Pre 7: Advancing Digital Inclusivity: UNESCO’s Measurement Approaches

Summary

This discussion focused on UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUIs) and efforts to promote digital inclusivity and gender equality in the digital space. Speakers highlighted the importance of the IUIs in assessing national internet environments and informing evidence-based policymaking. The framework’s multi-stakeholder approach was emphasized as crucial for developing effective digital policies and bridging knowledge gaps between stakeholders. Bulgaria’s experience in implementing the IUIs was shared, revealing both progress and challenges in the country’s digital transformation.

A key topic was online violence against women, particularly journalists. Speakers stressed the urgent need to address this issue, noting its impact on press freedom and democracy. The intersection of online and offline violence was highlighted, along with the need for intersectional approaches in addressing these challenges. Recommendations included strengthening legal protections, investing in ethical technology, and developing early warning mechanisms and crisis response systems.

The discussion also touched on the role of regional multi-stakeholder dialogues in shaping global digital cooperation agendas. The importance of these dialogues in ensuring local perspectives are incorporated into global policies was emphasized. Speakers noted the need for faster implementation of inclusive and gender-responsive digital governance frameworks, while also cautioning against potential misuse of these frameworks.

Overall, the discussion underscored the complex challenges in achieving digital inclusivity and gender equality, while also highlighting promising tools and approaches like the IUIs and multi-stakeholder engagement to address these issues.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUI) framework for assessing national internet environments

– Multi-stakeholder approaches to internet governance and digital policymaking

– Online violence and harassment against women journalists

– Gender equality and women’s participation in digital spaces and media

– Challenges in implementing inclusive digital governance frameworks

The overall purpose of the discussion was to explore UNESCO’s measurement approaches for digital inclusivity, particularly the Internet Universality Indicators, and how these can inform evidence-based policymaking and address challenges like online gender-based violence.

The tone of the discussion was largely informative and collaborative, with speakers sharing insights from their work and experiences. There was an underlying sense of urgency around addressing issues like online violence against women journalists. The tone became more action-oriented towards the end, with calls for concrete steps to implement inclusive digital governance frameworks.

Speakers

– Camila Gonzales: UNESCO staff member

– Bisera Zankova: Media expert from Media21 Foundation, Bulgaria

– Chris Buckridge: Principal of Buckridge Consultants, Australia and the Netherlands

– Elodie Vialle: Journalist, digital safety trainer and tech policy advisor from France

– Sandra Hoferichter: Secretary General of EuroDIG

– Xian Hong: Representing UNESCO information for our program, moderator

– Anelia Dimova: Former expert from the Ministry of E-Governance in Bulgaria

– Aida Sahraoui Soler: UNESCO staff member

– Tatevik Grigoryan: UNESCO staff member

Additional speakers:

– Audience member: Trainee at the Council of Europe

UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators: A Framework for Digital Inclusivity

This comprehensive discussion centered on UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUIs) and efforts to promote digital inclusivity and gender equality in the digital space. The dialogue brought together experts from various fields, including UNESCO staff members, media professionals, and policy advisors, to explore the challenges and opportunities in implementing inclusive digital governance frameworks.

Internet Universality Indicators: An Evolving Tool for Assessment and Policy-Making

A primary focus of the discussion was the value of UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUI) framework in assessing national internet environments and informing evidence-based policymaking. Camila Gonzales, a UNESCO staff member, emphasized that the IUI provides a comprehensive overview of the internet landscape, enabling informed decision-making. The framework has been recently revised, reducing the number of indicators to 133 and adding new themes such as environmental impact and advanced digital technologies.

The IUI is based on the ROAM principles: Rights, Openness, Accessibility, and Multi-stakeholder participation. Anelia Dimova shared Bulgaria’s experience in implementing the IUIs, revealing both progress and challenges in the country’s digital transformation. The assessment highlighted gaps in digital policies, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and challenges in retaining IT specialists and addressing the digital divide in rural areas.

Bisera Zankova, a media expert from Bulgaria, noted that the IUI framework puts human rights at the center, allowing for human-centric research of the communication environment. Chris Buckridge added that the IUI provides a common knowledge base to bridge gaps in multi-stakeholder processes, a crucial aspect of effective internet governance.

Multi-stakeholder Approaches: Opportunities and Challenges

The importance of multi-stakeholder approaches in internet governance and digital policymaking was a recurring theme. Sandra Hoferichter, Secretary General of EuroDIG, stressed that regional and national multi-stakeholder dialogues are crucial for shaping global digital cooperation, ensuring local perspectives are not lost and helping build trust.

However, Elodie Vialle, a journalist and tech policy advisor, highlighted potential challenges in multi-stakeholder processes, pointing out that power imbalances between stakeholders can hinder effective conversations. This underscores the complexity of implementing inclusive digital governance frameworks and the need for strategies to address these imbalances.

Addressing Online Violence Against Women Journalists

A significant portion of the discussion focused on the urgent issue of online violence and harassment against women journalists. Elodie Vialle emphasized that tech-facilitated gender-based violence is not only a pressing challenge but also a critical press freedom issue. The speakers agreed on the necessity of developing early warning mechanisms and crisis response systems to protect women journalists from online abuse.

The discussion highlighted the need for an intersectional approach to address online violence against diverse groups of women journalists and other marginalized communities. Suggestions included implementing newsroom safety protocols with a gender lens and investing in ethical technology and inclusive media to ensure emerging technologies are transparent, accountable, and free of bias. The importance of ‘prevention by design’ approaches in digital governance frameworks was also emphasized.

Digital Rights and Inclusivity: Navigating New Inequalities

The discussion touched upon the broader implications of digital transformation on rights and inclusivity. Anelia Dimova pointed out that digital transformation creates new inequalities, necessitating strategic principles for inclusivity. This view was complemented by suggestions for an intersectional feminist framework to analyze digital governance initiatives.

The importance of media and information literacy in combating disinformation and supporting women journalists was highlighted. Speakers also stressed the need for stronger political will and institutional capacity in implementing digital transformation policies.

Future Directions and Upcoming Events

The discussion referenced the upcoming UNESCO conference in June on AI and digital transformation, which will serve as an input to the WSIS Plus 20 review process. The Beijing Plus 30 consultation was also mentioned, including discussions on AI’s impact on women in media and the need for specific measures to address online violence against women journalists.

Conclusion

The discussion underscored the complex challenges in achieving digital inclusivity and gender equality while highlighting promising tools and approaches like the IUIs and multi-stakeholder engagement. It emphasized the need for continued dialogue, research, and action to create a more inclusive and equitable digital future. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the insights and recommendations from this discussion provide a valuable foundation for future policy-making and advocacy efforts in the realm of digital rights and governance.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Hello everyone. Before starting this session, I will show you now the rules on the screen so you can read them. And now I’m going to give the floor to the moderator, Dr. Xian Hong.

Xian Hong : Thank you for giving the floor. My name is Xian Hong, representing UNESCO information for our program. I’m here to support the moderation of UNESCO special event at EuroDIG, advancing digital inclusivity and the UNESCO’s measurement approaches. As you can see, we have a strong panel of speakers to share their views, such as Ms. Anelia Dimova, the former expert from the Ministry of E-Governance in Bulgaria, and Ms. Bisera Zankova from Media21 Foundation of Bulgaria. Both ladies speakers are well online. I see you perfectly. Then I have Mr. Chris Buckridge, the principal of Buckridge Consultants, Australia and the Netherlands sitting next to me. And then Ms. Elodie Vialle, the journalist and digital safety trainer and a tech policy advisor from France. Then I have Ms. Sandra Hoferichter, the secretary general of EuroDIG, also on the panel to share her views. Before we run into the wonderful discussion today, I’d like to give the floor to two of my colleagues, Ms. Camila Gonzalez and also Aida Sahraoui. And now we solely the consultant of UNESCO to give a joint presentation on the UNESCO’s work about internet universality indicators, and also the Beijing plus 20 consultations to set a scene for today’s discussion. So, Camilla and Ayla, the floor is yours.

Camila Gonzales: Good afternoon. Thank you very much. Well, I’m Camilla Gonzalez, I work at UNESCO. And well as Hong also mentioned this session will be focused on UNESCO’s measurement approach, particularly those that support evidence based policymaking and so I will begin by giving a brief overview on the internet universality indicators. So to begin, the iOS. They stem from the concept of internet universality, which was first endorsed by the general conference which is UNESCO’s governing body, and they came out of the recognition that the internet should be operated following five main principles that is that it should be based on human rights, open, accessible to all nurtured by multi stakeholder participation and that considers x cross cutting issues of the internet that includes gender sustainable development, the environment, trust and security. So, these principles these pillars are encapsulated in the Romex pillars, which are the base of internet universality and following this endorsement of the concept of internet universality UNESCO created the internet universality indicators, which was a concrete tool to help natural stakeholders to assess the state of internet development within their countries based on these five pillars. So, the Romex services as a blueprint for international digital development. And they have a unique role in promoting the achievement of the sustainable development goals, but also because they directly and indirectly reflect the outcomes of many other international frameworks such as the NetMundial Plus 10, the Sao Paulo multi stakeholder guidelines, the Future Summit, and the Global Digital Compact. Just to summarize in three main points why the ROMEX indicators have a fundamental role. The first one is that because they include so many different components of the internet based on these ROMEX principles, they give a very comprehensive overview of the internet landscape, which allows stakeholders to make informed decisions in digital transformation processes. Additionally, they have proved to be very versatile in their implementation. Since their creation, around 40 countries have implemented the IUIs, but these are countries across all five regions of the world. So we have countries in Africa, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and the Caribbean, but also Europe. And today, well, we have some of the research team from Bulgaria who have implemented and they will tell us a bit more of their experience. But then that’s also why they have proved to be so relevant. And then finally, it’s because also the findings and also the recommendations that stem from the framework from the assessment can help inform national digital strategies and plans that are aligned with international human rights standards. So this is just some of the IUI assessments that have been published. We have many of them who are still upcoming and will be published shortly. But as I mentioned, they are from all different regions, but then if we also see a breakdown of the countries that have implemented the IUIs, it’s been over 40. And then So we have the elite region in IAI implementation, but we also have Asia Pacific, Latin American, the Caribbean, and then in Europe, specifically we have Bulgaria, France, and Germany. So, how are the role mix indicators assessed at the national level. It’s mostly an eight step process, which can be done in various ways. In some of them, UNESCO provides strong companionship and support throughout the entire process, but in some other countries stakeholders might prefer to do it a bit more independently and that is also, of course, okay with us. One of the main key components of the IUI in all cases is the component of national ownership. So, the IUIs are always implemented by national research teams, who of course have a greater understanding of the national context of the country. And then also, the one of the key or the main components of the IUI is the establishment of the National Multi Stakeholder Advisory Board, or the MAP, which is composed of different relevant stakeholders from the internet environment within a country. And then this MAP, the role that they have is to provide support and input throughout the entire process. So for instance, they may provide supporting accessing information or data that might otherwise be hard to access. And that’s why they have such a key role. So, once the MAP is set up and then the research team is also set up, then comes of course the parts of research, of data gathering, data analysis, writing the report and the recommendations, but then we finally have one of the other key steps of the of the IUIs, which is the organization of the National Validation Multi Stakeholder Workshop, which again, is a part of the MAP. and then allows these members to, first of all, see what key information might be missing, but also kind of provides a space for deliberations into recognizing what are key recommendations that need to be addressed, and then also gives space to kind of build a national kind of action plan or roadmap into addressing these recommendations. And also just to give a brief overview of sort of the kind of latest updates in the IUIs. So in 2023, UNESCO initiated the revision process of the IUIs. This came in recognition that in the last five years, the internet environment, of course, has faced numerous changes, and it has, because of its, you know, very dynamic and fast-changing nature. So UNESCO recognized also the need to update the Internet Universality Indicator so that they can stay relevant within those changes. And so this process was a year-long process that includes many stages, from research to consultation with research teams who had already implemented the IUIs, expert meetings, and then also in-person and online consultations with, you know, broader audiences, to finally create the revised IUIs, which were launched in a high-level session at the last IDF, so in December 2024. And so these revised IUIs, they maintain the ROMEX categories, the five categories, but one of their key changes is that they now present a streamlined nature, which reduced the number of indicators to 133, and then they also grant a lot of more flexibility to research teams to selecting which indicators are most relevant for them according to their national context and just making sure that it’s relevant to the national context. Another key of the key updates to the to the region was the inclusion of overarching questions into each of the categories of the role mix that guides the research teams into providing more of an analytical and overview of what’s the key situation of a country within each of these categories. So well there you have sort of the questions. And also, it included two new themes. One of them was on environmental impact, and the other one is on advanced digital technologies so it includes a technologies like AI in the internet environment which before had not been included. As well, some issues that were already presented in the IUI were updated so this includes meaningful connectivity governance of digital platforms, privacy and data protection, children’s rights and sustainable development. So, well this is kind of the brief overview of the IUIs. I leave you with this in case well links in case you have one more information or have any questions. This is where you can reach us and then now I’ll give the floor to my colleague, Ida.

Xian Hong : Thank you, Camilla. Good morning everyone.

Aida Sahraoui Soler: I’m very happy to be here with you today, especially in this beautiful city of my heart, that is Strasbourg. I’m here to present another initiative that UNESCO is having. As you know, the digital landscape has transformed a lot in the last years. and it’s raising new challenges for women in the digital world and specifically for women journalists. I work for UNESCO’s section on freedom of expression and safety of journalists and research from UNESCO has shown that the forms of violence that women journalists are suffering nowadays are evolving. We have very high levels of online violence that journalists are suffering. According to UNESCO research, 73% of the women interviewed under the research had declared that they have suffered during their careers online violence. The indicators that Camila just presented also include gender equality indicators which help us reflect the gender divide, focusing both on access and safety within the digital spaces. I’m just here to share with you one of our other initiatives to address these challenges of women in the digital landscape. UNESCO organized in January an expert consultation in its headquarters where we brought together experts from academia, from civil society, from also journalists and the goal of this expert consultation was to contribute to the review process of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. I’m sure all of you know what the Beijing Declaration is. As you know, it’s the more comprehensive policy document on gender equality and that document has a specific chapter on women in the media. Our objective with this consultation was to assess the progress that has been made. during this last 30 years because this year the Beijing Declaration is its 30th anniversary and that’s why UN Women is doing the review process of the declaration. Our objective was to review the progress that has been made in these last 30 years but also to assess what are the challenges that we still have and what should be put at the centre during the following years on this topic of women and the media. During the discussions my colleague Elodie, who is next to me, will have the opportunity to share with you the recommendations that came out of the consultation but just to say that some of the key discussions that we had during the consultation were around gender equality newsrooms where we discussed about leadership of women journalists. Another key topic was media stereotypes and we also discussed for example the role of social media which was initially not very present in the initial version of the declaration and we think that now it should have more focus on that as social media are playing a very big role nowadays. We also discussed violence against women journalists online which is the new forms of violence that we are observing but also the traditional types of violence that women journalists suffer which are offline. We also discussed the topic of artificial intelligence and women in the media and maybe just worth mentioning that this year’s WordPress Freedom Day, which is a conference that UNESCO organised every year, was also around the topic of the impact of artificial intelligence on press freedom. in case you are interested in having a look at that. And yeah, I will just stop here, just to say that Elodie will present later the recommendations and in case you have questions on this process, we are here to respond. Thank you.

Xian Hong : Thank you very much. Thank you very much dear Camilla and Aida for your comprehensive presentation which really draws a big picture about UNESCO’s overall work on internet universality and also how it’s linked to the Beijing Plus 30 consultation on women and gender equality. So this year is such a crucial year. We are also facing the OASIS Plus 20 review leading to the NGDC implementation. Now I’d like to trigger a very dynamic conversation with our excellent speakers in this context. And also I would expect all of you, participants in the room and online, it will be a very interactive discussion so please prepare your questions and comments. You can post online. And also I will give the floor, open the floor after our panelists to talk. So I hope today we will get some sparkling thoughts together. So I mean, in this context of OASIS Plus 20 consultation, I’d like to ask the first question to Ms. Sandra Hofrichter. You are the Secretary General of Eurodig, one of the leading regional multi-stakeholder dialogue on internet governance in Europe. So you are in the best position to share your thoughts about what role you think this regional multi-stakeholder dialogue can be playing in shaping the future global digital cooperation agenda.

Sandra Hoferichter: Welcome everyone to the Eurodig. There will be a more formal opening later this day, but we are also very happy to have these Day Zero events, where the community can come together and exchange on their latest projects. You will find that the WSIS plus 20 review will be kind of an underlying issue in this Eurodig. There are several sessions on this, but I guess it will be many times point of reference for a discussion that is happening on any of the topics. And as Eurodig, we are of course embedded in this WSIS process and as we approach the plus 20 review, we find ourselves really in a pivotal moment. The pace of digital transformation is accelerating, yet the promises of inclusivity and trust and equitable development remain evenly unfulfilled. In this context, critical questions emerge. How can we ensure that the future of global digital cooperation is inclusive, relevant and rooted in local realities? And I strongly believe that the answer in part lies in the power of regional and national multi-stakeholder dialogue. The regions are the innovation hubs and the early warning systems. They can operate as laboratories of innovation and they are sort of a barometer of the need. And moreover, regional dialogues, they are indeed an early warning system because they can alert the global community to emerging challenges which otherwise possibly would not be recognized so quickly. But also regional and national forums are closer to the people and that is important. They create more accessible spaces for civil society use and under marginalized groups. that might not participate on a global level that actively and language, cultural relevance and the contextual understanding make participation for them more meaningful. In a global digital agenda, many times the powerful voices dominate, but regional dialogues ensure that the local perspective is not lost, but that it remains relevant. And then also trust. Trust is the currency of cooperation and trust is only built if repeated respectful multi-stakeholder engagement is taking place. And this is basically the chance for the national and the regional, for us to have these repeated respectful multi-stakeholder engagement. These dialogues allow then actors to move beyond just rhetoric and into more collaboration. Governments can listen to grassroot digital rights groups. Tech companies could co-designing solution for rural areas because they exactly know what their needs are and they can in this respect work together. And regional organizations can harmonize policy for cross-border digital trade and data governance. That’s kind of a shared ownership and strengthens the legitimacy and sustainability of the global outcomes. For the WSIS plus 20 review, it is crucial if the next phase of digital cooperation is to be fit for the purpose, must be grounded in the lived experience of the region. Let’s remember as the future of digital cooperation is not built in isolation. It’s shaped through dialogue, region by region and voice by voice. And if you listen carefully to our regions, we will hear the blueprint for all digital future that is just inclusive and truly global. Thank you very much.

Xian Hong : Thank you so much for sharing your visionary ideas on the role of regional multi-stakeholder dialogue. Multi-stakeholder is such a core of UNESCO’s Internet Universality Framework. And as Mr. Guillermo Canela mentioned in his video message in the previous session, it’s the 10th year of UNESCO member states which have endorsed this four fundamental principles, human rights, open accessibility, and also multi-stakeholder approach. And it’s such an inspiring experience. In the past 10 years, more than 40 countries have conducted national assessments by using UNESCO’s indicators. Now we have updated 81 new indicators put in place for your use. So please do not hesitate to join us if your country is interested in conducting new assessments using these new indicators. So now I’m very pleased to invite our speakers from Bulgaria online to share their national experience of conducting the Internet Universality Indicator Assessment in their country. So, Ms. Anelia Dimova, first of all, congratulations for having successfully conducted the IUI assessment in Bulgaria. So perhaps you could start by sharing some highlights of the findings in your national assessment.

Anelia Dimova: Okay. Hello, everybody. I will present to you the Bulgarian experience concerning the project Internet Universality Indicators, the findings and recommendations. Bulgarian Ministry of E-governance. and a consortium of three NGOs including Law and Internet, Media21 and Media Communications and Culture implemented a project conducting a national assessment of the Internet Universality Indicators. In the context of the Fourth National Action Plan within the framework of the International Initiative Open Government Partnership thematic area, transparency and access to information. The duration of the project was until the end of 2024 for two years. Except the consortium, a multi-stakeholder advisory board was established within the Ministry of Electronic Governance consisting of different participants, National Statistical Institute member, Council of Electronic Media member, National Commission of UNESCO within Ministry of Foreign Affairs, business, jurists, journalists, media experts, etc. in their personal capacities. UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators allow each country to voluntarily assess its national Internet environment, bridge the digital divide and improve connectivity between business and society. After Germany, Bulgaria is the second European country to prepare a comprehensive report. There is no specific Internet regulation in Bulgaria and we do not have consolidated and up-to-date information on the network and quality of services which is essential for the national digital policy. Such a policy must be horizontal and take into account the status and process of technology. on Technological and Societal Development in a Timely Manner. The research methodology relies on an interdisciplinary approach, integrating experts from various fields. Research methods, overview of the current legal and policy framework, gathering and analysis of available data from authoritative and reliable sources, identification of individual trends, formulation of suggestions and recommendations. The main method used is a desktop research, but for some areas an analysis and interview extracts are included. We were studying 130 indicators, including contextual indicators that are the basis for the others. The report contains a SWOT analysis for better formulation of recommendations. Some findings. Category Accessible Internet for All. This category covers a total of six topics which examine the existing accessibility framework. The legal and strategic framework aims to overcome inequalities, but it is difficult to assess how effective the measures taken are. Bulgaria remains below the EU average in Internet use. Barriers to accessibility are widespread and cannot be reduced only to those of a financial nature. This is a relatively even distribution of digital skills and Internet use between gender and demographics. Other people remain relatively isolated from the digital world, and it is recommended that specific measures must be taken for their better inclusion. Barriers to accessibility are people don’t need Internet or don’t have enough skills. Financial aspect is the last. Reason. Second category, multi-stakeholder participation. In respect of ensuring multi-stakeholder cooperation in the implementation of digital governance policies, the executive authorities should make efforts in digital policy development and the active participation of all stakeholders. Bulgaria has a solid basis for policy development in the digital sphere through existing international and European regulations. However, to fully exploit the opportunities and address the threats, further refinement of national digital policies and the existing national legal framework is needed. The lack of structured mechanism and a national internet governance forum limit the full use of this potential. This category is dedicated to multi-stakeholder collaboration to put in place policies to manage the digital environment. The data indicate that this is where efforts should be made by the executive branch in terms of developing digital environment policy and actively involving all stakeholders. Their two-week development and coverage do not allow to draw significant findings about the internet environment in Bulgaria in the studied aspect. Addressing the weaknesses and threats in national digital policies requires a proactive and coordinated approach that includes creating new mechanisms for participation and collaboration. With the proposed recommendations, Bulgaria can strengthen its position in international and regional digital policymaking by overcoming current weaknesses and eliminating threats. The key to success lies in the active involvement of all stakeholders. Contextual indicators, they are demographic, development, ICT development, mobile connectivity, they provide background information that is important for interpreting the findings obtained from the indicators in the ROM categories. The prepared report is a valuable asset for both theoreticians and practitioners. It allows them to see all the issues related to the Internet in a systematic way. It is a good start for the development of appropriate digital policy and legislation and enrichment of national statistics. The report will also serve as a test for the effective implementation of the approach by all stakeholders in Bulgaria. Information about the project report, validation workshop, brochure, leaflet, and dissemination is on the site of the Ministry. The report was validated by a valuable workshop debate on the development of the Internet in Bulgaria. I named this workshop Trendsetter. Problems and obstacles. Bored, not paid, and not active enough. Financing. Public procurement for the consortium, but the project philosophy is different from the very beginning of the report, multi-stakeholder approach is needed. IFAP would be better to help. Information gathering, difficult in any cases. Government and NGOs don’t help enough. Consortium, three NGOs, not easy work. Governmental structural changes. often. Project follow-up, concerning project follow-up, indicators revision, impact assessment and monitoring. I propose and I hope it will be possible at a future moment taking into account the revised indicators and eventual assessment and monitoring, impact assessment and monitoring. I intend to communicate with UNESCO staff, Tatevik maybe, to discuss details. Thank you very much.

Xian Hong : Thank you. Thank you, Anelia, for so rich sharing of the findings and also process, including those challenges barrier encountered, which can be so useful reference also for other countries. As you well mentioned that Bulgaria is the second European country to have conducted the Internet universality assessment. We are really here to encourage all the other European countries to consider using our updated indicators, which really tackling the most emerging issues can be so relevant to all the European context. So please not hesitate to contact us, my colleague Tatevik or anyone here. I’m here as well for today, so please do reach out to us. So based on what has been shared by Anelia, I’d like to give the floor to Ms. Bisera Zankova. You and your organization has been a key actor in conducting this assessment. So could you please go a bit further and share more about the main findings regarding the online violence against the women in Bulgaria, and how do you think these findings and recommendations could further inform and formulate interventions and actions in the country? Thank you.

Bisera Zankova: Thank you very much. I’m happy to be with you today and to share some of my impressions of our work on the assessment report. Yes, it was not easy, but the report is a fact and it is also, I think, a great achievement. Comprehensive data has been collected and now we have a full comprehension at this stage of the internet picture in the country, including also how freedom of expression is exercised. And also through this report, we could identify some weak notes in the whole internet landscape in Bulgaria. And unfortunately, I would say then that one of these areas that require further efforts is the area of gender equality, women’s assistance and gender-based online violence. In fact, inferences in the report are that the environment in Bulgaria, especially this digital environment, is positive towards the victims of online and generally offline violence. I think that we have to think much further. Yes, if we consider legislation, there is a regulatory framework to enforce a law against human trafficking. Recent amendments to the law against domestic violence. There are also provisions in the criminal code, but all these acts, I think that they are not systematically interwoven, they do not support each other. And we cannot say that at this moment, the regulatory measures in force can encourage an efficient system against online violence. Also, our report and the work on it persuaded me especially that there is not sufficient data on on gender violence. First of all, the registry that would provide information about cases of domestic violence is not implemented. Also, there should be a coordinating mechanism for supporting such victims. It has not been established so far. But let us think that domestic violence is not online violence. It can go also online, but these are different categories of violence. Also, our statistics from the National Statistical Institute, it is not well structured and systematic. For some years, we used the statistics from other datasets, not from national datasets. And what is alarming is that the general coefficient of violence against women in Bulgaria is 44.2, much higher than the average for the European Union. At this moment, one of the problems that we have in Bulgaria is about the violence among children, among girls especially, and the media report on cases when there are conflicts and fights against the girls. And then all this is recorded on the mobile and published on the internet. So these are different cases that should be handled in a different way. But first of all, we have to know more about the general picture in Bulgaria. And in fact, we have only one public statement at the conference that everyone, women in 10, has experienced the violence online until the age of 15. We have to have evidence about that and we have to work on improving our legislative framework and also to have in mind that we have to differentiate among online and offline violence. I think that this is an area that we should put considerable efforts in the future.

Xian Hong : Thank you and thanks a lot for this sharing so empirical evidence regarding these hot issues on online gender-based violence. I’m sure our speakers on the panel will pick it up again in a later conversation. And from what you have jointly presented on our national assessment experience in Bulgaria, we have perceived that the huge challenge also lies in the multi-stakeholder approach. multi-stakeholder participation. I mean multi-stakeholder is a buzzword for past 20 years since WSIS Tunis agenda and Mr. Chris Buckridge, you must agree with me since you have been engaged in this whole process on multi-stakeholder in the past several decades. So based on your expansive experience on internet governance and what do you think that this multi-stakeholder models can be really strengthened in order to support what we are promoting here, the evidence-based policymaking, particularly those, I mean, in many countries and regions where we don’t have a sufficient institutional capacity to operationalize this multi-stakeholder engagement. And yeah, Chris, floor is yours.

Chris Buckridge: Okay, thank you, Xian Hong. So yes, I will agree with you that multi-stakeholder is a bit of a buzzword. And we’ve had, I think, some really interesting discussions in recent years about what it actually means to have a multi-stakeholder process, what accountability there is, what level of engagement there needs to be. And it’s a moving target, a moving needle, which I think we’re sort of constantly aspirational thing. But I mean, I think it integrates and fits really well with these Romex principles and the IUI initiative. I’ve been following the development of this project sort of since its inception, and I think the latest revision of these is a really important step forward. It makes this project even more accessible, usable, able to be implemented. And I think in that sense, it’s an idea and a project whose time Feels like it has really come, partly because we see also in the IGF, where I’m a member of the multi-stakeholder advisory group, but also elsewhere, a real, well passion maybe is the wrong word, but a desire to be a little bit more practical, concrete, measurable in how these institutions actually deliver what they’re delivering, what they’re actually working in. And that’s coming from a number of different directions. I think we saw with the Global Digital Compact, a real move towards the need to make specific commitments, measure those specific commitments. We’re also seeing in the context of the WSIS Plus 20, a real focus on what has been achieved by 20 years of the World Summit on the Information Society, what has been achieved by the IGF as one of the instruments of that process. And I think we’re also seeing it in the current MAG and the leadership panel, where the Romex principles have been raised and discussed as one of the important tools that we have in our kit at the moment to better develop this kind of measurement, this kind of practical understanding of what’s going on here. A lot of what I would say, I think, probably repeats a bit of what Sandra was saying. I think the Romex approach ties in really nicely with the national and regional initiatives that have come out of the IGF and out of WSIS. And that’s something that’s also been recognised in the Global Digital Compact, that national and regional initiatives are where a lot of the work in this multi-stakeholder internet governance space gets done, because it’s at the more granular level. It’s drawing on issues for national populations or regional populations. It’s drawing on national expertise and experts. national policy makers and other stakeholders to develop solutions. So I think in that sense, the Bromex really fits into that same ecosystem and can be, well, can be a sort of two-directional thing, both in terms of when I look at the idea of the MAB, the Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Board, in countries where there is no NRI, or there is not that sort of institutionalisation yet of a multi-stakeholder model, that MAB could be a useful tool to bring together different elements of the multi-stakeholder community and perhaps beyond the initial Bromex assessment to a longer-standing NRI process. On the flip side, in countries where there is an NRI, I think that existing community and the sort of the work that it’s done can be a really fertile grounding for developing the MAB and developing these kind of Bromex processes. So I think that sort of interactivity is what I would really see as important to strengthening the multi-stakeholder aspect of the Bromex principles, but I think it’s really valuable on both sides. There’s a lot of value there.

Xian Hong : Absolutely, and this is exactly a by-way process, and on one hand, UNESCO is trying to operationalise a Rome principle, including multi-stakeholder at a national level, but on the other hand, through this national assessment, as my colleague Camilla well said, it’s not just about assessment, it’s really about to enhance the institutional capacity of multi-stakeholder participation. I think in some countries, even after the assessment, the multi-stakeholder advisory committee composed for the assessment decided to continue to exist in the country to follow up with the all the actions in the future assessment, also policy and action improvement in the country. So you see the by-way benefits of the ROAM framework and also the country’s stakeholders. And now I take the opportunity to thank again Chris and also all the other stakeholders in the room online for your long-term engagement with UNESCO in developing ROAM principles, in developing indicators, in supporting the national assessments and to now. I believe it’s a long journey, but we are on the right track. Thank you. So now I’d like to give the floor to Ms. Elodie Vialle. As I mentioned that gender is a core topic of today’s session and several other speakers, presenters also mentioned a lot before. So since you are the coordinating person in the Beijing Plus 20 consultation, so what do you identify as the most urgent challenge faced by women in the digital space today, particularly related to the media and the technology facilitated violence against women and girls? Please, thank you.

Elodie Vialle: Thank you. Yes, as it has been mentioned by my UNESCO colleagues and BICERA online, the issue of tech-facilitated gender-based violence is one of the most urgent challenges that women face in the digital space today. And addressing this issue is not only a priority, should be a matter for when it comes to protecting women’s rights, but it’s also a fundamental press freedom issue. So when we talk about tech-facilitated gender-based violence, I don’t know if everyone here is very familiar with this expression, but it’s very We talk about concrete, very violent, we talk about defects, we talk about online intimidations, online threats, online harassment, and these practices are designed to discredit journalists, to undermine their credibility and ultimately to silence their voices. So it’s not only an issue for individual women, marginalized communities, this is a democratic issue, because what we observe today in Europe and in the world is how the anti-gender narratives are increasingly intertwined with anti-democratic narratives. These anti-gender, anti-democratic movements are two sides of the same coin. So this is one of the key outcomes of this Beijing Club 30 consultation, and it’s a great honor to be a rapporteur of this expert group gathering 25 international experts. And what we said during this consultation is that the question of the safety of journalists, especially women journalists, is deeply intertwined with the need for inclusive digital governance that we’re discussing today. So, of course, we acknowledge that over the last 30 years, some progress has been made when it comes to women and media, like increased gender equality within newsrooms, but many of the same threats persist, which is including this, and these threats are evolved because we notice a connection between offline threats against women journalists and online threats. And with this rise of online violence, Aida mentioned the UNESCO and ICFJ study, the Chilling, about women and media. which is a report published five years ago about online safety of women journalists. And what is very worrying is that we noticed that 20% of women journalists who have been attacked offline say that these attacks were connected to online abuse. And we have to remember that Daphne Carona Galizia, who was murdered a few years ago in Malta, investigative journalist, she was harassed online massively before being murdered. There’s a direct connection between these offline attacks and what happens online. So of course, during this expert consultation, we discussed the weaponization of artificial intelligence. We do think that it has all the potential to close digital and gender gaps, but it also amplifies hate speech, enabling the massive dissemination of false content and violence against women. So what we could do as multi-stakeholders in the room and policymakers, we do think that this multi-stakeholder, we mentioned the multi-actor approach because we’ve heard a lot about multi-stakeholder all over the years, but we, I don’t know, we like the multi-actor expression better during this consultation. And we think that it’s important to strengthen this approach, legal protection, and ensure that responses are both intersectional and survivor-centered. I just want to say a word regarding this multi-stakeholder approach. When it comes to tech accountability, it’s increasingly difficult to put everyone in the room, which is why it’s so important. I’ve done a lot of, tons of these meetings with social media platforms, representatives in San Francisco, in Brussels, in Tunisia, in many countries. And actually it doesn’t work that much, if I can say so. And let’s be frank, because when you, when you. but civil society organisation in the room, policy makers and the platforms, there is a power imbalance, a knowledge imbalance. It’s very complicated to have this conversation. And basically, civil society organisations are not happy with the situation, to say the least, and particularly now that it’s very difficult for us to keep having this conversation in a context of funding freeze. So I believe in this approach, but it’s going to be increasingly difficult to lead in the coming years. And so that’s why our group talk a lot about money as well. And we think that we need to invest in ethical technology and inclusive media, ensuring that emerging technologies are transparent, accountable, free of bias, with a focus on protecting women’s rights. With the ongoing tech brawl, let’s be frank, it’s not the case at all. But this is our recommendation. We think that we should put our efforts in investing in this tech, ethical technology. And funding should be also made available for independent women-led media initiatives and gender-focused research to support evidence-based policies. We want to come with very concrete and actionable insights for policymakers in Europe, then evidence-based policy and gender-focused research have to be supported. And of course, this has been mentioned this morning, and it’s important, crucial in this context of massive disinformation online to strengthen media and information literacy, to ensure broader public understanding of the vital role of women in media and the media’s role in society, while empowering individuals to protect and support a free and independent press. Thank you.

Xian Hong : Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much Elodie for so strong messages and the recommendations. Actually, may I take this opportunity to forward a question from the chat? Actually, I think you have tackled the most part of it. I think it’s a question from Luno Celalonga, sorry for my pronunciation of name. And yeah, the question is, as the Beijing Declaration would be 30 years this year, how much of these intended objectives have been achieved? And how much is yet to be achieved? For those not yet achieved, what have been the major challenges? Do you like to compliment any further points? Yeah, right, right, right button, right button.

Elodie Vialle: Okay, thanks. Yes, I think I’ve digged into it a little bit. But we noticed some progress when it comes to gender equality within newsroom, gender representation in the media. And I have to say that 30 years ago, in 1995, for the Beijing Declaration, these were the two main points when it comes to women and media that were mentioned. And of course, during this conversation, expert consultation initiated by UNESCO, we digged into other topics such as AI, and tech-facilitated gender-based violence, which are for us today, the key challenges we need to address.

Xian Hong : Okay, thank you. Thank you, Elodie, again, for your excellent inputs. I think there are one more comment from the chat asking whether we can share the PowerPoint and the talking points. As technician, we all suggested that I would encourage our speakers and presenters, if you permit, you could share your PowerPoint and talking points. in the chat. So we can all download from there. So we are all on the same page. Actually now we are at 20 minutes before the end of session. We have a second round of the question answer with my distinguished speakers. But before that, I’d like to open the floor shortly to see if there are any burning questions, comments, suggestions, ideas, whatever from the room and also from online. I’d like to share a few minutes with the audiences to have your feedback. So please don’t hesitate to take the floor. Do we have someone? Oh yes, please. Please introduce yourself briefly.

Audience: Thank you. Hi, I’m a trainee here at the Council of Europe, but I’m very interested in this topic, so that’s why I follow this very interesting discussion. And I wanted to know regarding violence against women journalists, if you have addressed intersectional violence in this case and how it was addressed and if you can elaborate more on this topic. Thank you.

Xian Hong : Thank you for the question. And also thank you for you to have your youth voice heard in this room. Appreciate it. So any other questions or comments before I move back to our panels to respond? And anybody online? None? No? Okay, so I wonder if Elodie or those either do you like to comment further on this question? Thank you.

Aida Sahraoui Soler: Maybe Elodie can complement on the expert consultation, but just to say that, for example, the research that we mentioned, the chilling, has intersectional lens. It’s not only exploring the impact of violence on women journalists, but also on the LGBT community and It’s also exploring the impact on women journalists that are part of a minority, that are part of an indigenous group, that are black women journalists, etc. So it does have the intersectional lens. And if you’re interested, you can consult the research.

Elodie Vialle: And yeah, thanks, Aida. And exactly. And this was, thanks for mentioning it, because it was a very crucial point for our experts. And I have to say also that all the experts of the group come from different continents and have a diverse background. And there’s this, and share this experience and research and based on their, yes, experience through CSOs, that there is a need to better address this intersectional approach, which is not done today. And particularly when it comes to AI and all the buyers that are being amplified right now. So we’ve discussed a lot how we can both address these buyers through this multi-stakeholder approach. And at the same time, I would say, try to hack AI and use it to bridge digital and gender gap. Thank you.

Xian Hong : Thank you, Aida and Camilla, for your brilliant feedback on this wonderful topic, a very meaningful conversation we are having here. And I think now we have 15 minutes, and my speakers and those online, with your permission, may I give each of you two minutes to quickly tackle the question I’m going to pose to you and to further the conversation we just had. So perhaps this round, I started with maybe the only sir, only gentleman here on the panel. Okay, Mr. Chris Buckridge. to what you had just presented, what do you think are the main gaps between the measurement frameworks of UNESCO and other organizations and the policy making, and how can we really bridge these main gaps? Thank you.

Chris Buckridge: All right, thank you. Yeah, I’ll keep it very brief. But I think, I mean, actually, I was going to, I’m changing what I was going to say, because I think Elodie’s point is a really important one about multi stakeholder models and where there can, you know, even in the best intentions, bringing together people, there is often a knowledge gap, a power, a power differential in the room. And I think actually, the Romex, I’m not wanting to be too optimistic and gloss over those, those challenges. But I think part of what Romex helps provide and measurement of this kind generally helps provide is a bridge across that knowledge gap by providing sort of common, quite in depth knowledge about specific environments, specific countries, and their challenges and what they’ve already done, and in terms of policy, policymaking, etc. I think having that common knowledge base is a really important way of bridging the gap between a multi stakeholder process and actual policymaking. So I think that that’s really important. In terms of other gaps, I think there can be sometimes a gap of political will to adopt what might come out of a report like this. And I think particularly when you’re working with multi stakeholders, there’s not always the transparency of the many factors that play into whether the policy is made. So I think opening up those communication channels, making sure that there is that sort of awareness across all stakeholders as to the complexities of the situation is really essential. Stop there. Thank you.

Xian Hong : Thank you, Chris. And to complement what you suggested, allow me to advertise another UNESCO conference in June. We are literally convening an international conference to enhance capacity building. in the public sectors in the area of AI and digital transformation, also as an input to the WSIS plus 20 review. So it’s 4 to 5 June at UNESCO headquarter in Paris. You are all welcome to join us there, also online as well. So my second question briefly is to our online speaker, Anelia. So following your experience in assessing internet in Bulgaria, can you maybe take two minutes to give us maybe a couple of lessons you have learned from your country experience so that can be useful for other countries in Europe or maybe in other regions? I imagine some other countries also be interested to do the assessment. So do you have a couple of important lessons to share with them? Thank you.

Anelia Dimova: Okay, but more than two minutes please. Bulgaria has achieved a number of important results on the path to digital transformation. The targeted efforts have been recognized at international and European level as evidenced by rankings, reports and indices. Significant progress has been made in promoting digital innovation and creating a favorable environment for a startup’s ecosystems, improving digital infrastructure and providing online public services. Our country is known for a talented young generation with advanced digital skills, while at the same time it is difficult to attract and retain IT specialists in the public sector, especially at the regional level. The growing problem of brain drain increases the risks of loss in qualified IT specialists. Given the rapidly growing high-tech companies, the digitalization of SMEs, hubs and accelerators, financing can Digitalization and investment remain a challenge. Bulgaria has many opportunities to improve its performance in the digital transition. Efforts need to be significantly increased and thus the country’s contribution to achieving the goals of the digital decade. It continues to perform well in terms of connectivity, but the uneven distribution of digital infrastructure in rural areas requires further attention. Measures are planned to target public investments in digital infrastructure and high capacity technologies. The level of use of digital public services is still low, which raises the need for targeted measures. Promoting the minimization of the administrative burden for companies by improving the efficiency of public administration and strengthening digital governance is among the priority areas. The set of activities needs to be complementary, building on inflexible while being linked to the need to promote the digital skills of citizens. Simulating the digital transformation in the public sector is among the challenges which requires additional efforts and resources. Among the leading challenges are the lack of strong and consolidated political will to set and achieve the goals aimed at digital transformation. Limited institutional capacity, lack of coordination and cooperation between administrations, central and municipal, as well as insufficient digital skills. In addition, the lack of public trust, problems related to compliance with regulatory requirements and fragmented information systems and data sets hindered the proper adoption of digital technologies in the public sector. According to business, it is necessary to constantly build filters against information, disinformation, and propaganda. Achieving this goal is only possible with critical thinking and a high digital culture. Education in the era of artificial intelligence requires transformation, as the role of the teacher is to rise to the status of a mentor for the student, who will guide him through the process of building an independent thinking person. It is also important to emphasize the fact that digital transformation creates new inequalities. The advent of artificial intelligence will create new divisions. Strategic principles for inclusive digital transformation are needed that work to protect human rights and interests. The implementation of digital transformation in partnership with the European Union expands the opportunities for achieving the set goals. The support will allow the implementation of strategic projects in several strategic areas, supercomputers, artificial intelligence, cyber security, improvement of digital skills and technologies in the economy and society, including for digital innovation hubs. Digitalization is associated with risk-related cyber security for the administration and for business. Therefore, it is necessary for business to take advantage of all programs that support the improvement of cyber security. Training in the field of cyber security is fundamental, as the prevention of risk is a principle through which a safe Internet is ensured. Achieving concrete results in coordinating intersectional cooperation and partnership is the strategic goal for Bulgaria. Implementing the goals of the Digital Decade Programme 2030 in the context of common European efforts creates conditions for Bulgaria to be among the countries that are leaders in the ongoing digital transformation of the European Union. Thanks.

Xian Hong : Great, thanks from all of us for sharing so many important lessons and valuable experience. You may also upload your report links and the presentation to the chat so we can have further reading. Thank you again. So now I’d like to ask Miss Bisera Zankova. Shortly, I mean, we are tackling the question on media. So you are actually really someone working in the media for decades. How do you think the IOI framework can be used to contribute to the promoting digital rights in the current media landscape?

Bisera Zankova: Thank you very much for this last question. I think that so far our talk here and the valuable interventions of my colleagues, they have all proven that Rohan Hicks indicators and the whole methodology is not only unique, but it allows us to capture the whole dynamics of today’s media environment. And I would say that media and Internet environment, they’re inseparable. We cannot speak only of the media or only of the Internet. We witness a totally new type of media and a totally new type of journalism. And I think that very important for this UNESCO methodology is putting human rights at the center, which allows us to make a human centric research and a totally new understanding of the whole dynamics of. contemporary communication environment. And also another point I would like to make about this UNESCO system, it builds on indicators that were adopted in the past about the media development indicators, gender sensitive indicators for the media, journalism indicators, media and information indicators. So these previous indicators or former indicators, they enrich the whole methodology. And of course, freedom of expression is a central right in the whole system of human rights and also for UNESCO approach.

Xian Hong : Thank you. Thank you a lot, Bisera. So our last speaker, Elodie, is here to answer my question about the interplay between the measurement such as IOI and the global advocacy process such as Beijing plus 20 plus 30 in driving structural change within digital governance frameworks. And actually, we have received a couple of questions quite much related. So Elodie, for now, I’m going to invite our co-host to read out these two questions online, so for you to tackle them together in your final intervention. Thank you. So, please.

Tatevik Grigoryan: So from Mrs. McBurr, it’s a research associate at the United Nations University in Portugal, is asking, how can we use the intersectional feminist framework to analyze digital governance initiatives across regions involving women from rural communities, persons with disabilities, and LGBTQ plus groups? Are there cases or examples that can be shared? Thank you. And also is asking, second question, how can public private collaborations and feminist technology funds be strengthened to ensure women are not passive users but active shapers of the digital economy?

Xian Hong : Go ahead. Thank you.

Elodie Vialle: Yes, so I’m gonna try to answer all at once. I think the first the IUI framework must be accompanied by robust advocacy to translate this insight into policy change and this is where processes like Beijing plus 30 can help drive change. And how to and I will I will I will go back to more specifically to your to your question in a minute. What I want to I wanted to flag also here is that while we’ll discuss all these frameworks and these global advocacy processes, the technology evolves rapidly. AI is already used massively for automated surveillance, deepfakes, drones in war context, massive censorship, sharing propaganda at scale, while at the same time fact checkers and civil society organizations documenting, investigating this disinformation and attacks against women journalists are left under-resourced, particularly now they are struggling on their own in this unregulated battlefield. So I think there’s a lot of challenges we need to address here. We need to move forward faster on implementation and an implementation as raised in your question that needs to be intersectional and taking into consideration as actors, builders, underrepresented communities, indigenous women as it has been said many times during the expert consultation launched by UNESCO ahead of Beijing plus 30. So we need to move faster on this inclusive and gender responsive implementation. while facing many challenges. And I think it’s very important for us while doing this to avoid the mistakes that platforms did. And we need to do more red teaming because they didn’t do red teaming that much when launching their product, which is why today we have all these challenges to deal with. So we need to do a human risk assessment to measure any potential misuse of the principles and recommendation we advocate for. One way, and just floating ideas here, but one way to avoid misuse, it has been mentioned during our consultation, of the digital governance framework is to focus on prevention by design. We don’t necessarily have the time to dig into it, but it’s a way to build safer online spaces containing hate speech without undermining freedom of expression. And these processes, these design processes, have to be led also with communities of women journalists, underrepresented communities, LGBT communities and minorities who are today actually at the front line of this online violence. And just sharing a few very more specific concrete ideas that we’ve mentioned during the consultation, and it has been mentioned, but for a different context, we think that we need early warning mechanism connected to crisis response systems that could better support these communities at risk online. And for instance, leveraging also AI responsibly, such as using digital watermarks for detecting defects so as to mitigate the spread of harmful… content and protect women journalists from online abuse. So the I just want to highlight one more time that the level of violence women journalists face online is unbearable. And it’s we cannot think about a bright future for democracies without seriously addressing this issue. And when I mean seriously, I mean putting real effort and resources into tackling it. And I think this is how I can answer your question in the chat. So we want the group, the 25 experts of the group want stronger prevention, protection, coordination and accountability measures now. And I think maybe the Council of Europe can be a leading voice to promote this inclusive approach to digital governance, addressing tech facilitated gender based violence.

Xian Hong : Thanks a lot. Thank you for tackling three questions in one. That’s really brilliant. So I’m kindly informed by our co-host. We can actually go over the schedule a few more minutes to allow for more questions and answers from online in the room. We actually already got one question online. And also I’d like to check if someone in the room would like to take the floor. We still have some time. So please do take this opportunity. You can signal to others. And perhaps may I invite our my co-host to read the question from online. OK.

Tatevik Grigoryan: So Mr. Tsikalangis, if I mispronounced your name, is asking cultural diversity and beliefs. For example, only men can be sports news reporters, which makes it harder for women to be recognized as component as opposed to the equivalent. Is it it is a costly exercise as women journalists, among other professions, need to continually deal with varying kinds of biases. What would be the best approach to change the culture to achieve meaningful equity and gender equality in the workplace and different professions? Also protect women journalists from online bullying.

Xian Hong : Thank you. Thank you for this. I think it’s a broader question. We want to know more about UNESCO and other stakeholders. on how we can really support women journalists in this digital shifting area, in the workplace, in the media, and to have better gender equality in the media as well. Certainly to make sure they are safe from any forms of violence online and offline. I wonder if any of the speakers would like to tackle a bit more on this. Aida, please go ahead.

Aida Sahraoui Soler: I can respond by using an example. From UNESCO side, one of the things that we are currently doing is to support newsrooms to develop safety protocols that have a specific gender lens. So we help the newsrooms to have a protocol in place where, for example, when a journalist suffers online violence, they can have immediate psychological assistance, they can know who to refer to the women, they can have a focal point on gender within the newsroom, etc. They can also be connected to the organizations that they have around in the country where they are operating, etc. For example, this is one of the things we are doing to support newsrooms to develop this type of protocol so that women journalists do not find themselves alone when they suffer these types of situations.

Elodie Vialle: Yes, and as said by Aida, protocols for newsrooms are very important and there are a lot of resources that have been developed that you can get some inspirations. And specifically for women working in covering sports, I just want to refer to an initiative in Mexico called Somos Versus and tackling exactly the question that you raised.

Xian Hong : Thanks to all. Thanks again for your dig, for our wonderful technical support to allow us this additional minutes to tackle this important issue. Again, I encourage you to go to look at our update, the Internet University indicator, which does include a more specified category indicator to measure the online violence against women and also the more measurement on gender equality in the media, in the social media platform, etc. So I think today we are really having a very meaningful discussion. I thank again to all our wonderful speakers in the room and also online and also all the participants in the room and online. I hope all of us are enjoying your dig and I look forward to more interactions with all of you here and also online. Thank you.

Agreement points

UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUI) framework is valuable for assessing national internet environments

Speakers

– Camila Gonzales
– Anelia Dimova
– Bisera Zankova
– Chris Buckridge
– Xian Hong

Arguments

IUI provides comprehensive overview of internet landscape for informed decision-making

IUI assessment in Bulgaria revealed gaps in digital policies and multi-stakeholder collaboration

IUI framework puts human rights at center, allowing human-centric research of communication environment

IUI provides common knowledge base to bridge gaps in multi-stakeholder processes

UNESCO encourages European countries to use updated Internet Universality Indicators

Summary

Speakers agree that the IUI framework is a comprehensive and valuable tool for assessing national internet environments, promoting informed decision-making, and identifying areas for improvement.

Multi-stakeholder approach is crucial for effective internet governance

Speakers

– Sandra Hoferichter
– Chris Buckridge
– Xian Hong

Arguments

Regional and national multi-stakeholder dialogues are crucial for shaping global digital cooperation

IUI provides common knowledge base to bridge gaps in multi-stakeholder processes

Multi-stakeholder advisory boards for IUI assessments enhance institutional capacity

Summary

Speakers emphasize the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches in internet governance, highlighting their role in shaping global digital cooperation and enhancing institutional capacity.

Online violence against women journalists is a critical issue requiring urgent attention

Speakers

– Elodie Vialle
– Aida Sahraoui Soler
– Bisera Zankova

Arguments

Tech-facilitated gender-based violence is an urgent challenge and press freedom issue

Intersectional approach needed to address online violence against diverse groups of women journalists

Early warning mechanisms and AI tools needed to protect women journalists from online abuse

Summary

Speakers agree that online violence against women journalists is a pressing issue that requires immediate attention, intersectional approaches, and innovative solutions.

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers highlight the challenges of power imbalances and inequalities in digital transformation and multi-stakeholder processes, emphasizing the need for inclusive approaches.

Speakers

– Anelia Dimova
– Elodie Vialle

Arguments

Digital transformation creates new inequalities, requiring strategic principles for inclusivity

Power imbalances between stakeholders can hinder effective multi-stakeholder processes

Unexpected consensus

Importance of intersectional approaches in digital governance

Speakers

– Elodie Vialle
– Aida Sahraoui Soler
– Audience

Arguments

Tech-facilitated gender-based violence is an urgent challenge and press freedom issue

Intersectional approach needed to address online violence against diverse groups of women journalists

Intersectional feminist framework needed to analyze digital governance initiatives

Explanation

There was unexpected consensus on the importance of intersectional approaches in addressing digital governance issues, particularly in relation to online violence against women journalists. This consensus emerged from different perspectives, including experts, UNESCO representatives, and audience members.

Overall assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement include the value of UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators framework, the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches in internet governance, and the urgent need to address online violence against women journalists.

Consensus level

There is a high level of consensus among speakers on these key issues, which suggests a strong foundation for collaborative efforts in improving internet governance, digital inclusivity, and the safety of women journalists online. This consensus implies that future initiatives in these areas are likely to receive broad support from various stakeholders.

Different viewpoints

Effectiveness of multi-stakeholder processes

Speakers

– Sandra Hoferichter
– Elodie Vialle

Arguments

Regional dialogues ensure that the local perspective is not lost, but that it remains relevant. And then also trust. Trust is the currency of cooperation and trust is only built if repeated respectful multi-stakeholder engagement is taking place.

Multi-stakeholder processes can be hindered by power and knowledge imbalances between participants. This is particularly evident when bringing together civil society organizations, policymakers, and tech platforms, making it difficult to have productive conversations.

Summary

While Sandra Hoferichter emphasizes the importance of regional multi-stakeholder dialogues in building trust and ensuring local perspectives, Elodie Vialle highlights the challenges of power imbalances in these processes, particularly when involving tech platforms.

Unexpected differences

Overall assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the effectiveness of multi-stakeholder processes and the best approaches to translate IUI insights into policy action.

Disagreement level

The level of disagreement among the speakers is relatively low. Most speakers generally agree on the importance of the IUI framework and multi-stakeholder approaches, with differences mainly in emphasis and implementation strategies. These minor disagreements do not significantly impact the overall discussion on advancing digital inclusivity and measurement approaches.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers highlight the challenges of power imbalances and inequalities in digital transformation and multi-stakeholder processes, emphasizing the need for inclusive approaches.

Speakers

– Anelia Dimova
– Elodie Vialle

Arguments

Digital transformation creates new inequalities, requiring strategic principles for inclusivity

Power imbalances between stakeholders can hinder effective multi-stakeholder processes

Key takeaways

UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators (IUI) framework provides a comprehensive tool for assessing national internet environments and informing digital policies

Multi-stakeholder approaches are crucial for effective internet governance, but face challenges like power imbalances between stakeholders

Gender-based online violence against women journalists is an urgent issue requiring intersectional approaches and new protective measures

Digital transformation is creating new inequalities, necessitating inclusive governance frameworks and capacity building

Resolutions and action items

Encourage more European countries to conduct IUI assessments using UNESCO’s updated indicators

Strengthen prevention, protection, coordination and accountability measures to address tech-facilitated gender-based violence

Develop safety protocols with gender lens to support women journalists in newsrooms

Implement ‘prevention by design’ approaches when developing digital governance frameworks

Unresolved issues

How to effectively bridge knowledge and power gaps in multi-stakeholder processes

Ways to accelerate implementation of inclusive digital governance frameworks while technology rapidly evolves

Methods to change cultural biases limiting women’s participation in certain journalistic fields like sports reporting

Strategies to ensure women from marginalized communities are active shapers of the digital economy, not just passive users

Suggested compromises

Use IUI assessments to create common knowledge base and bridge gaps between stakeholders

Leverage AI responsibly (e.g. digital watermarks) to protect journalists while maintaining freedom of expression

Balance need for rapid policy implementation with thorough human rights impact assessments

Regional dialogues, they are indeed an early warning system because they can alert the global community to emerging challenges which otherwise possibly would not be recognized so quickly.

Speaker

Sandra Hoferichter

Reason

This insight highlights the unique value of regional dialogues in identifying emerging issues before they become global problems.

Impact

It shifted the discussion to focus more on the importance of regional and local perspectives in shaping global digital policy.

The lack of structured mechanism and a national internet governance forum limit the full use of this potential.

Speaker

Anelia Dimova

Reason

This comment pinpoints a key gap in many countries’ digital governance frameworks.

Impact

It prompted further discussion on the need for institutionalized multi-stakeholder mechanisms at the national level.

When it comes to tech accountability, it’s increasingly difficult to put everyone in the room, which is why it’s so important. I’ve done a lot of, tons of these meetings with social media platforms, representatives in San Francisco, in Brussels, in Tunisia, in many countries. And actually it doesn’t work that much, if I can say so.

Speaker

Elodie Vialle

Reason

This comment provides a critical perspective on the limitations of current multi-stakeholder approaches, especially when dealing with large tech platforms.

Impact

It challenged the prevailing optimism about multi-stakeholder processes and led to a more nuanced discussion about power imbalances in these forums.

We think that we need to invest in ethical technology and inclusive media, ensuring that emerging technologies are transparent, accountable, free of bias, with a focus on protecting women’s rights.

Speaker

Elodie Vialle

Reason

This comment offers a concrete recommendation for addressing gender issues in digital spaces.

Impact

It shifted the conversation towards more actionable solutions and policy recommendations.

Part of what Romex helps provide and measurement of this kind generally helps provide is a bridge across that knowledge gap by providing sort of common, quite in depth knowledge about specific environments, specific countries, and their challenges and what they’ve already done, and in terms of policy, policymaking, etc.

Speaker

Chris Buckridge

Reason

This insight highlights how measurement frameworks like ROAM-X can help bridge knowledge gaps between different stakeholders.

Impact

It connected earlier discussions about multi-stakeholder processes with the concrete benefits of UNESCO’s measurement approach.

Overall assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by highlighting the complexities of multi-stakeholder processes, emphasizing the importance of regional and national perspectives, and focusing attention on concrete solutions to address gender-based issues in digital spaces. They moved the conversation from theoretical frameworks to practical challenges and potential solutions, while also critically examining the effectiveness of current approaches to digital governance.

How can the multi-stakeholder approach be strengthened to support evidence-based policymaking, particularly in countries and regions with insufficient institutional capacity?

Speaker

Xian Hong

Explanation

This question addresses a key challenge in implementing multi-stakeholder models and is important for improving digital governance globally.

How can we use the intersectional feminist framework to analyze digital governance initiatives across regions involving women from rural communities, persons with disabilities, and LGBTQ+ groups?

Speaker

Mrs. McBurr

Explanation

This question highlights the need for more inclusive approaches to digital governance and research methodologies.

How can public-private collaborations and feminist technology funds be strengthened to ensure women are not passive users but active shapers of the digital economy?

Speaker

Mrs. McBurr

Explanation

This question addresses the important issue of women’s active participation in shaping digital technologies and economies.

What are the main gaps between the measurement frameworks of UNESCO and other organizations and policymaking, and how can we bridge these gaps?

Speaker

Xian Hong

Explanation

This question is crucial for improving the effectiveness of measurement frameworks in influencing policy decisions.

How can we change the culture to achieve meaningful equity and gender equality in the workplace and different professions, particularly in journalism?

Speaker

Mr. Tsikalangis

Explanation

This question addresses persistent cultural barriers to gender equality in media and other professions.

What is the best approach to protect women journalists from online bullying?

Speaker

Mr. Tsikalangis

Explanation

This question focuses on a critical issue of online safety for women journalists, which impacts press freedom and gender equality.