[IGFmaglist] Questions for Virtual meeting III

[Anriette Esterhuysen]

Yes..sorry! I drafted yesterday but was waiting for input from civil
society colleagues and forgot to edit before sending.

Anriette

On 31/07/2013 12:58, Paul Wilson wrote:
> Anriette,
>
> the meeting is today, in 5 minutes time, by my calculations…
>
>> Topic: MAG Virtual Meeting III 
>> Date: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 
>> Time: 11:00 am UTC 
>> Meeting Number: 955 620 167 
>> Meeting Password: IGF2013 
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 31/07/2013, at 8:27 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Chengetai, Markus and all
>>
>> Thanks for details of the meeting tomorrow.
>>
>> Here are the list of questions I would like us to address. Some came up
>> in the last few days in various civil society discussion spaces,
>> including the IGC list, and some I wanted to raise at the first meeting
>> as they related to the draft schedule that was distributed last week.
>>
>> 1) Cancellation rumours: we need an update. I am sure you are working on
>> that :)
>>
>> 2) Commercialisation of the Bali IGF represented by the
>> funding/sponsorship document from the Indonesian organising committee
>> circulated in the last few days.
>>
>> - What is the status of this document? The copy I saw was on Google
>> docs, but I believe it has the same content as the one on the Host
>> country website marked as "revision 10b". It has since been removed.
>> - Is the Indonesian strategy (as represented in this document and if it
>> was indeed a formal document) different from previous IGF host country
>> sponsorship and branding strategies and does it comply with UN criteria?
>> Can we confirm that the organisers were aware of these criteria?
>> - Does the approach to sponsorship in the document risk sponsors having
>> influence over the IGF agenda and character?
>> - Was the document used and referenced in conversations with sponsors or
>> donors who have committed support? I.o.w. are they are any sponsors who
>> expect promises made in the document to be kept?
>> - Would not delivering on these promises put any of the money already
>> raised by the Indonesian organising committee at risk?
>> - More generally, what is permitted and what is not in terms of
>> branding/banners/benefits for sponsors?
>> - How does UNDESA and the Secretariat ensure compliance with these rules
>> or standards?
>>
>> 3) Workshop selection and Open Forums: it seems that rejected workshops
>> have found their way into the programme as Open Forums. If this is
>> indeed the case, we need to be clear that they meet the criteria and we
>> need to be fair and ensure that all rejected workshops were given equal
>> opportunity to 'reframe' as a different type of event. It would be good
>> for the secretariat to clarify. For example the joint open forum between
>> EBU, CoE and OSCE on independent journalism on the internet: how to
>> protect and finance it, and which role for the public service media. 
>> Sounds interesting, but it also sounds like a workshop.
>>
>> 4) Scheduling conflicts: I notice that several SOP related workshops are
>> in the same time slot as the SOP focus session.  We really, really
>> should try to avoid that.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692