It was fun to read government guy Richard Komen’s take on the U.S. government release of ICANN, the Internet governing authority.
That’s because it was completely different from that of the BBC.
Komen wrote that control of the network was being privatized. That sounds like spin meant for Americans.
The BBC wrote it was being de-Americanized.
The New York Times has it as a little of both. “Washington said Wednesday that it would give other governments and the private sector a greater oversight role.”
Which is more important? I’m going with the BBC on this one.
During the Bush years the U.S. government would often assert claims of Internet sovereignty, as when it ran all the network’s traffic through a closet and said it was going after spies. ICANN made no protest then. It might now.
Europeans hailed the move, which will let representatives of many governments — not just the U.S. — oversee ICANN’s work on security, accountability and competition.
When I covered ICANN in the mid-1990s the big issue was democracy, and whether individuals around the world might have a way to participate in network governance. This move means the model is being replaced by a balancing of interests among governments and private business.
It’s not democracy, and it’s not pure capitalism. It’s more like how the European Community itself runs.
I wonder how U.S. Republicans will react to that once they figure it out? Obama let the Internet get Eurocratized. Obama lost the Internet. You betcha. I can see Russia from my house.
Related posts: