Thu 12. Dec 2024, 09:43
ICANN is fighting against fake news: an article by the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) has prompted the Internet administration to make several public clarifications. Once again, the Domain Name System has become the subject of political debate about internet governance.
Founded in 2011, RIAC is a non-profit think tank that sees itself as one of the instruments of public diplomacy in Russia and is considered to be close to the government. On 12 November 2024, RIAC published an article on its website entitled ‘What's Wrong with the Global Digital Compact?’, which deals with the ‘Summit of the Future’ of the United Nations, which took place in New York in September 2024 and at which the Global Digital Compact (GDC), the topic of internet governance, was at the top of the agenda. The RIAC criticised the GDC as ‘biased and unbalanced’, which overestimates the role of non-state actors in internet governance. In particular, it emphasises the importance of a Western interpretation of human rights and does not take into account the principle of state sovereignty. The article focuses on ICANN and its subsidiary Public Technical Identifiers (PTI), but contains several inaccuracies in the opinion of the network administration. As far as can be seen, this is the first time that ICANN has felt compelled to comment publicly on such a report in order to clear up misunderstandings and clarify its own role. At the same time, ICANN refutes several popular misconceptions.
For example, RIAC claims that the technical management of the Internet infrastructure is carried out by PTI, which is registered in the USA. But this is wrong. The infrastructure of the Internet consists of numerous systems that are managed by governments, private companies and other organisations. In contrast, ICANN's role is limited: it only coordinates technical functions such as the allocation of domain names and IP addresses through the PTI, but does not control or manage the entire Internet infrastructure. RIAC also claims that Washington - and therefore the US government - has the ability to influence important political and economic decisions relating to Internet governance. This is certainly misleading. ICANN operates under a global multi-stakeholder model that ensures that no single stakeholder or government can dominate. Governments participate in ICANN's work through the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). In addition, the RIAC calls for an ‘internationalisation of Internet governance’, suggesting that the current system is overly influenced by Western countries; however, Internet governance has long been shaped by collaborative global processes involving intergovernmental and international organisations and many other stakeholders. Several high-level UN agreements, such as the Tunis Agenda of the WSIS and in particular the GDC, have recognised that Internet governance must continue to be global.
ICANN believes that such misrepresentations can lead to confusion and hinder effective co-operation. The Network Administration explicitly encourages people to follow ICANN updates and participate in public discussions. Again, the spread of disinformation is dangerous for societies and democracies worldwide; it must be exposed and analysed. In any case, the Domain Name System has long since left its purely technical function.
You can find the ICANN article at:
https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/ ... 11-2024-en