The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during an IGF virtual call. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. Good afternoon, morning and evening Ladies and Gentlemen. Welcome to MAG virtual meeting No. 9. And as you know this meeting is being recorded and a summary report will come out and the summary report for previous MAG meetings is also available on our website if you would like to read them. That's the summary report and also the transcripts. Thank you.
With that let me hand it over to our Chair, Anriette Esterhuysen to start the meeting. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you. Welcome. (Off microphone).
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: We can't hear you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Can you not hear me?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: You are faint now.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I will mute my video. My apologies in advance, my Internet connectivity has been poor. I have arranged for Chengetai that he will jump in and take over the chairing if you cannot hear me. Chengetai just speak up if I'm too faint.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sure.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Welcome, everyone to this our 9th virtual meeting of MAG 2021. Thanks a lot to everyone for being with us to the observers to the MAG members and to our captioner. And to our colleagues from the host country for IGF 2021. So at this point I'll make some more remarks later on. But now I'd like to hand over the floor to our colleagues from (inaudible) to give us an update from
>> Can't hear, Anriette.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Hello? Carlos you said something. Sorry.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Yes. I couldn't hear Anriette and I hear you perfectly.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. Yes, she was just introducing. And she just apologize for Internet connection and hopefully it will get better with time. She's just right now gave the floor to our Polish hosts, if they have anything to update the MAG on.
>> TYPIAK PRZEMYSLAW: Good afternoon, good morning, good evening, colleagues. Warm greetings from Poland. Just a quick add on that we have just reached 12 million vaccinated Polish citizens in Poland. At least with one vaccination. The Government of Poland in the last two weeks has undergone a broad vaccination and information campaign for the Polish citizens in order to speed up the vaccinations. So we're good with that. We are speeding up. So hopefully by the by vacation, at least half of population will be vaccinated but we will see.
So we are going as scheduled also with preparations. We are in permanent contact with our good colleagues from the IGF Secretariat, and we have regular meetings. The next scheduled for next week. So we are going good. And all the preparations are scheduled. Thank you very much to all the colleagues who submitted the actual vaccination situation in their countries, home countries and regions as requested by our MAG Chair, madam Anriette. Thank you very much for their responses.
I have read all of them very carefully. And I do hope that the situation will also improve in your regions. I'm particularly looking out to Carlos here. And I read very carefully your e mail. So thank you very much for update and all the best to Brazil and, of course, to other countries and regions of the world so that hopefully we will we will just move along and stop this pandemic as soon as possible.
So all the best. Take care, good colleagues. And all the warm and very good wishes to good health and to take care. Thank you very much for giving me the floor and back to you madam Anriette and Chengetai. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much, Typiak. Is that better?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. Carlos, can you hear her now?
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Can you hear me?
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Yes, now I can hear. A bit low. But I can hear.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I've moved from fiber to mobile data. So this gives you all an indication of how we still have challenges with connectivity in even a country like South Africa which has fairly good infrastructure.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Even more important the policy network meaningful connectivity.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much for the update. I want to urge other members from the MAG but also past MAG members, alumni, observers who are on the MAG list to respond to that thread that we started to provide updates to one another on the state of travel restrictions from our regions. And we could also get an update from the Secretariat who had started a poll on checking if people are planning to participate in person or online.
But now Chengetai, can I hand back the floor to you and your team to give us an update from your side?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much. Just update you on the situation in Geneva, after a very slow start, I think the vaccine efforts are ramping up and this is what you are seeing all over Europe that the vaccine efforts are ramping up now. They have got these mass vaccination centers. And it is going at quite fast enough pace. I don't think it is going fast enough to affect our June meeting but I think for our September meeting there might be a change of policy that will allow us to have a face to face September meeting. But we will keep you informed and especially keep you informed by what the our Swiss authorities and also the UN authorities say about meetings. And that also reminds me that, I will also send out an e mail but any MAG member who wants or needs support for their Internet connection costs for the June meeting please send me an e mail with an estimation of that cost. And that's any MAG member that resident in the global south as such. Thank you.
And Luis just put in the poll that we have. And it is possible to change the poll. So if people have changed their minds due to the changing situation, you can see we don't have that many respondents at the moment. I think we have about, I don't know, 250 respondents at the moment. But we still have the majority of those respondents do plan to come to the IGF meeting. And we're also going to be pushing this poll and advertising it and we do ask you to please also ask your constituent members to respond to the poll because it helps us, I mean it is not an exact figure but it just helps us feel the temperature and it helps us in organization, it helps our Polish hosts, also in the organization of the venue. And the onsite facilities as well.
So please do fill out the poll and please do encourage your members as well to fill out this poll. And also please tell them that if there even if they don't know, if their situation changes, they can still go back to the poll and change their answers. So we can have a running average of what the feeling is within the community. And that would be very helpful for us. Thank you.
Other updates, we do have the consultant for the policy network on meaningful access. And for those of you that is Raquel Gatto and I'm sure you know her well. She was a previous MAG member. And also a previously worked for ISOC. So just to go through the list, so that you you know and you are familiar, we have Sorina who is the consultant on Dynamic Coalitions MAG support and also supporting our Parliamentary track. We have Wim who is the consultant for our base factors Forums as that is cybersecurity. And also the gender and access one. And we have Flurina who is new. Who is a consultant for the PNE. That's the policy network on environment. And then we have also said about Raquel and then for fundraising we have Tereza Horejsova who just started and we will interview some of you and we will come up with our fundraising strategy. Thank you for that. We have published the call for the sessions and also included in that sessions, call for sessions included in those call for sessions we have the booth submissions, and also for the open Forums, and also for the remote hubs just in case. So would also ask you to please encourage people to register for those sessions if they want to have a remote hub, please register now. Because we do plan to have capacity building activities throughout the year until the IGF 2021.
So the remote hubs would help. If you were registered we can organize some activities for you. So that we you know how to use the this hybrid meeting for format for the best advantage. We have Morocco and Cote D'Ivoire and Uganda. And we have nine booth submissions and one open Forum and six workshop drafts are in the works.
So as you know usually almost, I would say like 80 or 70% of all workshops that come in, come in the last 48 hours of the call. But as you know for this year the schedule is rather tight. And there will be no extensions. So it is very, very important that people please do start working on your session proposals and please do tell your various constituent groups as well that it is very important that you start working on the session proposals now so that if there are any problems you can contact us, contact Luis or anybody else at the Secretariat and we can work through. If they sought not to submit or navigate the system a couple of hours before the submission deadline, then it's total chaos and you may not be able to do it. And we will not be able to extend the deadline.
I think that's it from the Secretariat, unless I have forgotten something. One thing that I think that Desa would like you to know that we do have the STI, science and technology that's going on in New York. Our Chair chaired a session there and it is a digital cooperation session that's going on that's happening now. And if Jason is on, maybe he wants to say something about that. I don't know if he is or if he can. If not, I will just wait for three seconds. If he says nothing then we will move on.
>> JASON MUNYAN: I would be happy to. As just Chengetai just mentioned there is an STI Forum side event at 2 p.m. New York time. So 8 p.m. Geneva, 7 p.m. London. Everyone is welcome to join it. It is an hour long session. So it is short and it will be an update on the roadmap implementation. It will be on UN WebTV and that's basically all I have to say on that.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Jason. I think that's all. And back to you Anriette. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much, Chengetai. And just to add to Jason's and Chengetai's information, tomorrow is a panel that I will participate and I hope to say something about the IGF. Let me give me the floor before we move on to Adam who put his hand up in the queue. Adam, over to you.
>> ADAM PEAKE: Thank you. I hope everyone can hear me. Yes, and my question and I might have missed it in the call, is there information about day zero events and how we are taking calls for day zero? I haven't seen it but that means I might have missed it. But if we could have a quick update on the day zero events?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: The day zero events are one of the other sessions. Luis, can you just show, if it is possible? Sorry to just put this on you without warning.
>> LUIS BOBO: Hello. Thank you. As far as I know the day zero events are now integrated in one of other specific types of sessions. These are networking sessions or lunches. As far as I know there is no day zero event as such. So it has to be concretized in some kind of session.
I can show you the current thing. So here you will see there are town halls and lunches and awards, lightning talks, networking sessions. What traditionally were entering in to day zero events, so these sessions except for the town halls, for example, don't have directly the regular full services of the IGF. But nothing prevents, of course, to be added in a case by case basis. But they have a specific urgence. If you apply for lunches and awards which was a traditional or one of the, yeah, traditional for presentation of research, this would go to this Forum.
Okay? These sessions also by the way except this year, selection of language. And the duration is linked to the specific type of session that you are applying. So you correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the approach to have different sessions. Before what was considered as day zero Forums and no intersessions or workshops, this year has been concretized in different formats for which you can apply independently.
>> ADAM PEAKE: I'm sorry to interrupt, Chengetai. It is Adam again. So a question I would have is over the years we've seen organizations like the academic group, giga net holding sessions for quite a lot of the day zero, you know, my organization, many organizations have held day zero events that have been, you know, sort of typical 90 minutes and so on. I think the specific question I have is what would the giga net group as an example do? And then what do the rest of us do here? Or do we do nothing? Has day zero changed completely?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, it hasn't changed. I think we should make it clearer. Thanks Adam for pointing that out. Let's make it clearer.
>> If I may just add on this, please.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Who is speaking?
>> Typiak is. May I ask for the floor?
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Yes.
>> Just to add, actually we have opened the call for day zero sessions on 15th of March and the call will close on 31st of May but it is addressed to local Polish stakeholders. It is in Polish language only. It has been announced on our IGF website. We can address the code to local stakeholders in order to increase the engagement on Internet governance affairs. We will discuss this in order to clarify this because as I said we have announced the call for our stakeholders because we understand that in order to increase their engagement in the day zero, we wanted to, you know, get to as many stakeholders as possible. But, of course, we will discuss that.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, I think we need a discussion but let's take it offline.
>> Yes. Of course. Just a quick update on that.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks everyone. And thanks Adam for pointing that. I think it is really just a technical oversight because in the document on type of sessions that the Secretariat prepared and showed us at the last MAG call pre events are listed there as one of the type of sessions and the decision was and as to launch the call for all sessions at the same time. It is there but it is probably just a little bit hidden. But it definitely is in the list of session types that the Secretariat prepared. And Chengetai as you said let's make this an urgent action point. So not on that list, Luis but it is definitely in the Google doc that I had looked at that Anja had prepared. It might not have made its way to the website but the text is there. We need to leave this with Chengetai and we need to rectify that quite urgently actually. So as we don't tend to communicate to anyone that we are not going to have a day zero.
Okay. Thanks very much. If there are no other questions on that, and, you know, no other comments on the call and in fact, thanks for all the inputs that we received on the call and corrections on the call. The Secretariat will get to me the deadline on getting the call out on the agreed date and it was helpful to get some feedback on little things there had to be corrected. And then this is what we just which is also something that be addressed.
So to start us on our next agenda item, item 4, debrief and taking stock of what we have achieved so far in 2021, I virtually prepared a short document. So if you can just enable screen sharing for me, please, Luis.
>> LUIS BOBO: Immediately.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I wanted to us to just take a few minutes to reflect on what we've done. I think this has been a challenging year and challenging for the new MAG to start the work of this year without meeting one another, without meeting the Secretariat and the host country. But I have looked at what we have achieved and in fact, we've achieved quite a lot. Can you all see my screen?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.
>> I think so, yes.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I'm going to run through this. Weave this is our ninth virtual meeting and I did a rough count. And all the different MAG working groups together have had around 20 meetings. So there has been a lot of discussion going on. We issued the call to take stock in January. And that was synthesized. And also the call for thematic inputs, which was closed at the end of January.
This has also been documented and there is input documents that we will continue to work with. We had the first public event on 9 February. Of course, all MAG meetings are open to observers but on 9 February we had an open consultation where we analyzed the stocktaking input and looked at how to work with that in the planning of this year. We then had the first open consultations and MAG meeting from 22 to 24 February. Very well attended by many observers and partners from the UN and from the rest of the multi stakeholder IGF community. And based on those discussions and open consultations a decision was made to approach IGF 2020 as a hybrid IGF.
And I think this is something we need to think about very deeply because I think we need to integrate the idea and the development understanding of what we mean by a hybrid character to all sessions to maximize inclusivity and this includes the preparatory phase and the annual Forum. We also made a decision not to have ideally no more than five parallel tracks. On the issue of hybrid meeting we keep finding we need to revisit what it means and this is where the Working Group has been helpful in looking at the outputs of the MAG and the Secretariat and pointing out where we are overlooking integrating that understanding. I think similarly as Chengetai just said when we start working with hubs we will also need to factor in what it means for those hubs to operate in this hybrid environment.
The MAG also made a decision and I'm glad Luis just showed it to you on having social proposals. Open for sessions in languages other than English and this was a recommendation from the MAG Working Group on language, the 2020 Working Group. So, for example, networking sessions and day zero events could be in languages other than English. So this is quite a significant achievement and a way of making the IGF more inclusive.
There was the launch of the new Intersessional work activity, the policy network on environment and digitalization that happened last week and the MAG also reviewed and it took quite a long time and several discussions but you made a decision on two best practice Forums, cybersecurity and gender and on a second policy network that includes local content. And the BPF proposal on the governance of environmental data was also approved. And it's scope of work is now being considered under the umbrella of the policy network of environment. That MAG Working Groups have been formed and most of them are working and meeting. The Working Group on hybrid meetings, the Working Group on strategy which continued from 2020, communications and outreach Working Group and the Working Group on workshop process. And as we have already seen with in particular the hybrid meetings Working Group and the strategy Working Group and the workshop process Working Group, the outputs of these MAG Working Groups is helping and shaping how the rest of the work continues.
And I think that will also happen with the communications and outreach Working Group in due course.
There was also and we will hear more about it later today, a study on Dynamic Coalitions which involves MAG participation but it is being led by the Secretariat and the volunteers and Markus Kummer. MAG made a decision on adopting this approach. Based on that and the input from the community identified the main focus areas and cross cutting areas. So this took quite awhile but what we have now is a document which actually operates as a premeeting guide to the focus of IGF 2021 and it has created the text that has gone out for the call for session proposals which was released last week and open until 26 of May. Luis, I will stop the share now. But I wanted to just give everyone an opportunity to think a little bit on that because I know it has been quite an overwhelming year. And it might have felt that progress has been difficult for us. Primarily I think due to not being able to meet face to face.
But, you know, if you look at all of these achievements and all of these outputs that we have generated, this MAG which is a new MAG, with many new members. It is a smaller MAG. MAG 2020 had at least 50 members. MAG 2021 is made up of only 40 individuals. So I really I think I want to just close this section on recognizing the work and recognizing the effort. And I urge all of you to also recognize the fact that you have achieved a lot and there is a lot of work ahead. But a lot has been achieved already.
So I can if there are no comments or questions on this, we can move on to the rest of the agenda. I will share that document with everyone in the list and the working groups will have a chance to report later. But Courtney I see you have asked for the floor. Please go ahead.
>> Courtney: Thank you very much. This is Courtney Radsch. I wanted to go back to the earlier point that Adam had raised specifically about giga net and I think there was a concern and I'm not sure if this was addressed in the previous discussion about some of the traditional day zero events that happen and that the format that we've identified for the IGF don't necessarily work for the day zero. And so, you know, especially for the giga net, like I think there is a concern none of the session types are a perfect fit. Could you provide some guidance in terms of what to tell people in that sense and whether there is more flexible for day zero events since those are more community driven?
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Courtney, I think what we will do is simply make a very explicit content to website, to the call for proposals that hones in on day zero events. So
>> Courtney: Okay. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Chengetai do you want to add?
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: No. Exactly we will make it very explicit. We are not going to get a checkbox selection for like the giga net. Giga net is one organization and yes, they may require the whole day. But if there are those kind of special requests we'll ask them to write in to their Secretariat. Most of the sessions will be those, you know, maximum two hour sessions. But we would we will and we are willing to accommodate larger sessions. But would treat that as a special request, yeah.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks.
>> Courtney: Thank you so much.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: The take away we need to accommodate the fact that there is this criteria to the hybrid character to the events and that by implication that also means that events that are online would also be able to apply.
But let's leave it to the Secretariat to add this content and then you can all review it and comment.
The intention certainly has been from the outset, for the annual Forum this year to have a day zero, very much in the traditional way that we have a day of pre events, with some events organized by the host country but actually primarily that we have these events for the IGF community and know there is an intention to continue with that.
And also keep in mind that usually the MAG does not evaluate applications for day zero, that is done by the Secretariat who consults the MAG as needed.
Okay. So to move on, let's look at as I said in my recap of what we've achieved this year, we put out the call for session proposals. Some of those sessions are workshops. Some of them are other types of sessions. But by the closing date of 26 May the MAG needs to be ready to start evaluating the workshop process. The workshop proposals. And it's in that regard that the workshop evaluation Working Group has been preparing the criteria and the evaluation feedback Forum working with Luis. I will give the floor to Roberto so give us an update on how the work is going.
>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: Thank you very much. I'm Roberto Zambrana, second year MAG member. It's a nice work that has been during the last couple of years regarding this stage of the evaluation process.
Many of you have received an invitation to be part of the workshop evaluation process. I'm going to send once again another invitation and I'm going to share what we've done so far regarding this stage, particularly about the Forum that is going to be used to provide the evaluation. As you know each of the MAG members will do this task individually. And we are adjusting what the Forum was during the last year, considering the new criterias that are being considered in the evaluation according to the call for proposals that was sent some years some days ago. And yesterday, we have a meeting in this work group of workshop evaluation and we started to provide some feedback about an initial approach of this criteria and the adjustments that need to be made to the Forum. I am preparing a document that I'm going to share with all of you for your comments in order to have all this inputs that we received yesterday and also by mail to the mailing list for coming from the past members that for sure are very important to take in to account and to have a very, very well organized first share about the different criterias that we need to evaluate and then the adjustments that Luis is going to give you a tool. Understandable and very clear but in particular very effective in order to have this evaluation at this stage.
And that's pretty much the summary Anriette, of what we've done so far. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much, Roberto and thanks for your hard work on getting this group working and for everyone who has contributed. And I think Luis, thanks also for being so proactive. I do want to urge other MAG members to participate in this process. We have many more MAG members signed up to this Working Group mailing list than we have attending meetings or responding to documents. And Roberto needs your support and participation. And also the more you participate in shaping the process of evaluating workshop proposals the easier it will be for you to then use those tools.
And so please participate in the Working Group. Or when Roberto sends the documents please look at them and send your comments.
Next we have, if there are no questions for Roberto or any additions, I don't see any anyone in the speaking queue or any hands. Let's move on to Intersessional work. We have taken we took a bit longer this year to launch Intersessional work. Our goal was to launch Intersessional work by the end of January. Unfortunately we didn't do that but I think on the positive side we've approached Intersessional work very creatively this year and we have brought in elements of the IGF plus and the evolution of IGF in response to the whole digital cooperation process in to this year's Intersessional work.
So thanks very much to those of you who were proactive and responded to the e mail. So can we start with the best practice Forum on cybersecurity and on gender? And get short updates from you? So Wim I'm not sure if that's you or Bonana who is taking the floor. I hand over to you.
>> WIM DEGEZELLE: I'm just checking, Bonana texted me she was driving home and not able to talk.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: She is not in the meeting.
>> WIM DEGEZELLE: In that case I apologize for her. She was hoping to make it on time for the update. Luis, can I share my screen? Because I have a short
>> LUIS BOBO: Yes, you can now.
>> WIM DEGEZELLE: Okay. Just checking that so it is only a brief update on the best practice Forum on cybersecurity. It has been discussed before, but I think it's very good to repeat again, that the IGF this year is working on norms. Continuing working on norms. But focusing on norms to foster trust and security on how they can help to foster trust and security.
A little bit similar to last year, the BPF has identified three different workstreams for 2021. Two that focus on the subject matter. And third one that will focus on outreach. Two workstreams that focus on producing content and third one focused on getting other people involved. So the three workstreams or one focuses on norms mapping. That's workstream 1. It will take a deeper look at the drivers of cybersecurity norms. The whole is to better understand what ideas, concerns, incidents and other events have triggered norms. And how existing norms, the other way around, relate in particular to actual problems. It is trying to get insight.
And the second workstream will identify significant historical cybersecurity events and discuss if a norm was or would have been successful to mitigate adverse effects.
This workstream 2 is something we at the BPF really looking forward to because one of the ideas is to try to involve victims organizations and stakeholders that have been affected by cybersecurity incidents, and have them help reflecting on the discussion whether evaluating if a norm has been helpful. Or also come up with some comments if a norm would have been in place, if it would have helped them in dealing with the particular incident.
Like I said workstream 2 has a supporting role for the BPF and for the two other workstreams that will focus on identifying and engaging new stakeholders in the BPF as well as enhancing synergies with IGF and IGF work program. The next steps, the BPF had its kickoff meeting last Thursday, April 29 and it has scheduled four update meetings throughout the year. The dates are available on the Web page. And it is possible to subscribe. So I would recommend to already subscribe. Then you receive a calendar invite and the time is blocked in your agendas.
The idea is that at those moments the BPF and two different the two work streams will come and provide an update on what has been done and where they stand. In between those calls work will be done in smaller teams, smaller groups link you had to workstream 1, workstream 2. And those calls depending on the need and depending on the interest will be organized separately and will be announced on the mailing list. So it is really important to subscribe to the mailing list. So at this moment, the immediate next step is the BPF is forming those key groups to work with the workstream leads. And is inviting people and stakeholders willing to help with research discussing and drafting the work on workstream 1 and workstream 2.
Like I said the call was the 29th and invitation e mail will go to the mailing list so that people can show interest in working and collaborating on one of the two workstreams. And, of course, will also be shared on the MAG list.
I think more information is available on the BPF Web page. And I just before I go to Q and A on the BPF cybersecurity, I don't know if Markus is on the call. I just wanted to mention that Markus is one of the two persons together with Shetel leading workstream 3 on outreach. And like I said it's really an important focus point this year is to get more people involved, more stakeholders from outside the traditional IGF circle involved in the BPF. But also looking to cooperation with other parts of the program and other initiatives.
So I don't know if Markus wanted to add some words. If not, happy to reply some questions and answers.
>> MARKUS KUMMER: Nothing to add from my end.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much then for that report. Do you want to move on to the gender report? Is there another MAG member who will take us through that? Or will you do that?
>> AMRITA CHOUDHURY: I'm here.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you very much.
>> AMRITA CHOUDHURY: I'll take care of the first part and then Wim would be adding in. So this year the best practice Forum on gender and digital rights would be exploring the concept of gendered disinformation. Because the phenomena of this information, you know, is advancing and it needs more nuanced understanding because of the level of complexity. And in the current structure, a timely exploration of the concept of gender disinformation in relation with online gender based violence and hate speech, as well as the effects on women and gender diverse groups existence online and the freedom of expression needs more understanding. So the group actually envisages the following deliverables. First is to understand how gender based disinformation has been deployed as a strategy against women and gender diversity groups. Second, to understand how the negative effects on digital rights spill over to other sets of rights such as political participation, which allows gender disinformation to be used as a part of a large political project of moral policing, censorship of citizens' rights and actions to halt the spread of gender disinformation and build a less toxic environment for female and gender diverse groups online. And also showcase positive initiatives that set the beginning of what can be done on a long term multi stakeholder dialogue on gender disinformation. We had a call today. And I think Wim would like to explain more about what we decided and what are the take aways. But like, you know, cybersecurity, BPF, we actually want more engagement in this particular BPF on gender and digital rights. I would respect in your own respective countries and locations if you know of people who are working on gendered not only on gender, but also on disinformation. If you can connect them to the Forum, it would be a great help because we need people who are specialists in disinformation. And, of course, it would be helpful if they also work on gender issues.
Wim, over to you for more details on the work plan.
>> WIM DEGEZELLE: Thank you very much. Like Amrita said we had our first planning meeting only three hours before the MAG call. So this is a pretty fresh. No, the idea is the BPF starts working as of today with a prekickoff phase. What will happen, there will be an e mail to the mailing list asking for input on the working definition of gender disinformation, the BPF is working with or plans to work with.
Together with input and feedback on that, like Amrita said we will ask to the people on the mailing list if they are aware of valuable resources other stakeholder specialists that should be involved in this year's work.
Another question that will be asked is exploring community needs, that is directly related to the call for inputs later on asking for if we ask questions to the community, to the broader community what exactly would you like us to collect. What would be interesting to collect in this BPF. So this prekickoff phase is all in preparation of the official kickoff call and framing discussion which the BPF is planning to hold in the 3 either the week of the 17th or the week of 24th of May. We're still looking for an exact date. So at that meeting we will collect all the information we had so far. And then really start working.
After that and later and before the July and the call of July and August months kick in, the BPF plans to have at least one or two calls with experts where we invite one or two experts to have a panel discussion as inputs for the BPF on the topic. One of the ideas but we're still thinking on that, one the ideas is to involve people experts that are focused on disinformation.
And so not necessarily people that are involved in general, but people that just focus on our experts on disinformation and combine them and ask them to provide input so that later on we can combine their views with people that are really focused on gender disinformation. So that's all to come for those calls before July and August.
What we also would do, I refer to it before, is to plan is to launch a call for inputs to the community. What exactly that call of inputs will be about is something that we still have to refine based on feedback and input that we get from the community in the coming weeks.
Then the coordinating team was very positive about an experience they had last year, was organizing some interviews with specialists. Something they said last year that brought in very useful insights in the for the BPF report. That's something that is also put on the agenda for this year. That with collecting additional information and engagement amongst other reaching out to other enterprises, reaching out to youth initiatives. The ideas we will not count on a call for input or count on interviews to get input for this year's BPF. We try to have different sources of information and different way of engagement. So that's something that is planned for June, probably May, June, September.
And then after the July, August months, the BPF can focus on processing and discussing all the information that has been collected and then compile some draft findings as typically provide them to the community for further input so that it can be discussed at the IGF at the end of the year.
That's the overview for gender and digital divides. Same request here, please if you are interested, subscribe to the mailing list as it are as really the place where the most announcements will be made and the easiest way to follow what going on.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks a lot for that one. I don't see any speakers in the queue or hands that are up. Just based on the chat, I would suggest that the consultants and the MAG members involved in coordinating BPFs get together, just to talk about how to distribute information about BPF activities and meetings. I think at times people are reluctant to overwhelm the mailing list. I know the mailing lists are the primary mechanism but I think it would be good to look at a standardized place in the website, on website as well. But I believe that to you. I get the sense from MAG members responses in the chat that there is still some unevenness in getting updates and access to meetings, meeting dates and activities. Next can we get an update on the policy networks? I'm not sure Anja are you doing the report on the policy network on environment or will that be Joyce or Theresa. I didn't see the end of that discussion. Joyce, are you here?
>> ANJA GENGO: I think it will be Tereza.
>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Hi. I wasn't sure if there should be some general intro before I jump in. A quick update on the first meeting of the policy network on environment and digitalization, as you know Joyce and I agreed to serve as kind of cofacilitators that we serve as a bridge between the network discussions and the MAG. And we will make sure any inputs that you have in general or in specific are voiced at the meetings. We had our very first meeting a few days ago only. One participant that whose name already was mentioned here, was Flurina who was actually contracted by the IGF Secretariat to take care of this network. So we got to know her. We got to know the other members of the network. As it was also expressed in some of the basic documents, the goals are to formulate some concrete and actionable policy recommendations and to look in to the intersection between environment and digitalization.
We did not have that much time in that meeting to really go in depth but some of the key goals or outcomes will be a preparation of an output document and exploring cooperation with other initiatives, stakeholder engagement, in fact, the members of the network were also chosen based on the fact how extensive their networks are. And another goal involves informing communities and efforts to trigger actions at a local level.
As I said a meeting was quite short. But it doesn't mean that the work has stopped at that point. There are certain collaborative online tools that are being used in these days to kind of collect more inputs from the members of the network.
And another meeting should take place in about two weeks' time. I will probably stop here and Anja, if you have anything to add please go or others.
>> ANJA GENGO: Yeah. Nothing from my side. Thank you so much, Tereza.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that report. I participated in that meeting and I thought it was a really excellent meeting. Just to congratulate the Secretariat and MAG members for putting it together. I encourage MAG members to follow the process. I know there are other MAG members who are very committed to this issue area. So I think just reach out to Joyce and Tereza about how to get involved. Anja, can you give us an update on the status of the second policy network, the one on meaningful access and meaningful universal access?
>> ANJA GENGO: Yes. Thank you. I note this as well Carlos and Roberto as MAG members are also on the call. Maybe I can start and Carlos and Roberto and Karim can also come in. There has been quite a number of calls and exchanges with the colleagues that I just mentioned. Of course, including also the MAG Chair and Jakmo to understand the way of how to proposed BPFs on local content and community networks would integrate in to the PNMA and that's been successfully agreed and reflected in the proposal that was shared with all of you and available on the IGF website. Colleagues also suggested quite an interesting diverse composition for the multi stakeholder Working Group. Some of the members from that list are already been invited by the Secretariat. And there are a couple of members that are being discussed also with the Secretariat. That relate to the stronger high level UN engagement to have also that type of representation on the group. And I'm hoping that all invitations will be sent in this week, end of this week for sure, the latest, so that towards the next week we have the composed Working Group and then in and around two weeks' time from now we can expect the very first planning call of that multi stakeholder Working Group. In the meantime Chengetai did mention at the very beginning the consultant is contracted and we are fortunate to have Raquel on board that. We also we will be working on producing the timeline and the annual work plan for this stream which will also be shared with you. And just a final update relates to the mailing list, there is a dedicated mailing list available in the IGF website for the PNMA but it was also agreed that the BPF on local content mailing list will continue to be operational because it is a great source of excellent expertise. And we will be communicating also through the BPF local content mailing list everything basically related to the PNMA but the part that will relate the local content and reflected the local policy output. That's all I can say my from my side but please, Roberto, Carlos, Karim if I forgot to add something.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks. Carlos and Karim and Roberto do you want to add anything?
>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: Nothing on my side. It was a very good summary made by Anja.
>> CARLOS ALBERTO AFONSO: Yes, I agree. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: And Karim?
>> ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: He has problems with his connection. But I think he is well again, too.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you also to everyone who contributed to the proposal. The proposal went through a few different iterations and I was very happy so that so many MAG members contributed to it. And thanks a lot for the update. And next I don't see questions or hands. I'm just doing a final check. I don't see any hands.
It is not too late to raise your hand. But for now let's move on to the next agenda item which is reporting back on the dynamic rotation coordination process and also on the survey and the learning study that is being conducted at the moment. So Markus and Sorina can I hand over to you please?
>> SORINA TELEANU: Thank you. I will start with a quick overview and then Markus you can add on top of that. We have said in previous calls that the Dynamic Coalition coordination group is working this year on a paper, documenting Dynamic Coalitions their work, their place within the broader IGF process and looking to strengthen the work of Dynamic Coalitions themselves but their integration in to the broader IGF process and the contribution to some sort of a strengthen IGF as we are all discussing about that.
So this paper is a work in progress. Our final goal is to have the final, final paper published by the end of October. But before that there will be a bit of time for everyone to comment on our first draft during the year. As a first step towards building this paper, we have started working on basic introduction in to Dynamic Coalition, how they work and how they have been working and what they do to contribute to the IGF process. And this first draft is ready and will be discussed with the Dynamic Coalition at the next calls. The second most important thing is the survey that Anja just mentioned. We had about six weeks for Dynamic Coalitions to respond to an online survey. It was quite a long survey with some 40 questions. So that explains why they had quite a few weeks to respond to it. Out of 22 active Dynamic Coalitions 14 have responded. The deadline was last Sunday. We are not processing the responses, trying to write some sort of an output of all of that. And this will also be discussed at the upcoming dynamic coalition coordination meetings. And this will feed in to the paper. Regarding MAG's contribution to this whole process, in addition to what Anja has said that that we will be inviting you to review the draft paper later on, we envision for June another online survey which will be inviting MAG members but also the broader IGF community to provide some input in to how they see the Dynamic Coalitions. Both how they work now and how they see Dynamic Coalitions to further contributors to strengthen IGF. To expect more news from us on that in June and we will keep updating you on how the actual drafting of the paper is advancing. I will turn it over to Markus.
>> MARKUS KUMMER: Markus here. That was an excellent summary of the work done so far. And in many ways that's the easy bit. Here we are documenting current and past practice. And maybe we are a little bit ambitious with the questionnaire. It was a tough homework. But we see that 40 actually responded. I think it is a good sign. The difficult stage will be looking forward and to make suggestions for improvement and better integration in to the overall work of the IGF.
But that's ahead of us and there we also will rely heavily on the input from the MAG and the broader community. I don't know maybe Jutta and Adam have something to add. That's all from me. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Jutta and Adam do you want to add anything here?
>> JUTTA CROLL: I wanted to thank all the dynamic coalitions who took the time to fill in the survey and questionnaire. It is a very helpful exercise and with regard to the fact that the number of Dynamic Coalitions has really grown over the years. It is such a large group and it is very helpful to better understand what they are doing for the work of the IGF in general. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Adam?
>> ADAM PEAKE: Thank you. It is Adam. Nothing really to add except to thanks Sorina for all her work and pulling it all together. One thing to note, the work of Dynamic Coalitions that sort of were a little bit concerned about why they were being asked all these questions and was it in some way trying to exclude people and the answer is definitely not. It's really as Markus was saying to include the Dynamic Coalitions in the work of the IGF throughout the year as a goal. Which I think is the goal for the sort of IGF plus model of having a process that works throughout the whole year long period rather than just aiming towards the meeting itself. The annual event. So I think that's an important message and something we've spoken about in previous MAG calls that we want to see sort of an inclusive ongoing process through the year and the Dynamic Coalitions and the best practice Forums and Wim touched on this, that it should be activities through the year and not aimed at the annual event. That's all. Thanks again.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: We still have to hear from the NRIs. A question for the MAG members and Secretariat who have reported so far on BPF, and policy networks and the Dynamic Coalitions. One of the recommendations from the MAG Working Group strategy was that that the MAG invites the Intersessional activities to consider responding to or integrating the MAG issue focus areas for IGF 2021.
To invite them to consider whether these are relevant, whether they will be covered in their work, whether they want to organize some kind of online discussion on that. Have you given any thought about how this can be done in a way that doesn't place further burdens on these Intersessional activities? But that achieves the goal of this year, year round closer integration that you just mentioned Adam? Is this I'm not expecting definitive answers on this today but it would good to get some reactions from all of you and then we can take this further because we do need to issue this call, this invitation for participation in the next week or so.
>> To be frank we haven't discussed that with the Dynamic Coalitions. But we are going to have a call next week and maybe that will be a good opportunity to raise this issue and to address this very relevant question.
>> ADAM PEAKE: To follow on from that. It is just to raise the expectation or get the message across, we will have more Intersessional working throughout the IGF, the components of the IGF. It is not just the Dynamic Coalitions but everything. So making them aware that this is something to aim for. Something they should be considering is important. And, of course, it is sort in their name, dynamic, that they would be doing something. Having said that, some of the coalitions are sort of collectives that bring together work that they do independently and they use the IGF as a way to come together, as a way for sharing their own experiences and best practices.
So it won't always fit but for some of it it is really an awareness that this is something that we would like of them because this is something that the IGF is moving towards, this whole idea of working intersessionally. As Markus says this is something now to reinforce with them at the next meeting, I think.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks Markus and Adam. I think clearly in the best step for the Dynamic Coalitions would be to have a conversation with them about this at your next call so we can follow up on that. For Wim and Winana and Amrita let's discuss this also in terms of the BPFs and how we can roll that in.
But now let's move on to report from Anja, an update on national regional and youth IGF initiatives.
>> ANJA GENGO: Thank you very much. So for the NRIs just to have you also briefed on which are the NRIs that probably will be recognized in the coming weeks, so now having extensive discussions almost finalized with the subregional IGF of Southeast Asia, very interesting part of the world which is which could be better represented at the IGF. So we're hoping that this will help us. In addition to that we're speaking to a number of colleagues from Viet Nam as well as from Ethiopia. So those could be recognized in the coming weeks. The process for gathering inputs from all the NRIs is underway. Just yesterday it was decided to extend the deadline and align it with the deadline for all calls for sessions of the IGF 2021. So 26th of May. The Secretariat will take a few days to put together a metrics to understand where are the similarities. And on the basis of that metrics we'll submit analysis and a proposal to the NRIs for the topics that could be the priority topics as well as the collaborative sessions and propose the organizing teams for the collaborative sessions. And the agenda possible draft agenda for the NRIs coordination session.
So everything should be ready by the second open consultation of MAG meeting aiming for the MAG timeline and program overall will be discussed.
And that's pretty much it for the NRIs. I mean internally what the Secretariat is doing now is developing some informational materials for on the NRIs to brief specific stakeholders. So that would be materials to put at disposal to all the NRIs when they approach their governments or their members of Parliaments to showcase what the NRIs are about on a collective level, what's the relationship with the IGF Secretariat, of course, with the MAG as well. And on that basis, hopefully help to kind of others that are not familiar with the IGF concept understand the value of the IGF concept that's being implemented at the local levels.
Yes. That's pretty much what the NRIs are doing now. And to follow up on Adam's question, in the context of the NRIs, the Secretariat is looking how to work, cooperate better with the NRIs in the preparatory phase of the IGF 2021 building on what we've discussed several meetings ago. And as you know the NRIs when we approach them they did express their willingness to cooperate but they did also ask for more concrete information on how that cooperation would feed in to the IGF 2021 processes, including, of course, the 16 IGFs program. So we speak intensively with the MAG Chair on this. And the Secretariat will put together some draft on this for then the MAG's consideration if that would be the vision for this year for the preparatory phase to include that that formal cooperation with the NRIs before we approach the NRIs with a final package of information on that particular cooperation. That's I think that's pretty much what I wanted to brief you on. Thank you very much, Anriette.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I don't see any comments or questions. There are no hands. There is no one in the speaking queue. I do urge MAG members to keep an eye on the Intersessional workstreams. There is a goal and we are making progress. But MAG participation in helping us integrate the Intersessional work in to the IGF as a whole is very important. So keep that in mind. Try and follow what's happening and look at the outputs and participate.
And next we have the updates, reports from the MAG Working Groups. If I can start by handing over the floor to the MAG Working Group on hybrid meetings. And thanks very much to this Working Group for all your support and participation in designing the call. And for careful checking that the text of the proposal form and the call accommodates the commitment to hybrid meetings. Adam or Tereza over to you for your report.
>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: Thank you. I'm speaking for both Adam and myself. So I will be quick. So the Working Group concentrated mainly at this stage on providing inputs for the call of proposals because that is what we consider as kind of the most time sensitive issue. What we wanted to ensure is to make sure that the hybrid element of the meeting is very clearly communicated to anybody who would be submitting a proposal. So that if anybody is working on a proposal, that I have the hybrid and interactive format of the session there about to propose in mind.
With this regard, we have provided inputs to the call for sessions that was launched to make sure this was this was very clear.
I think now we are moving to another stage and that's where our cooperation with the Working Group on the workshop process is totally essential is that we fee it is important, us the MAG members who will be evaluating the session proposals have clear criteria specified or defined in how we should assess whether the sessions correspond to the format of the meeting, now that we have in mind. So that's kind of the most time sensitive issues. Other than that we are trying to be in touch with other organizations who have been implementing virtual or planning hybrid meetings to make sure we learn from their experience and them and can use some of the best practices.
I'll probably stop here. We we also I suggest that if this is appealing to you, this topic, about how to make the IGF more interesting, on the format level, for interactive sessions, accommodating more online and in situ participants that you do join our Working Group mailing list and meetings. We are a nice job and we try to make everyone's opinions in to account. Adam, if you have anything to add, jump in.
>> ADAM PEAKE: Yeah. Just quickly following up on the idea of the next steps, so we're thinking about the types of organizations we should be contacting to learn from their experiences and what they are planning for this year. They are organizations that have held or will hold similarly large global events and also organizations that are doing things innovatively, whether regional or national levels. The rights com series which is an obvious one. Joyce, I saw an e mail from you or the Asia Pacific Regional IGF asking for a call for ideas and thoughts about hubs. And I think hubs are we've already heard there have been a couple of applications. Innovative approach of how we do hubs and IGF and organizations have helped, have used hubs before but what's the innovation around that. So anybody who has thoughts on this type of larger global or innovative approaches, who should we be approaching to get good ideas to where we can learn would be very helpful. Yeah, colleagues, please help us out on some good ideas.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you for that. And this will be included in the evaluation criteria. I do think it is very important for us all to be very clear but whether we understand what is meant by hybrid, once you are evaluating those workshop proposals, I think it's, you know, I think we need to have a vision for what we understand as hybrid. And I wonder if that's something that we need to discuss more. Do you feel that Adam and Tereza, do you feel there is solid enough grasp amongst all your MAG members and Secretariat and the host on what we want or mean by hybrid or it is something that we need to pay more attention to?
>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: I think it is a question to MAG members who have not yet participated in our meetings. How we understand hybrid we are moving from what we call remote participation in the past, meaning that it was a face to face meeting where online participants were able to participate in some kind of a manner but rather observe. What we are looking for in the hybrid meetings is that no matter if you are participating in person or virtually, you should have a pretty similar experience. And that is something that needs to be taken in to account at a very moment of starting to design that meeting. That would be quickly kind of defined answer to what a hybrid meeting is. But let us hear from others. Are you clear about that? Do you have any doubts? Do you think this would be possible to evaluate well when the session proposals start coming in?
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that. Anyone else with a reaction to that? I see Adam asks if the explanation document has been posted to website. I think it has. But can the Secretariat update us, please? Has the document developed bit Working Group, is that available on website?
>> ANJA GENGO: I believe it is, but let me please come back to just to confirm that that's the version of the document.
>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA: It was shared with the whole MAG, yes.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Perhaps we can also do what the IGF does so well which is to hyperlink the to add hybrid to the list of terms that one can click on to get a definition. And in that way people who read the site can also start internalizing what we mean by it. Thanks very much to the Working Group for your efforts. Next let's hear from the Working Group on (inaudible).
>> Courtney: I had my hand raised. Yes, just to provide input, I guess what I'm not entirely clear on whether we are looking at this as a hybrid event at large or whether on a minute level everything must be hybrid. And I suppose that my suggestion would be that we look at this from a macro level, so if there is a session that's fully virtual or in person that we are flexible on that because this is going to be a unique scenario and I think our goal should be to make sure that people can participate in a way that makes most sense for them and people who can participate in person or virtually can do that meaningfully but not be super prescriptive on what that means for a session. I have concerns that we are mandating. And I think we should take a step back and think about the mix of proposals that we're getting and what that looks like for a hybrid event versus each individual session as a fully hybrid. Given that we are trying to encourage more people to participate and they might not be familiar or comfortable with the best way to do a hybrid session. I think we should provide some guidance and tips for how to make a successful session, what that looks like from, you know, a facilitator role because I know there is a detailed question on the form about that. And I again I think we want to empower people and part of that might be to give them suggestions not only getting people who are very familiar with doing events. So that would be my input to this.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks. That's the kind of question I was hoping would come up. This is actually more complex than just having a definition. But Tereza and Adam is that something that you feel responsible to respond to now? Any guidance that you can provide now or do you want to take time and discuss this further in your next call?
>> First of all, thank you for the question and I agree this would deserve proper discussion. We are definitely trying to encourage more people to attend this IGF. Because of the circumstances we also have to acknowledge that many people will not have the opportunity to attend the IGF in person, maybe they will not be vaccinated, afraid, they have to be careful, so on and so forth. We are accommodating them that they can still be active participants at the IGF. I see some of the conditions that we are trying to promote. That the session should showcase both in situ and online speakers as a good way to accommodate the people that cannot travel there or do not want to travel there. One thing that we commented our brought your attention in the document that we discussed a few minutes ago, what that is an event about digital policy and I think it would be great if we can show that we can embrace the digital tools in having our super important actual meetings.
So if we don't have it as a rule, I personally but we haven't discussed it within detail nor with the Working Group, I feel that people will do go the traditional way, with traditional speakers, lined in a session hall. And a few people might dial in to listen.
So that's what we were trying to move away from a little bit. But I agree, this is super important to discuss. And the whole MAG should be at ease for whatever format we go for at the end. That's my quick reaction.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Very useful reaction. And I suggest that you consider this in the evaluation criteria because I think that becomes I think my take away from Courtney's point you don't want the you want the evaluation process by MAG members to look at the extent to which these proposals are planning for, for equal participation of all for a hybrid event but you also don't want a tick box approach to okay, they have a virtual speaker. Therefore everyone will be equal. So I think how you package this in the criteria will be very important. But I think this will happen in the next meetings of the joint meeting between the hybrid Working Group, and the workshop process Working Group. So I think we have a clear sense actually of what it is that we need to be careful of here.
And so don't see
>> ADAM PEAKE: One thing. Sorry. There's also quite sort of basic principle here that, you know, since 2006 the IGF has emphasized and been very sort of cognizant of, taken account of remote access. Last year we went online. And so everyone was remote. But it is remote, remote has the wrong sort of connotation, doesn't it? It suggests that you are distanced from the discussion.
So what we're also trying to do and I think we mentioned this in the very first MAG meeting, this is trying to change a mindset. We have always wanted people to access without being on site, we should accommodate this and we should take this opportunity after 2020 to be able to do that and to make it clear that this is how the IGF should operate going forward. Not just the occasional Remote Moderator with somebody in the room who will take a question but to build this as part of how the IGF should work. The experience of over the last year what are we going to do? Always go to onsite meetings or are we going to adjust? The general thought would be we are going to adjust. Trying to account for that as well as sort of principle of what the IGF is and is about, is something that we'd like to get across. But Courtney is absolutely right. And thanks to Tereza as well for her comments.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks. That's the principle that the previous, the IGF MAG 2020, that did their debrief that was a principle they agreed on. It is very important that we don't have a tension between or a competition between virtual and face to face. But I see as an action point here, I think there is working with the criteria more sensitivity. And I think another action point that I would like to note is the hubs. Just I see Joyce has posted the Asia Pacific Regional IGF call for hubs. The IGF has already put out the Secretariat, the call for hubs. I'd like to suggest that there is a call between hybrid meeting Working Group members. And regional IGFs that are working on hubs and the Secretariat. Because I have a feeling we need to use hubs in a very deliberate way this year. And plan for the hubs to be a key component of the hybrid IGF. I know hubs have always been part of the remote participation. But I think as Adam just put it very, very succinctly this is not remote participation. It is more than remote participation. So I would just like to suggest an action in the coming weeks to talk more about hubs and how we can approach them in line with these principles.
Okay. I think that's it. I don't see hands. There is no one in the queue. We have how much time left? I'm just doing a time check. We have got over 20 minutes left. So now let's hear from the Working Group strategy, I believe Livia you are providing the report.
>> Yes. Hello everyone and thank you very much Anriette. I can gladly on behalf of the co Chairs, Titti and Roman and myself and just give a brief update. It is very short. And the other members of the Working Group can compliment. Currently the Working Group is really discussing the activities that we should undertake for the rest of this year. Because as you know last year the working group has been very active with the roadmap and then we put forward the recommendation on the IGF process and design. And now currently we are really in a transition phase and we are kind of discussing what should be the next activities that focus on. And that's why we are in the process of developing a questionnaire. Because our results is to ask the MAG what we as the Working Group should be focusing on. And then we are currently in the Working Group revising this questionnaire but the you can expect that we will send it to you in the next few days because our ideas really that we want to also our work is helpful for the MAG. And that we can support the MAG. So that's why it is important to receive your feedback.
Exactly. So that's on the questionnaire on our future activities. And then just to let you know that I mean we have calls every two weeks and there we also get a regular update from the IGF Secretariat and the office of the envoy on technology, on I mean the process of the UN SDG roadmap and the multi stakeholder high level body and consultations and follow up on them. Just to say that we are very grateful that the office of the envoy on technology and also the IGF Secretariat they are always participating in our calls and we can exchange on these really important issues. And then another activity is also on the parliamentarian track. There Wolfgang has presented a proposal and we are in constant exchange with the IGF Secretariat on how this will further develop. The very last point, I think that's also interesting in our next meeting, perhaps some of you are know him. He will give us an update on the project with the Internet. Because I think that's also one idea to strengthen the IGF by including ordinary citizens in the discussions. And that's what Antone and his initiative is focusing on. That's the most important. Please the other co Chairs and members in the group please compliment. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you. Any additions? Any questions? Livia I have some but I will share it at the Working Group meeting. Because I participated last week in the President of the General Assembly's debate, and I'm also participating in the sustainable the STI, sustainable technology Forum this week. So and occurred to me the IGF is so remote from these other global processes, even though they are UN based. So I am beginning to try and think of what would be useful discussions of the MAG Chair to convene in partnership with the strategy. Looking to other Intergovernmental processes within the UN but also others is something that I was thinking of bringing to the table. But we can pick that up in the Working Group strategy. It just occurred to me that this is something that we can do that is useful. I don't see any other hands. Thanks to yourself and Titti and Roman. Do we have an update from Courtney and Amado? Have you had any further opportunity to look at communications and outreach? I didn't get an e mail from you. So I assume you don't, which is fine. You can update us at the next meeting.
Nothing. Good. So I think that what I suggest there is that we also look at this Working Group, the MAG Working Group on communications and outreach. Having a check in with the Secretariat and Secretariat plans on communications and outreach around the call and the distribution of the call might be useful to look at that and just check in if that's something that we can do. And also just to keep in mind that the goal of this Working Group is to start planning for overall outreach and communications on IGF 2021 earlier rather than later.
But there is still time. No need to panic on that. I don't think we have any other updates pending. So we are now on any other business.
Any other questions? If any MAG member wants to share any concerns or check in on the timeline, I open the floor for general input and discussion.
Karim I see your hand. Please go ahead and let's hear from you.
>> KARIM ATTOUMANI: Good evening, everyone. My apologies as my first I'm face can connectivity issues. I just joined the meeting right now. But I have a I would like to raise an issue regarding languages in our work in global but also in the IGF as a Forum. Because we can recognize today that if we we don't take care of the diversity in terms of language, we are excluding a lot of people in terms of issue raising, in terms of exchanging views, et cetera, et cetera. So I think that's as a MAG members, we need to think about this issue. And try to set up something, an agenda for next year's IGF to see how we can bring slowly but effectively language diversity in all our activities.
I don't know how we can build of this kind of question. I can assume that its it will employ a lot of means, a lot of resources. But we need to raise the issue in the table. And try to see together how we can bring more diversity in our work because using only English in all workshops, in all Intersessional activities, it's really it involves a lot of people. Thank you.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks for that, Karim and it is an ongoing challenge. I have to say, I'm not sure if everyone else has noticed, I need to congratulate the IGF Secretariat because the 2020 outputs is available on website in UN languages. That's a good achievement. And it is also an achievement that this year we are inviting session proposals of for sessions in languages other than English but it does remain a challenge. So I do think it is something that MAG members need to continue to apply themselves to. And it is also a resource issue. But I also think that in the way that we are looking at hybrid in a big picture I think we need to look at the IGF and the NRIs as a collective. Not every single event can realistically have interpretation in to multiple languages. But as long as there is opportunity for people to make inputs and submissions for NRIs and maybe we can look at the call for response to the IGF 2021 issues, actually that might be something as well. Available to people in I see Mattia do you want the floor? Please go ahead.
>> Amado: I do.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I see Amado's hand and I see Courtney and Mattia. Let's go in that order.
>> Amado: Thank you. Thank you very much for the opportunity Anriette following up with the comment from Karim. I would like to say that the Working Group on languages with Lucian involved in it, we have tried to integrate in to the outreach and communication Working Group, the principles of the main outcomes from the language Working Group. And I have already sent a draft to Courtney and I hope we can put together a joint document during these days in order for us to be able to reach, outreach the different organizations participating at the IGF 2021 in different languages as well. I hope Courtney has the time to coordinate together with us and look forward to take advantage of the opportunity of spreading the word in different languages and also trying to invite different, different groups coming up from different countries without this barrier which is the language. Thank you very much.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thank you.
>> Courtney: I don't know that I got the e mail. So just one thing is that my e mail is email@example.com. Just to make sure that everyone has that updated information. In terms of the sorry, I lost my train of thought now. Responding to that request, so maybe can you come back to me?
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: That's fine. Mattia please go ahead.
>> MATTIA FANTINATI: Thank you very much. I would like to have a very brief update what I'm doing about IGF focus on parliamentarian situation. I asked, as many of you, I have asked to increase parliamentarian track and we criteria of transparency and representatives. And there is an answer has answered me back and asked me to organize this kind of work. And so I had a contact with the Secretariat of the IP in Geneva and we set up a date to a meeting and I will in order to discuss about the role of parliamentarians and how to get as many parliamentarians as possible in the IGF. And I will update when we have this meeting, that should be within the next week.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks very much for that update. For anyone that couldn't hear Mattia very clearly. He is in active conversation with UNDESA and can you just mute? He is in active conversation with UNDESA and with the Secretariat about the parliamentarian track and participation in it and keeping it open and inclusive. And he has convened a meeting and it will happen soon. And he will let us know. Thanks for your efforts and update. Courtney, do you still want to contribute?
>> Courtney: Yes. Sorry. Thank you. I wanted to just, you know, kind of on the any other business go back to something you said earlier about the kind of challenges, I think for this MAG and especially new members, there is a very steep learning curve. There are a lot of e mails, a lot of mailing lists, a lot of meetings. I would as somebody who is new and try to figure out how to navigate and participation and contribute in a meaningful way, I think it is really important to add things to that calendar on the IGF website. Not sure how the mailing lists are working and I would ask also if there is a way to confirm for each individual member which mailing lists they are subscribed to because it's I feel like I must be missing e mails but then I feel like I have subscribed. For those of you who have new and trying to figure out how to meaningful contribute and it would be helpful to have a central location and the MAG aspect of the website is super helpful but I think it is more on those where these different threads of work are being led by different individuals. The more we can put on that calendar would be helpful for helping us stay informed and proactively involved. And then to the extent that it is possible to send calendar invites in addition to e mails that have the meeting information in it, again because there are so many e mails trying to stay on top of that and know where there is log in information, it is just it is very challenging and we never met each other. And I would just ask if there is any way that folks can do that, that would be very helpful. Thank you so much.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks and I couldn't agree with you more. I do think, you know, I have talked with the Secretariat about exploring whether we can't use Teams for the MAG as a work space and work platform and I know they are looking in to that.
And but I let's please action item Courtney's call about the calendar because she is quite correct we are not updating that calendar. We need all the relevant NRIs and Working Group meetings and we need BPF meetings. A call to Secretariat and to relevant MAG members and please do update the calendar.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: I would like to add. I totally agree, Courtney and Anriette. Let's see if we can have it updated in the next week.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I know you have been incredibly busy but let's revisit the Teams thing. Let's look in to that as well.
I don't see any other hands and we are just about at our closing time. So unless anyone else has a hand up, I don't think they do. Let me see. I see two hands are up. Courtney and Mattia you are done. Those are old hands I think. Anyone else with a question or a comment?
No one. So Maria is saying she had a very bad experience with Teams. Let's not discuss that now. It is such a challenge for us not to have a collaborative work platform. It is something that we cannot avoid looking at.
Well, thanks very much everyone for your participation. And to all the Working Groups, and Intersessional modalities, and for your reports, thanks to the Secretariat for really achieving a lot in the last weeks. And thanks to your captioner and to all our observers. I let me just check, a final check. I don't see any hands. Chengetai and your team any last words before we close the meeting?
>> TYPIAK PRZEMYSLAW: Nothing from my side. Thank you for the very good meeting.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: The next meeting is on the oh, my gosh I have lost everything. On the 18th of May. And it's the one that is at 20 UTC.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: I want to report maybe you can report back on the doodle pool.
>> CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. This is the thing that I had forgotten to say about the doodle poll for the second day of the MAG meeting. And we had 20 MAG members participate in this poll. So just half of you. Actually less than half of you. But the most popular date is the 30th of June for the for this meeting. So we are going to go with the 30th of June unless something else happens. But so it is going to be the 30th of June.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks and just to put everyone on a same information base, at the last MAG call we had a discussion about postponing the June open consultation and MAG meeting to give MAG members a bit more time to finalize workshop evaluation. Some MAG members challenged the idea of quite correctly of changing a meeting date which has been made public quite a long time ago. So we went back and looked at that and then we came up with solution which was to go ahead with the open consultation and one day of the MAG meeting on those scheduled dates. But then to have a gap before the final MAG session when MAG will make the final decisions on workshop selection. And it was there in that regard that Chengetai distributed the doodle poll and that's how we came up with the idea of the final MAG meeting. It will be an all day meeting. We will share the times later, on the 30th of June to finalize decisions on workshops.
And then the schedule dates we'll have two day session as opposed to a three day session. But the open consultation and first day of the MAG meeting will continue on those published dates. And I hope the calendar has been updated. If not, I'm sure it will be by tomorrow. Thank you very much everyone for your participation. And for your work. And see you online and we'll meet again at 20 UTC on 18 May.
>> Thank you very much. Bye.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Bye everyone.
>> Bye bye.
>> Thank you. Bye bye.
>> ANRIETTE ESTERHUYSEN: Thanks to all the MAG alumni for joining us.
>> It is good to be updated. Thank you.
>> Good to be here.