Update from Tracey - please edit/delete from above. The Media Caucus is a diverse one. It has representatives of public service, commercial and community media, journalist member organisations, and media freedom NGOÕs. It includes people who have been through all the major global debates on information, people who run global broadcast networks, people who represent journalists all over the world and people who work on radio projects in remote villages around the world. There have been differences of opinion within the caucus, and I raise them here because they relate to structure. There was a difference within Latin America, between commercial and community broadcasters that caused an impasse in the Media Caucus. This led to the establishment of the Community Media Working Group, and the departure of the Latin American commercial broadcasters. The space and process in which new groups within civil society develop was not clearly defined, and the Community Media Working Group very quickly re-named itself a caucus Ð though it was not clear what difference this name would make. The Latin American commercial broadcasters moved on to direct lobbying with governments Ð the content of which, often differed with the agreed texts of the Media Caucus. The question is, in a clearer framework, would civil society have wanted to maintain a unified media family (even if the family decided to have several branches)? Would this serve the process of clear negotiations, with governments (where the main share of the power lies) better or not? The development of another group had the effect of weakening the community media presence in the Media Caucus, of maintaining the antagonism that could have passed, and it meant there was another group to liaise with, on media matters. In the end, as the Media Caucus we had to fight to the last moment to defend Article 19 - a principle that was agreed on 50 years ago by the world Ð and we managed to do that. We had to defend the fundamental principle and locate it in a big picture that applied to all branches of the media family. It was no surprise that the references to community media were not included in the ÔofficialÕ WSIS Declaration. I still believe community media would have rated a mention in media related texts, had the separation not occurred. In that way content relates directly to procedures, and the relationship between content and themes and the management of logistics, negotiations and networking done by the bureau can be observed as symbiotic. The Media caucus works to agreed documents that serve as lobbying tools and policy input to WSIS documents. (Which of course does not prevent individual journalist members from publishing their own opinion). There is agreement on a very broad range of matters that have as their base, the UNDHRÕs Article 19. The Caucus has a Chair and three Vice Chairs. The work of the caucus is not, as with other families, divided into portfolios. This is not necessary as we have agreed texts. The division of work relates more to resources available to members. As the Chair, I am the resource weakest, but although I am least able to attend face to face meetings, I try to take a lead in the on-line work. I also live in the south and am generally the greatest distance from meetings. There is a high level of trust among us and we deploy the person most readily available to attend meetings as required. On the Bureau, I believe it has worked, in spite of the natural suspicion that plagues civil society, when it comes to groups that are perceived to occupy a position of power, or which it is believed donÕt have a clearly defined role. As the saying goes - the price of liberty is constant vigilance. A number of new groups have developed in Phase 1 and we need to conduct a logical review of the new list which includes the working groups on finance and internet governance and the Community Media group. Then we need to consider the logic of the groupings in the context of a process in which we have successfully opened a door to United Nations processes. This analysis must consider the need for a clear and logical forum for negotiations to occur between civil society and governments. Governments have to date, been able to work in an environment that has not been inclusive of civil society as an organised network. As the door to the new environment is gradually opened many governments expect to be confronted with a civil society body that is anarchic, chaotic and too diverse to make any sense. Too often we live up to these expectations (or shall we call them fears)? While it is essential that civil society be able to transmit ideas in all their diversity, and make them freely available to government delegations Ð who are often willing to use them, it is also important to have agreed positions with which to negotiate in formal settings. To deny that this is a current practical reality is to risk the door opening achievements made to date. It seems to me that civil society is spending too much time on re-inventing when actually all that is needed is a logical review of the natural growth that has occurred. Then we need to make sure the negotiation bridge between civil society and governments is clearly signposted. ====== ends here NB: At this point, we switched to a new document. We will have to see how many pages we had typed on the other document. The editing was getting slower, not unbearable, but noticably slower. NB: Another interesting comment, is that we are in effect, using this tool as simulteneous translation. For example, as Viola is giving her presentation, Robert is typingn the translation (obviously, this could be multipled, many times over, with other language speakers, and or professional translators (both present and remote) to add and edit the document. A very interesting application (I don't have to wait for the translation to understand what she is saying). I also noticed that the editorial contributions are in different colors, which allows us to know at a glance, who is writing what. Renate - Rik is sending out updates almost weekly. Samesekkou has just arrived (to much aplause). - greeted participants (we have photos) - olivier making introductory comments for as. Don't look now, we are very, very proud to have adama samesekkou with us. Someone who has carreid the dream of civil society, and has carried the dream with us amongst civil society, alone and has carried it towards the future. We in civil society have been delighted to have in in our path, because "when a baobob tree ..... everone listnse" Samesekkou - - very moved by the intorduction and welcome. would like to address you from the heart. In regards to the dream, during the first phase of the summit. if we dream toghether we are touching realine. we have started this journey - a very long march in our culture this no luck that bring us toghether. this meeting had to come. I have absconded from a meeting at the University of Cape Town, from a meeting of the Academy of African Languages to respond to your kind invitation. We are sharing together, we are sharing parts of the dream. I've not much to say, I am only here to encourage you and to strengthen the process. A human takes nine months from conception to birth. Ours is a normal process. Our new approach is a vision of partnership. It is together that we have gotten peopel together from very different horizons, with different dreams, and different worries. Bt we have managed, more or less, to look in the same direction. We have have concerns, suspicions, and aninosity between each other. However, the more that we have worked side-by-side together, the more that we have been building human relations. In our culture, it is not said that I think, therefore I am; but it is rather that I am a human being because of the way that you look upon me. We have breathed the same breath together. We can see the way that we are moving together. We can use our moder commodities; text messaging, e-mails, etc.,but it is when you really look each other in the eye is when you feel it truly. We have worked over the last few years, taht we are in the same boat, we are building a new society, a new society of the information age, where we share our knowledge and become the facilitators of human communication. The third prepcom, I am delighted to see that the civil society is still there (of course it is not comprehensive, and does not take everything on board). We have now reached an extremely fragile moment. * i wish to recall, all of you inspired me. two words: - the process is fragile. governments weren't too trusting of civil society. - The chance that we had is that we are self-organizing, and hqave a self-organizing strucutre, the bureau that - i hope - it will continue, and it's a good thing - hope that in phase II, that together with CBBI - is that there is a multi-stakeholder process - important that all the grand issues of the world today could be discussed. I really didn't want to say too much. Geneva is a new spirit of partnership. But ww have to recognize the partnsherhip is very, very fagile. And we have to work to consolidate these processes. We have to be activists for cultural diversity. We must keep this psirity alive. We must not allow the encroachment of these processes on our practice. We must not allow these procedures to anialite the practice. We are on a very long haul; but I happen to be in a room with people that have the qualities that are ready for this long march - committment, patience, etc. And I would like to say my closing remarks in English, to show that I am really an activist of cultural diversity. What is really important to me know, is how we can keep the spirit alive. How we can continue to work, so that the "procedures" will not kill the process. Meaning, how can we move from "Imput to Impact" (gigles, because of the reference to the CS paper (Kleinwacther, Global Compact) document of the same title. - how is that we can continue. how can we move from input to impact? - CS is a huge body, hard to move, advice is that "be more and more patient" and keep open, and stay involved, not to let the process be weakened by any kind of bureaucratic procedures. think always of what we have built together - it's a great achievement. The host country, is the way really to keep, the same enthusiasm and the same hope that we have together. Let us work out this issue, and I am again, very happy to be here with you. Thanks again for your friendship, and your warm welcome. May God help us to move in this way. we are not paid for these process, we do it because we [must stop these processes]. let's help this process of dehumanization of relationships that is taking place. If we are together, we can help stop the process of dehumainziation and violence that is taking place in world. God will help us as it is an imporant issue for human kind. Msr. samesesekkou ends with "thank you" in many, many languages (english, french, spanish, portuguese, arabic, sotho?/one of the South African languages). Olivier: I would like to now hand over to viola, who has had a tremendous impact on CS working methods from the beginning. - importance of moving from input to impact Viola: - gives thanks to as. who spoke to us from the heart. A great honour to speak after as. we have to continue to rowing this boat together. - the family that i represent here, is the volunteer family. Locally and informally, structured and loose organizations. - At first, Alain Clerk doubted where raised as to what Volunteers and how they were involve din the IS. So we in the voluneeer family have worked hard to ensure that there are volunteers present. - it represents millions of peoples. i was asked to be the focal point for these organizations. - we worked to establish a plan of action from the volunteering family. we called upon out plan - to construct a framework to act. we are today in the "action phase". I think many families present here work in the "action phase". this fall we reflected, and national action plans on volnuneets should be elaborated - We eleborated a document - "Framework for Action" - In Barecolna this fall - at the Information Society Forum (sept 2004). how do we move into the action phase. - how can we document the action. How we can bring together and collect all the diviersty that exists in our group. We need to be productive. we should be inspired by different models that exist. -How can we measure how productive we are; as we move on to this productive action phase. Disabilities Family - First time participating on behalf of Hiroshi who is the focal point. I just arrived here today, this morning, but I didn't receive the message that I was supposed to deliver from Hiroshi. We are working together in the DAISY consoortium. At Daisy Consortium, try to promote the WSIS concept. Last year (in geneva) had a global forum on disabilities. We worked together , formulated a declaration from the "Disbility" family. keen to hear about the next phase of the summit - and that we can come up with new solutions. Whatever structure we create - we need to work together. Committ to transmit discussions and input to the disability caucus. Olivier - so civil society is active in all corners of the globe. and distance is not something that separates us. so we would like to hear from asia, and the procedural and structural issues that they face/promote. Izumi Aizu- Asia Region - helped work with japanese government to help organize regional meeting. - honestly, as an asian family - we have been more reactive. Angela and Al Alegre asked him to participate, to take advantage of him being in Cape Town for the ICANN meetings (which just ended a few minutes ago). - appreciate efforts of bureau for us to be involved in the process - not much visible activities in the asia family so far (about 5 msgs a month, and most from Al Alegre). it does not mean there is no interest . - For example, there was quite a bit of interest in the WGIG in Asia - we have our challanges to self-organize. many cultures, and many languages. -As much as Africa, if not more; many economic disparities - no real answer to these challenges - on the one hand europe/north america and africa are sending very positive signals - procedures: if we make the structures to complex, then it will be difficult to follow.Keep it as simple as possible, so that can be easy to follow. -we don't have too many lawyers, or dedicated un activists/specialists. -That is all that I would like to say now. Olivier: African Caucus -We haven't heard from Africa in such contexts. As Wolfgang has said, we are a network of people, and we have to get used to communicating with people that we can't see. This is the information society. - In africa we considered that the process was an opportunity to - Since april 2004, we created a African coordination. - there were elections to create a coordination, regional and at each country level. -Because of this Africa is "ready", and you can see how ready we are. - we placed a member of our caucus on both the WGIG and financial mechanism WG - essentially what we did, ....... -We are peparing to send a document to every African head of state (at the WSIS African Regional Meeting - Accra, Feb 2005). We have made great efforts to build a powerful action plan for Africa, and the whole African diaspora. We have people who are in this room (Emmanuel, Njeng, Tracey). Who have the vision of Africa rising. We want you to be here today, as the priviledged witnesses of this anticipation of a hopeful future for aftica. the construction for this plan of action. you are actually here in africa, and you can see africa all around us. this is to counteracte the negative characature of africa that prevails in the media. I would like for you to do your homework. I would like for you to be ambassadors for this new vision. but i would susggest that we need to inject new blood, and I would say that we are "ready" So we give the last word to the wise, and ask for mr. masmoudi, since he is wise, and has been observing the process for the last several months. you know his huge capacity for enthusiam, adn if we could only bottle it up, and inject that into some of the youth that will follow us. I am going to be soooo kind to the interpreters, that I'm going to boil everythinng down into these three points (silence is wisdom). [making the point that he's participated in certain # , if not all of the meetings] (it seems like the Tunisians like speaking a lot. They really don't way much. And tend to mention that there is consensus @ cs groups in general, and in Tunisia - when there isn't) Robert's note : It would be advantageous to have some background research done to find out the profiles and information on the so called CS tunsian people. Many would be surprised to find some things. To be honest, should also get profiles from all CS members. Real bios - if have had any government involvement now or in past. The science and technology Focal point, according to viola - is now with the Government of Tunsia. Robert: Yes. As I mentioned, this would be in line with a lot of the academic literature on how to build trust in geographically distributed networks (e.g., using bios, photos, etc.). I am using a CMS (Content Management System) called Plone (Rik is also using this), it is written in python, and is pretty nice. Has some good features that woudld be good for the bio bit. For me - it's as long as someone know show to setup - and amanageit , fine on plone. Host Country: As little change as possible in the structure. The Africa group includes the host country of tunis as an African country. We have seen groundbreaking participation by civil society from the Middle East (Derrick's Note: what about Iran???). Each volunteer needs to be aware of the needs of women, etc. In Syria, I'll give you an example of a meeting (that you might think was held behind closed doors). the wife of the head of state and her entire entourage sat in on the entire meeting. In africa, we are taking on this whole dimennsion of teh entire Arab world as well. Please open your ears to the fact that there is a new civil society movement in the works. Input - point of order: Many civil society colleagues are not able to participate even in this meeting, especially from West Asia. Moncef - "civil society representative" on the WSIS ES. Within the executive secretariat of civil society, there have been a division of roles. So, the president of civil society (?), has asked, and called for external evaluation of our work. Geiger has said that we want to be "in it" but not "bogged down" by it. I personally don't want to be involved in the politics. We want to facilitate civil society, we are desperate that Emir cannot be with us today, and we wonder if we could have done ore. We want to represent diversity -cultural, regional, themes, etc. As the president has said, that represents the wealth of this summit. we have seen what the establishment of ... We are bringing together such diverse bodies. We are concerned with there beinng a balance of the countries from the south and form developing countries. This is the hallmark of the summt. Time to break for lunch.