fyi: FOI = freedom of information
There are sign-up letters for Civil Society, NGOs, and individuals.
See
http://www.access-info.org--
*From:* Helen Darbishire [mailto:helen.darbishire@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, August 28, 2007 8:18 PM
*To:* foianet@foiadvocates.net
*Cc:* helen@access-info.org
*Subject:* [foianet] Urgent Action re Council of Europe Treaty on Access
to Docs.
*Importance:* High
Madrid, 28 August 2007
**
*Dear FOI Advocates*
*Access Info Europe*, *Article 19 *and the *Open Society Justice
Initiative *are today launching a campaign to call for the future
European Convention on Access to Official Documents, currently in
preparation by the Council of Europe, to meet international standards
and to ensure adequate protection of the right to information.
*We are urging all FOI Advocates around the world to join the campaign
through a sign-up letter (attached) and other actions (listed below).*
*The problem*: If the current draft of the Convention is adopted it will
become the world’s first treaty to guarantee the right of access to
information but it will fall below prevailing European and international
standards, thereby flying in the face of the enormous progress made in
the past several years. The final drafting session will take place in
Strasbourg during 9-12 October 2007.
The future Convention will establish a right to request “official
documents”, which are broadly defined as all information held by public
authorities, in any form. On the positive side, the Convention will
establish that the right to “official documents” can be exercised by all
persons with no need to demonstrate a particular interest in the
information requested, and at no charge for filing requests and viewing
documents.
However, the draft treaty has a number of serious flaws :
*1. *Failure to include all official documents held by legislative
bodies and judicial authorities within the mandatory scope of the treaty;
*2. *Failure to include official documents held by natural and legal
persons insofar as they perform public functions within the mandatory
scope of the treaty;
*3. *Failure to specify certain basic categories of official
documents, such as those containing financial or procurement
information, that must be published proactively.
*4. *Absence of a guarantee that individuals will have access to an
appeals body which has the power to order public authorities to disclose
official documents.
*5. *Absence of a guarantee that individuals will be able to appeal
against violations of the right of access other than "denial" of a
request (such as unjustified failures to provide access in a timely
fashion or in the form preferred by the requester).
*6. *Lax drafting of exceptions that permit withholding of official
documents under the internal deliberations and commercial interest
exemptions:
*a. *There are no time limits on the application of the internal
deliberations exemption; such documents may be withheld indefinitely,
even after a final decision on the matter has been taken;
*b. *The treaty should protect only “legitimate commercial
interests,” not all and any “commercial interests,” as in the present
draft.
*7. *Absence of a requirement that states set statutory maximum
time-limits within which requests must be processed.
More analysis of these problems can be found in the attached documents.
The final drafting session in Strasbourg starts on 9 October 2007. We
need to take action now to convince governments of the 47 member
states of the Council of Europe to insist on improvements to the draft
Convention before it is finalized. We plan to use International Right to
Know Day, 28 September 2007, to highlight these concerns.
*ACTION: **Attached is a sign up letter to the drafting group**. *We
are aiming for as many signatures as possible from NGOs (civil society
groups) and individuals across Europe and around the world by 28
September. You can sign up by writing to me (helen@access-info.org
or helen.darbishire@gmail.com
), or to the e-mail address
treaty@access-info.org . The deadline for
signing is 17 hrs CET (5 pm) on Wednesday 26^th September, so that we
can release it to the media for coverage on 28th September.
Please encourage other NGOs to sign as well. All human rights and other
civil society groups should care about this issue and are welcome to
sign the letter. Interested individuals can also sign. A copy of the
letter and a sign-up link can be found on the home page of Access Info:
www.access-info.org , along with more
information.
A copy of the draft treaty can be found via a link on the Access Info
home page.
* *
*The attached document gives a list of WHAT YOU CAN DO and these ideas
are copied below. These actions are mainly for people in the 47 Council
of Europe member states, but others are welcome to do whatever they can
to support the campaign: this treaty will have a global relevance!! *
* *
*/Access Info Europe (Helen Darbishire and Eva Moraga) is coordinating
the campaign, liaising with Article 19 (Daniel Simons) and the Justice
Initiative (Sandra Coliver, Darian Pavli and Eszter Filippinyi). Please
contact any of us to discuss what action you can take! Here are some
ideas: /*
* *
• */Contact your representatives in the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe/*: Every Council of Europe member state sends
parliamentarians to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
(PACE). If possible, meet with your country’s representatives and call
on them to raise the issue in the next session of the Parliamentary
Assembly in Strasbourg.
The national delegations to the Parliamentary Assembly are listed here
http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/AssemblyList/AL_DelegationsList_E.asp
• */Get the support of other NGOs/*: Translate information about the the
problems with the Convention into your language and distribute it to
other civil society groups: encourage them to sign the letter. This
issue is relevant to human rights groups, environmentalists, consumer
groups, women’s and youth groups … anyone who needs information should
care about this issue!
• */Spread the word/*: Let other interested communities know about the
issue and call on them to take action and disseminate the news:
archivists, librarians, bloggers, and academics (such as in faculties of
communication, law, political science, etc) are among the groups of
people who are likely to care about this issue and help raise concerns.
• */Discuss with Information Commissioners/**/:/* If your country has an
Information Commissioner, let them know about this issue and discuss
what joint actions you might be able to organise, such as a public
debate of the right to information. In other countries it is possible
that Data Protection Commissioners and Human Rights Ombudspersons would
be interested in the issue and ready to participate in public
discussions or talk to members of government.
• */Write to your government/*: Write to your Head of Government
(President or Prime Minister as appropriate) and the Ministers of
Justice and Foreign Affairs and call on them to urge their
representatives at the Council of Europe to take action to press for the
treaty to meet the minimum standards. Get as many national NGOs as
possible to sign the letter to your government.
• */Brief the politicians/*: Try to meet with government representatives
to explain the issues to them – find out what their opinion is and if
they will support the call for a strong treaty.
• */Try for a parliamentary resolution/*: Brief parliamentarians and,
where possible, urge them to adopt a resolution calling for the treaty
to meet minimum standards (declarations of support from political
parties could also be helpful).
• */Brief the media/*: Tell journalists (especially those who write
about access to information) about the problems and get them to write
stories: ask them to ask the government what it is doing to ensure the
treaty meets the highest standards. Let the media know that on September
28, International Right to Know Day, there will be news about how many
groups have signed the NGO letter as well as about actions taking place
all across Europe.
• */Right to Know Day Special Actions/*: On 28 September, in addition to
your regular Right to Know Day activities, take some special action to
promote awareness of the Council of Europe treaty problem. Keep an eye
on the Access Info Europe website for the latest news on what groups are
doing around Europe and how many NGOs have signed the joint letter.
_Countries with representatives on the Groups of Specialists _are
Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and United
Kingdom.
_Other countries may participate in the discussions_ – Slovenia was one
such participant in the July 2007 drafting session. Since all 47 Council
of Europe member countries have a representative in Strasbourg, it may
be that your government can send this person (or another appropriate
representative such as the Information Commissioner from your country)
to make a contribution to the final treaty drafting session.
*Need more info? *
If you would like to know more about how the process in Strasbourg works
and to discuss what action to take, please feel free to call us:
Access Info tel: +34 91 743 14 73 and ask for Helen or Eva.
Helen mobile : + 34 667 685 319, or via Skype: helen_darbishire.
_______________
Helen Darbishire
Executive Director
*Access Info Europe*
calle Principe de Anglona 5, 2c
28005 MADRID - Spain
mobile: + 34 667 685 319
helen@access-info.org or
helen.darbishire@gmail.com
Skype: helen_darbishire
www.access-info.org Labels: access, information, legislation, responses
Reminder: Application deadline 26 September 2007Oxford Internet Institute
Civil Society Practitioners ProgrammeInvitation to applyThe
Oxford Internet Institute (University of Oxford) invites applications from the global South to fill two places in its Civil Society Practitioners Programme.
This visitor programme is intended for Civil Society Practitioners of distinction or outstanding promise who wish to visit the Institute for a period of six weeks between February and December 2008, to undertake research concerning the social impact of the Internet and related ICTs. Visitors are expected to reside in Oxford during their stay, and to participate fully in the intellectual life of the Institute. The successful applicants will receive:
* A subsistence allowance of 3800 GBP (7500 USD) to cover research expenses and living costs during their stay in Oxford
* A travel grant of up to 1000 GBP (2000 USD) for travel to and from the UK
Applications will ideally be submitted by Civil Society Practitioners in or from the global South, active in the areas of freedom of expression, media reform, media justice, and communications and information policy in the globalized context of the Internet.
How to applyFor details on how to apply, please download:
Information for Applicants (PDF, 45kb) at
http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/CSPP_Application_Information.pdfYou may also request to have this information emailed to you in plain text form. The deadline for completed applications to reach the OII Academic and Student Affairs Officer (by post or email: contact details below) is 26 September 2007. Please note that incomplete applications cannot be considered.
Final notification of an award will occur in November 2007. Successful candidates will be expected to take up their six week residency in Oxford at any time between February and December 2008.
ContactLaura Taylor
Academic and Student Affairs Officer
Oxford Internet Institute
University of Oxford
1 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1865 287222
Fax: +44 (0)1865 287211
Email:
recruit@oii.ox.ac.ukThis programme has been made possible through funding by the media policy portfolio in the
Knowledge, Creativity and Freedom Program of the Ford Foundation.
This Call for Applications is also available at:
http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/microsites/cspp/ps:
Global South countries list (*.doc)Labels: call for applications, civil society, global South
Geert Lovink on Weizenbaum and the Society of the Query
i am posting here commentary/book review by Geert Lovink sent to the nettime-l list today. The book is Joseph Weizenbaum mit Gunna Wendt, Wo sind sie, die Inseln der Vernunft
im Cyberstrom, Auswege aus der programmierten Gesellschaft, Herder
Verlag, Freiburg, 2006.
the translated title of which can be said to be (Lovink´s translation:
“Where are they, the islands of reason
in the cyber stream? Ways out of the programmed society.”
some of the more key phrases that struck a chord for me were (and their compilation suggests some kind of article summary):A spectre haunts the world's intellectual elites: information
overload...
Not only are
popular noise levels up to unbearable levels, the chatter has entered
the domain of science and philosophy itself--thanks to the indifferent
Google. Search engines rank according to popularity, not Truth...
I do not believe that it is up to any professor or editor to decide
for us what is, and what is not nonsense. I would much rather like to
further revolutionize search tools and increase the general level of
media literacy....
Let’s forget Weizenbaum’s info
anxiety. What makes this interview book an interesting read is his
insistence on the art of asking the right question....
What we need instead of Google and Wikipedia, is the
“capacity to scrutinize and think critically.”...
For the time being we remain obsessed with
the increase in quality of the answer to our queries—and not with the
underlying problem, namely the poor quality of our education and the
diminishing ability to think in a critical way....
Every information, any object or experience has to be at hand
instantaneous. Serendipity requires a lot of time. If we can no longer
stumble into islands of reason through our inquiries, we may as well
have to build them. By definition these island will be artificial,
and, most likely, digital in nature.
---
Now, let me comment on Lovink´s piece. I think it is that we start to face an information overload situation, in a professional context even. And this is in an environment where we have not yet even realised the/this full Open Access dream. The question of info overload then has done turns in my mind in recent times, since yes, it is a matter which needs addressing. To phrase it in the latter way does not mean that there aren´t good people doing good work on info retrieval. (See for instance the wonderful Photosynth demo
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129 which, when thought of in and projected into the context of scholarly communication, makes you feel glad to have been born in these times (smile)). But think, and here is where I concur with Lovink, it is that people need to have/develop the skills to discern the level of quality of the work that is before them. Humans are innately adaptable are they not? What I disagree on is this either/or scenario suggested by Lovink when he says:
What we need instead of Google and Wikipedia, is the
“capacity to scrutinize and think critically.”...
It´s not a matter of "instead". Rather, it is a case of _because_ we have these kinds of tools (of which Google and Wikip are mere current instances; there will be others), that we need the “capacity to scrutinize and think critically.”
Then, as for the conclusion, I do wonder. Can it be that these spaces (islands) will be digital. If on the one hand, the piece calls for greater intellectual effort and discernment (things that happen in the human brain), then why can those spaces for serendipity not be constituted (also) of areas of mind, and not just be envisioned as some digital realm.
Think of it this way. Serendipity always (and I speak empirically) is a private event occurring between you and the information object, and the question which arises is where exactly is the locus of the serendipitous action (in among the bookstacks, say, or, while reading a digi article). what we tend to think is that the environment (physical or digital), shapes the experience and is therefore its locus. but isn´t it rather, that the environment are mere trappings, and the locus of the serendipitous event is the private space in there in your mind where "things come together"? so, isn´t the islands of reason still, essentially, in the mind?
okay, so what if we need to consider communal spaces, and some kind of group-think (not meant in its perjorative sense) scenario. well, then, i don´t know as yet :-)
---
The entire piece:-------- Mensaje original --------
Asunto: Weizenbaum and the Society of the Query
Fecha: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:25:10 +0200
De: Geert Lovink
Responder a: Geert Lovink
Para: nettime-l@kein.org
Weizenbaum and the Society of the Query
By Geert Lovink
A spectre haunts the world's intellectual elites: information
overload. Ordinary people have hijacked strategic resources and
are clogging up once carefully policed media channels. Before the
Internet, the mandarin classes were able to strictly separate 'idle
talk' from 'knowledge. With the rise of Internet search engines it is
no longer possible to easily distinguish between patrician insights
and plebeian gossip. The distinction between high and low, and the
occasional mix during Carnival, are from all times and should not
greatly worry us. What is causing alarm is another issue. Not only are
popular noise levels up to unbearable levels, the chatter has entered
the domain of science and philosophy itself--thanks to the indifferent
Google. Search engines rank according to popularity, not Truth.
What today's administrators of noble simplicity and quiet grandeur
can't express, we should say for them: there is a growing discontent
in the search algorithms. The scientific establishment has lost
control over one of its key research projects, computer science
and the enlightened citizens and statesmen have so far not found
a way to communicate their concerns to those in charge (read:
the Google board). One possible way out could be to overcome to
positively redefine Heidegger's 'Gerede' as 'being of everyday
Dasein's understanding and interpreting'. Are Internet users cut off
from a a primary and primordial relationship with the world? Should we
portrayal bloggers and the Web 2.0 cybermasses as 'uprooted' and cut
off from the existantial?
These questions, and more, came up while reading an of book of
interviews with MIT professor Joseph Weizenbaum, known from the
computer therapy program ELIZA and his 1976 book Computer Power
and Human Reason. The publication is in German. A few years ago
Weizenbaum (b. 1923) moved back to Berlin, the city where he grew up
before he and his parents escaped from Nazis. The interviews were
conducted by Munich-based journalist Gunna Wendt. A number of Amazon
reviewers complained about Wendts uncritical questions and the
polite-superficial level of her contributions. No doubt interesting
are Weizenbaums stories about his youth in Berlin, the exile to the
USA and the way he got involved in computing during the 1950s. The
book indeed reads like a summary of Weizenbaums critique of computer
science. What interested me was the way in which Weizenbaum shapes
his arguments as an informed and respected insider (the net criticism
position, so to say). The title and subtitle sound intriguing.
Translated it goes like this: Where are they, the islands of reason
in the cyber stream? Ways out of the programmed society.
Weizenbaums Internet critique is general. He avoids becoming
specificand I appreciate that attitude. His Internet remarks are
nothing new for those familiar with Weizenbaums work: Internet
is a great pile of junk, a mass medium that up to 95% consists of
nonsense, much like the medium television, in which direction the
Web is inevitably developing. The so-called information revolution
has flipped into a flood of disinformation. The reason for this is
the absence of an editor or editorial principle. Why this crucial
media principle was not built-in by the first generations of computer
programmers, of which Weizenbaum was a prominent member, the book
fails to address.
On a number of occasions I have formulated a critique of such media
ecology, Hubert Dreyfus On the Internet (2001) being one of them.
I do not believe that it is up to any professor or editor to decide
for us what is, and what is not nonsense. I would much rather like to
further revolutionize search tools and increase the general level of
media literacy. If we walk into a book store or library our culture
has taught us how to browse through the thousands of titles. Instead
of complaining to the librarian that they carry too many books, we
call in assistance, or find the way ourselves. Weizenbaum would
like us to distrust what we see on our screens, be it television or
Internet. Who is going to tell what to trust, what is the truth and
what not, Weizenbaum doesnt mention. Lets forget Weizenbaums info
anxiety. What makes this interview book an interesting read is his
insistence on the art of asking the right question. Weizenbaum warns
for an uncritical use of the word information. The signals inside
the computer are not information. They are not more than signals.
There is only one way to turn signals into information, through
interpretation. For this we depend on the labour of the human brain.
The problem of the Internet, so Weizenbaum, is that it invites us
to see it as a Delphi oracle. To all our questions and problems,
the Internet will provide you the answer. But the Internet is not a
vending machine in which you throw a coin and then get what you want.
First of all there are plenty of obstacles before one can even pose a
question, like class, race and gender. Key is that you need to have
a proper education in order to formulate the right query. Its all
about how one gets to pose the right question. Weizenbaum: It doesnt
mean much that everyone can publish on the Net. Random publishing is
as useless as random fishing. In this context Weizenbaum makes the
comparison between Internet and now vanished CB radio. Communication
alone will not lead to useful and sustainable knowledge.
Weizenbaum relates the uncontested belief in (search engine) queries
to the rise of the problem discourse. Computers were introduced
as general problem solvers and a solution for everything. People
were invited to delegate their lives to the computer. We have a
problem, so Weizenbaum, and the problem requires an answer. But
personal and social tensions cannot be resolved through by declaring
them a problem. What we need instead of Google and Wikipedia, is the
capacity to scrutinize and think critically. Weizenbaum explains
this with the difference between hearing and listening. For a critical
understanding we first have to sit down and listen. Then we also need
to read, not just decipher, and learn to interpret and understand.
As were all aware, the so-called Web 3.0 is going to be the
technocratic answer to Weizenbaums criticism. Instead of Googles
algorithms that are based on keywords and an output based on ranking,
soon we will be able to ask questions to the next generation of
natural language search engines such as Powerset. However, we can
already guess that these computational linguists will not question the
problem-answering approach and will be wary to act as professional
expert who will decide what is and whats not crap on the Internet.
The same counts for the semantic Web school and similar artificial
intelligence technologies. Ever since the rise of search engines in
the 1990s we seem to be stuck in the Society of the Query, which,
as Weizenbaum indicates, isnt that much different from Debords
Society of the Spectacle. The complete reannotation of the worlds
information isnt going to solve the inevitable issue, also raised by
Andrew Keen in his Cult of the Amateur, about the future status of
the professional expert. For the time being we remain obsessed with
the increase in quality of the answer to our queriesand not with the
underlying problem, namely the poor quality of our education and the
diminishing ability to think in a critical way. I am skeptical if
next generations will discover Weizenbaums islands of reasons .
The culture of time is simply not there to stroll around , like a
flaneur. Every information, any object or experience has to be at hand
instantaneous. Serendipity requires a lot of time. If we can no longer
stumble into islands of reason through our inquiries, we may as well
have to build them. By definition these island will be artificial,
and, most likely, digital in nature.
--
Joseph Weizenbaum mit Gunna Wendt, Wo sind sie, die Inseln der Vernunft
im Cyberstrom, Auswege aus der programmierten Gesellschaft, Herder
Verlag, Freiburg, 2006.
# distributed via : no commercial use without permission
# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: majordomo@kein.org and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.orgLabels: geert lovink, information overload, open access
