‘Building an International AI Cooperation Ecosystem’ session spotlighted the urgent need for international collaboration to manage AI’s transformative impact. Hosted by China’s Cyberspace Administration, the session featured a global roster of experts who emphasised that AI is no longer a niche or elite technology, but a powerful and widely accessible force reshaping economies, societies, and governance frameworks.
China’s Cyberspace Administration Director-General Qi Xiaoxia opened the session by stressing her country’s leadership in AI innovation, citing that over 60% of global AI patents originate from China. She proposed a cooperative agenda focused on sustainable development, managing AI risks, and building international consensus through multilateral collaboration.
Echoing her call, speakers highlighted that AI’s rapid evolution requires national regulations and coordinated global governance, ideally under the auspices of the UN.
Speakers, such as Jovan Kurbalija, executive director of Diplo, and Wolfgang Kleinwächter, emeritus professor for Internet Policy and Regulation at the University of Aarhus, warned against the pitfalls of siloed regulation and technological protectionism. Instead, they advocated for open-source standards, inclusive policymaking, and leveraging existing internet governance models to shape AI rules.
Regional case studies from Shanghai and Mexico illustrated diverse governance approaches—ranging from rights-based regulation to industrial ecosystem building—while initiatives like China Mobile’s AI+ Global Solutions showcased the role of major industry actors. A recurring theme throughout the forum was that no single stakeholder can monopolise effective AI governance.
Instead, a multistakeholder approach involving governments, civil society, academia, and the private sector is essential. Participants agreed that the goal is not just to manage risks, but to ensure AI is developed and deployed in a way that is ethical, inclusive, and beneficial to all humanity.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
Since 2015, 21 June marks the International Day of Yoga, celebrating the ancient Indian practice that blends physical movement, breathing, and meditation. But as the world becomes increasingly digital, yoga itself is evolving.
No longer limited to ashrams or studios, yoga today exists on mobile apps, YouTube channels, and even in virtual reality. On the surface, this democratisation seems like a triumph. But what are the more profound implications of digitising a deeply spiritual and embodied tradition? And how do emerging technologies, particularly AI, reshape how we understand and experience yoga in a hyper-connected world?
Tech and wellness: The rise of AI-driven yoga tools
The wellness tech market has exploded, and yoga is a major beneficiary. Apps like Down Dog, YogaGo, and Glo offer personalised yoga sessions, while wearables such as the Apple Watch or Fitbit track heart rate and breathing.
Meanwhile, AI-powered platforms can generate tailored yoga routines based on user preferences, injury history, or biometric feedback. For example, AI motion tracking tools can evaluate your poses in real-time, offering corrections much like a human instructor.
While these tools increase accessibility, they also raise questions about data privacy, consent, and the commodification of spiritual practices. What happens when biometric data from yoga sessions is monetised? Who owns your breath and posture data? These questions sit at the intersection of AI ethics and digital rights.
Beyond the mat: Virtual reality and immersive yoga
The emergence of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) is pushing the boundaries of yoga practice. Platforms like TRIPP or Supernatural offer immersive wellness environments where users can perform guided meditation and yoga in surreal, digitally rendered landscapes.
These tools promise enhanced focus and escapism—but also risk detachment from embodied experience. Does VR yoga deepen the meditative state, or does it dilute the tradition by gamifying it? As these technologies grow in sophistication, we must question how presence, environment, and embodiment translate in virtual spaces.
Can AI be a guru? Empathy, authority, and the limits of automation
One provocative question is whether AI can serve as a spiritual guide. AI instructors—whether through chatbots or embodied in VR—may be able to correct your form or suggest breathing techniques. But can they foster the deep, transformative relationship that many associate with traditional yoga masters?
AI lacks emotional intuition, moral responsibility, and cultural embeddedness. While it can mimic the language and movements of yoga, it struggles to replicate the teacher-student connection that grounds authentic practice. As AI becomes more integrated into wellness platforms, we must ask: where do we draw the line between assistance and appropriation?
Community, loneliness, and digital yoga tribes
Yoga has always been more than individual practice—community is central. Yet, as yoga moves online, questions of connection and belonging arise. Can digital communities built on hashtags and video streams replicate the support and accountability of physical sanghas (spiritual communities)?
Paradoxically, while digital yoga connects millions, it may also contribute to isolation. A solitary practice in front of a screen lacks the energy, feedback, and spontaneity of group practice. For tech developers and wellness advocates, the challenge is to reimagine digital spaces that foster authentic community rather than algorithmic echo chambers.
Digital policy and the politics of platformised spirituality
Beyond the individual experience, there’s a broader question of how yoga operates within global digital ecosystems. Platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok have turned yoga into shareable content, often stripped of its philosophical and spiritual roots.
Meanwhile, Big Tech companies capitalise on wellness trends while contributing to stress-inducing algorithmic environments. There are also geopolitical and cultural considerations.
The export of yoga through Western tech platforms often sidesteps its South Asian origins, raising issues of cultural appropriation. From a policy perspective, regulators must grapple with how spiritual practices are commodified, surveilled, and reshaped by AI-driven infrastructures.
Toward inclusive and ethical design in wellness tech
As AI and digital tools become more deeply embedded in yoga practice, there is a pressing need for ethical design. Developers should consider how their platforms accommodate different bodies, abilities, cultures, and languages. For example, how can AI be trained to recognise non-normative movement patterns? Are apps accessible to users with disabilities?
Inclusive design is not only a matter of social justice—it also aligns with yogic principles of compassion, awareness, and non-harm. Embedding these values into AI development can help ensure that the future of yoga tech is as mindful as the practice it seeks to support.
Toward a mindful tech future
As we celebrate International Day of Yoga, we are called to reflect not only on the practice itself but also on its evolving digital context. Emerging technologies offer powerful tools for access and personalisation, but they also risk diluting the depth and ethics of yoga.
For policymakers, technologists, and practitioners alike, the challenge is to ensure that yoga in the digital age remains a practice of liberation rather than a product of algorithmic control. Yoga teaches awareness, balance, and presence. These are the very qualities we need to shape responsible digital policies in an AI-driven world.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
At the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2025 in Norway, a high-level networking session was held to share key outcomes from the 18th edition of the European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG), which took place earlier this year from 12–14 May in Strasbourg, France. Hosted by the Council of Europe and supported by the Luxembourg Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, the Strasbourg conference centred on balancing innovation and regulation, strongly focusing on safeguarding human rights in digital policy.
Sandra Hoferichter, who moderated the session in Norway, opened by noting the symbolic significance of EuroDIG’s return to Strasbourg—the city where the forum began in 2008. She emphasised EuroDIG’s unique tradition of issuing “messages” as policy input, which IGF and other regional dialogues later adopted.
Swiss Ambassador Thomas Schneider, President of the EuroDIG Support Association, presented the community’s consolidated contributions to the WSIS+20 review process. “The multistakeholder model isn’t optional—it’s essential,” he said, adding that Europe strongly supports making the Internet Governance Forum a permanent institution rather than one renewed every decade. He called for a transparent and inclusive WSIS+20 process, warning against decisions being shaped behind closed diplomatic doors.
YouthDIG representative Frances Douglas Thomson shared insights from the youth-led sessions at EuroDIG. She described strong debates on digital literacy, particularly around the role of generative AI in schools. ‘Some see AI as a helpful assistant; others fear it diminishes critical thinking,’ she said. Content moderation also sparked division, with some young participants calling for vigorous enforcement against harmful content and others raising concerns about censorship. Common ground emerged around the need for greater algorithmic transparency so users understand how content is curated.
Hans Seeuws, business operations manager at EURid, emphasised the need for infrastructure providers to be heard in policy spaces. He supported calls for concrete action on AI governance and digital rights, stressing the importance of translating dialogue into implementation.
Chetan Sharma from the Data Mission Foundation Trust India questioned the practical impact of governance forums in humanitarian crises. Frances highlighted several EuroDIG sessions that tackled using autonomous weapons, internet shutdowns, and misinformation during conflicts. ‘Dialogue across stakeholders can shift how we understand digital conflict. That’s meaningful change,’ she noted.
A representative from Geneva Macro Labs challenged the panel to explain how internet policy can be effective when many governments lack technical literacy. Schneider replied that civil society, business, and academia must step in when public institutions fall short. ‘Democracy is not self-sustaining—it requires daily effort. The price of neglect is high,’ he cautioned.
Janice Richardson, an expert at the Council of Europe, asked how to widen youth participation. Frances praised YouthDIG’s accessible, bottom-up format and called for increased funding to help young people from underrepresented regions join discussions. ‘The more youth feel heard, the more they stay engaged,’ she said.
As the session closed, Hoferichter reminded attendees of the over 400 applications received for YouthDIG this year. She urged donors to help cover the high travel costs, mainly from Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. ‘Supporting youth in internet governance isn’t charity—it’s a long-term investment in inclusive, global policy,’ she concluded.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the 2025 Internet Governance Forum in Lillestrøm, Norway, a parliamentary session titled ‘Click with Care: Protecting Vulnerable Groups Online’ gathered lawmakers, regulators, and digital rights experts from around the world to confront the urgent issue of online harm targeting marginalised communities. Speakers from Uganda, the Philippines, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Kenya shared insights on how current laws often fall short, especially in the Global South where women, children, and LGBTQ+ groups face disproportionate digital threats.
Research presented showed alarming trends—one in three African women experience online abuse, often with no support or recourse, and platforms’ moderation systems are frequently inadequate, slow, or biassed in favor of users from the Global North.
The session exposed critical gaps in enforcement and accountability, particularly regarding large platforms like Meta and Google, which frequently resist compliance with national regulations. Malaysian Deputy Minister Teo Nie Ching and others emphasised that individual countries struggle to hold tech giants accountable, leading to calls for stronger regional blocs and international cooperation.
Meanwhile, Philippine lawmaker Raoul Manuel highlighted legislative progress, including extraterritorial jurisdiction for child exploitation and expanded definitions of online violence, though enforcement remains patchy. In Pakistan, Nighat Dad raised the alarm over AI-generated deepfakes and the burden placed on victims to monitor and report their own abuse.
Panellists also stressed that simply taking down harmful content isn’t enough. They called for systemic platform reform, including greater algorithm transparency, meaningful reporting tools, and design changes that prevent harm before it occurs.
Behavioural economist Sandra Maximiano introduced the concept of ‘nudging’ safer user behavior through design interventions that account for human cognitive biases—approaches that could complement legal strategies by embedding protection into the architecture of online spaces.
Why does it matter?
A powerful takeaway from the session was the consensus that online safety must be treated as both a technological and human challenge. Participants agreed that coordinated global responses, inclusive policymaking, and engagement with community structures are essential to making the internet a safer place—particularly for those who need protection the most.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2025 opened in Lillestrøm, Norway, marking its 20th anniversary and coinciding with the World Summit on the Information Society Plus 20 (WSIS+20) review.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres, in a video message, underscored that digital cooperation has shifted from aspiration to necessity. He highlighted global challenges such as the digital divide, online hate speech, and concentrated tech power, calling for immediate action to ensure a more equitable digital future.
Norwegian leaders, including Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre and Digitisation Minister Karianne Tung, reaffirmed their country’s commitment to democratic digital governance and human rights, echoing broader forum themes of openness, transparency, and multilateral cooperation. They emphasised the importance of protecting the internet as a public good in an era marked by fragmentation, misinformation, and increasing geopolitical tension.
The ceremony brought together diverse voices—from small island states and the EU to civil society and the private sector. Mauritius’ President Dharambeer Gokhool advocated for a citizen-centered digital transformation, while European Commission Vice President Henna Virkkunen introduced a new EU international digital strategy rooted in human rights and sustainability.
Actor and digital rights activist Joseph Gordon-Levitt cautioned against unregulated AI development, arguing for governance frameworks that protect human agency and economic fairness.
Why does it matter?
Echoing across speeches was a shared call to action: to strengthen the multistakeholder model of internet governance, bridge the still-massive digital divide, and develop ethical, inclusive digital policies. As stakeholders prepare to delve into deeper dialogues during the forum, the opening ceremony made clear that the next chapter of digital governance must be collaborative, human-centered, and urgently enacted.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, a dynamic discussion unfolded on how small states and startups can influence the global AI landscape. The session, hosted by Norway, challenged the notion that only tech giants can shape AI’s future. Instead, it presented a compelling vision of innovation rooted in agility, trust, contextual expertise, and collaborative governance.
Norway’s Digitalisation Minister, Karianne Tung, outlined her country’s ambition to become the world’s most digitalised nation by 2030, citing initiatives like the Olivia supercomputer and open-access language models tailored to Norwegian society. Startups such as Cognite showcased how domain-specific data—particularly in energy and industry—can give smaller players a strategic edge.
Meanwhile, Professor Ole-Christopher Granmo introduced the Tsetlin Machine, an energy-efficient, transparent alternative to traditional deep learning, aligning AI development with environmental sustainability and ethical responsibility. Globally, voices like Rwanda’s Esther Kunda and Brookings Fellow Chinasa T. Okolo emphasised the power of contextual innovation, data sovereignty, and peer collaboration.
They argued that small nations can excel not by replicating the paths of AI superpowers, but by building inclusive, locally-relevant models and regulatory frameworks. Big tech representatives from Microsoft and Meta echoed the importance of open infrastructure, sovereign cloud services, and responsible partnerships, stressing that the future of AI must be co-created across sectors and scales.
The session concluded on a hopeful note: small players need not merely adapt to AI’s trajectory—they can actively shape it. By leveraging unique national strengths, fostering multistakeholder collaboration, and prioritising inclusive, ethical, and sustainable design, small nations and startups are positioned to become strategic leaders in the AI era.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, a vibrant multistakeholder session spotlighted the ethical dilemmas of AI in journalism and digital content. The event was hosted by R&W Media and introduced the Haarlem Declaration, a global initiative to promote responsible AI practices in digital media.
Central to the discussion was unveiling an ‘ethical AI checklist,’ designed to help organisations uphold human rights, transparency, and environmental responsibility while navigating AI’s expanding role in content creation. Speakers emphasised a people-centred approach to AI, advocating for tools that support rather than replace human decision-making.
Ernst Noorman, the Dutch Ambassador for Cyber Affairs, called for AI policies rooted in international human rights law, highlighting Europe’s Digital Services and AI Acts as potential models. Meanwhile, grassroots organisations from the Global South shared real-world challenges, including algorithmic bias, language exclusions, and environmental impacts.
Taysir Mathlouthi of Hamleh detailed efforts to build localised AI models in Arabic and Hebrew, while Nepal’s Yuva organisation, represented by Sanskriti Panday, explained how small NGOs balance ethical use of generative tools like ChatGPT with limited resources. The Global Forum for Media Development’s Laura Becana Ball introduced the Journalism Cloud Alliance, a collective aimed at making AI tools more accessible and affordable for newsrooms.
Despite enthusiasm, participants acknowledged hurdles such as checklist fatigue, lack of capacity, and the need for AI literacy training. Still, there was a shared sense of urgency and optimism, with the consensus that ethical frameworks must be embedded from the outset of AI development and not bolted on as an afterthought.
In closing, organisers invited civil society and media groups to endorse the Harlem Declaration and co-create practical tools for ethical AI governance. While challenges remain, the forum set a clear agenda: ethical AI in media must be inclusive, accountable, and co-designed by those most affected by its implementation.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At the 2025 Internet Governance Forum in Lillestrøm, Norway, experts from government, civil society, and the tech industry convened to discuss one of the thorniest challenges of the digital age: how to secure cyberspace without compromising freedom of expression and fundamental human rights. The session, moderated by terrorism survivor and activist Bjørn Ihler, revealed a shared urgency across sectors to move beyond binary thinking and craft nuanced, people-centred approaches to online safety.
Paul Ash, head of the Christchurch Call Foundation, warned against framing regulation and inaction as the only options, urging legislators to build human rights safeguards directly into cybersecurity laws. Echoing him, Mallory Knodel of the Global Encryption Coalition stressed the foundational role of end-to-end encryption, calling it a necessary boundary-setting tool in an era where digital surveillance and content manipulation pose systemic risks. She warned that weakening encryption compromises privacy and invites broader security threats.
Representing the tech industry, Meta’s Cagatay Pekyrour underscored the complexity of moderating content across jurisdictions with over 120 speech-restricting laws. He called for more precise legal definitions, robust procedural safeguards, and a shift toward ‘system-based’ regulatory frameworks that assess platforms’ processes rather than micromanage content.
Meanwhile, Romanian regulator and former MP Pavel Popescu detailed his country’s recent struggles with election-related disinformation and cybercrime, arguing that social media companies must shoulder more responsibility, particularly in responding swiftly to systemic threats like AI-driven scams and coordinated influence operations.
While perspectives diverged on enforcement and regulation, all participants agreed that lasting digital governance requires sustained multistakeholder collaboration grounded in transparency, technical expertise, and respect for human rights. As the digital landscape evolves rapidly under the influence of AI and new forms of online harm, this session underscored that no single entity or policy can succeed alone, and that the stakes for security and democracy have never been higher.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
At a packed session during Day 0 of the Internet Governance Forum 2025 in Lillestrøm, Norway, civil society leaders gathered to strategise how the upcoming WSIS+20 review can deliver on the promise of digital rights and justice. Organised by the Global Digital Justice Forum and the Global Digital Rights Coalition for WSIS, the brainstorming session brought together voices from across the globe to assess the ‘elements paper’ recently issued by review co-facilitators from Albania and Kenya.
Anna Oosterlinck of ARTICLE 19 opened the session by noting significant gaps in the current draft, especially in its treatment of human rights and multistakeholder governance.
Ellie McDonald of Global Partners Digital, speaking on behalf of the Global Digital Rights Coalition, presented the group’s three strategic pillars: anchoring digital policy in international human rights law, reinforcing multistakeholder governance based on São Paulo guidance, and strengthening WSIS institutions like the Internet Governance Forum. She warned that current policy language risks drifting away from established human rights commitments and fails to propose concrete steps for institutional resilience.
Nandini Chami of the Global Digital Justice Forum outlined their campaign’s broader structural agenda, including a call for an integrated human rights framework fit for the digital age, safeguarding the internet as a global commons, ensuring sustainable digital transitions, and creating a fair international digital economy that combats digital colonialism. She stressed the importance of expanding rights protections to include people affected by AI and data practices, even those not directly online.
Zach Lampell from the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law closed the session with a stark reminder: those who control internet infrastructure hold immense power over how digital rights are exercised. He and others urged participants to provide feedback by 15 July through an open consultation process, emphasising the need for strong, unified civil society input. The organising coalitions committed to publishing a summary paper to advance advocacy ahead of the final WSIS+20 outcome document.
Track all key moments from the Internet Governance Forum 2025 on our dedicated IGF page.
