ANNENBERG-OXFORD MEDIA POLICY SUMMER

INSTITUTE AGENDA & PROGRAM

WELCOME TO THE 19TH ANNUAL ANNENBERG-OXFORD MEDIA POLICY SUMMER PROGRAM.

Below you will find the schedule for the two weeks of the Institute followed by the full program (which includes descriptions of each session and, in some cases, recommended readings. The Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute (or ‘AnOx’ as it is affectionately nicknamed) is a two-week program that seeks to provide each of you with an opportunity to think outside the bounds of your everyday work experiences and academic silos—to think about ‘the media’, ‘media policy’, and ‘communications’ as points of inquiry and analysis, systems that are culturally, socially, economically, and politically constructed. The program brings together 30+ participants from a range of countries, each with varied experiences and backgrounds, operating in diverging media contexts. Much of the significance of this experience will largely not derive from the content of the program, but rather from the discussions that will arise and the connections and friendships that are formed. We ask that you come to the sessions willing to participate with discussion questions and comments related to your own experiences/work/research interests. Additionally, it is of the utmost importance that everyone remains open-minded and respectful of the diverse viewpoints represented at the institute. We have put together this packet so that each of you can come to each session prepared and eager to contribute your thoughts and experiences to the conversation. The readings are not required, but we’ve provided them as resources to you in case you want additional material on any of the subjects or if you want to familiarize yourself with a topic before a session. Most of the readings are available in the Dropbox or online. We hope we have created a program that you will enjoy, bringing some of the top scholars and practitioners in the field to engage with you throughout the two weeks. See the full list of speaker biographies here. In the last eighteen years of this program, many collaborations and partnerships have emerged. If at any point during the two weeks, you would like to set up after-hours or lunch-time working groups on a specific topic that is of interest to you, please let Laura know. We are very much looking forward to meeting everyone at the Institute!

1

2017 ANNENBERG-OXFORD MEDIA POLICY SUMMER INSTITUTE1 Week 1 Schedule: June 26– June 30, 2017 Day Monday 6/26: Tuesday 6/27 Wednesday 6/28 Thursday 6/29 Friday 6/30 Weekend

Topic What is media policy in today’s world?

Media Ownership & Journalistic Futures

Legal frameworks: International,Regiona, National, Local

Regulation Activism & Civil Society

Coffee & Tea: 9:00-9:10

FREE TIME Suggested Activities: Punting,

Blenheim Palace, Christ Church,

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford Night Time Pub

Tour

One 9:10 – 10:30

Welcome & Introductions

Media Ownership & Democracy: Tarlach McGonagle

Freedom of expression and Freedom of Information as Universal Rights: Joan Barata Mir

The Governance of

Media Regulators: What

is Good Regulation? Krisztina Rozgonyi, Eve

Salomon

METHODS: Research

Ethics & Security

Practices: Ben Zevenbergen, Jennifer

Henrichsen, Christopher Ali

Two 10:30-11:45

Markets for Loyalties & Discussion: Monroe Price & Damian Tambini

The Role of platforms in Content Regulation: Noa Elephant, Elizabeth Linder, Monroe Price, Joan Barata Mir

Hate Speech, Blasphemy, and Extremist Speech: Tarlach McGonagle, Nani Jansen Reventlow, Sejal Parmar

Media Regulation Across

the World: Krisztina Rozgonyi, Eve Salomon, Sudharma Yoonaidharma, Jeremy Oliver

Surveillance & Global Activism: Claire Lauterbach

Lunch: 11:45-1:30 Columbia FOE Project Workshop (optional)

Three 1:30 – 2:45

Elections and Social Media: Damian Tambini

Changing Role of News Providers: Gill Philips

Media Development in the Digital Age (Reventlow), Nationalism & Freedom of Expression (Srikumar), Online Safety of Female Journalists (Adams)

OfCom Regulatory Case Study 1: Net Neutrality Jeremy Oliver

Media Institutions & Society (Lunsford), Social Media & Polarization in Brazil (dos Santos), Politics of NGOS in Egypt (Kassem)

Coffee and Tea Break: 2:45-3:00 Four 3:00-4:15

METHODS: Role of Media Policy Research & How to read policy: Christopher Ali & Hilde Van den Bulck

METHODS: Stakeholder analysis & Interviews, Comparative media analyses: Christopher Ali & Hilde Van den Bulck

Legal Case Studies: Silvia Grundmann, Simon Haselock, Hawley Johnson, Willem Korthals Altes

OfCom Regulatory Case Study 2: Impartiality Maria Donde

METHODS: The

“Pitch”: Christopher Ali &

Hilde Van den Bulck

Five 4:15 – 5:15

Media Self Regulation in Georgia (Dzvelishvili), Online Media Regulation (Aryal), Media Capture & Aggregator Problem (Tofalvy)

Freedom of Expression & Activism: Modes for engagement with PEN International Panel

Page | 2

2

2017 ANNENBERG-OXFORD MEDIA POLICY SUMMER INSTITUTE2 Week 2 Schedule: July 3 – July 7, 2017 Day Monday 7/3 Tuesday 7/4 Wednesday 7/5 Thursday 7/6 Friday 7/7 Weekend

Coffee & Tea: 8:50-9:10

Depart from Oxford

One 9:10 – 10:30

Panel of national examples of media control: Sara Garcia Santamaria, Thusiyan Nandakumar, Sudharma Yoonaidharma, Katya Fisher

Introduction to Internet Governance: Ben Zevenbergen & Corinne Cath

Internet Architecture & Policy: How Technology shapes Policy: Collin Anderson

Modern Propaganda & Strategic Communication: Monroe Price, Ping Shum, Gregory Asmolov, Efe Kerem Sozeri, Alicia Wanless

The Future of ICTs in Somalia: Abdala Mohamud

Two 10:30-11:45

Strategic Litigation for Freedom of Expression: Nani Jansen Reventlow & Jonathan McCully

Activity: IANA Transition: Ben Zevenbergen & Corinne Cath

Hate Speech and Content Moderation on Social Media: Chinmayi Arun

Cosmopolitan Dimensions of

Virality (Dementriades),

Gender & Science News

Consumption (Lin Shi),

TBD (Thanny), TBD

(Timshina), TBD (Romaniuk)

Lunch: 11:45-1:30

Three 1:30– 2:45

Media & Security in

Somalia (Ahmed), Zero

Rating in Myanmar &

India (Hurulle)

(End 2:15!)

Data Protection in the EU

(Medzini), Digital Rights

in Russia (Coughtrie),

TBD (Khoo), Cultural

Tranlsation in NGO

Policies (Nasir)

Social Media Perceptions in Africa (Chair), Twitter, the UK Debate, & Youth (Sanchez), Populist Media Policies in Latin America (Jolly)

The Fake News Conundrum: Alicia Wanless & Filip Noubel

Presentations and Discussion of group work

Coffee and Tea Break: 2:45-3:00

Four 3:00-4:15

(Start 2:30!)

Legal Methods & Moot

Court Exercise: Nani

Jansen Reventlow &

Jonathan McCully

Multistakeholderism & Cybersecurity: Sarah Taylor, Chinmayi Arun, Katya Fisher, Lea Kaspar, Charles Bradley

Whistleblowing and EU regulations : Flutura Kusari

Media & Democratization: Katrin Voltmer & Nicole Stremlau

Presentations (Continued), Final Discussion and Awards

Five 4:15 – 5:15

Group work time Group work time

Page | 3

DAY 1: MONDAY, JUNE 26: (AM COMMON ROOM, PM SEMINAR ROOM G) 9:10-10:30: Welcome & Introductions: Monroe Price, Laura Schwartz-Henderson

10:30- 11:45: Introduction to Media Policy & Markets for Loyalties Speakers: Monroe Price & Damian Tambini In this opening session and discussion, Professor Price will have a conversation with Dr. Damian Tambini who directs the Media Policy Project at the London School of Economics, a project with the goal to generate empirical research on current media policy issues and to improve the policy impact through engagement and inclusive deliberation with policymakers and media practitioners. Dr. Tambini will discuss some of the Project’s work and introduce a range of major media policy issues that will be discussed throughout the two weeks of the institute. Professor Price will also speak about his scholarship on "markets for loyalties.” Readings:

1. Picard, Robert G. and Victor Pickard, Essential Principles for Contemporary Media and Communications Policymaking, Reuters, (2017).

2. Price, Monroe E. "The market for loyalties: Electronic media and the global competition for

allegiances." The Yale Law Journal 104.3 (1994). 3. Review the issues highlighted on the Media Policy Project Website:

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/

1:30-2:45: Elections and Social Media Speaker: Damian Tambini This session will examine the way social media impacts elections around the world, with a specific focus on how the internet has affected campaign regulations in the UK. UK campaign regulation aim to ensure that elections are free and fair and not captured by a narrow range of interests. Since 1883, the UK has had legislation on its statute books that limits candidates’ spending on political campaigns. Broadcasting legislation ensures impartiality and fairness in elections as well as the legitimacy of democratic processes. Through this case study, Dr. Tambini will explore the evolution of the social media tactics used during elections and the changing patterns of citizens’ political information consumption. He will then describe how these new technologies pose challenges to established election communication regulations that were designed for a pre-internet world and the new role that intermediaries and social media platforms play as gatekeepers to political information. Readings:

1. Goodman, Emma, Sharif Labo, Damian Tambini, and Martin Moore. "The new political campaigning."

(2017).

3:00-5:15: Introduction to Media Research & How to Read Policy Speakers: Christopher Ali & Hilde Van den Bulck

This session will introduce and discuss the key terms and methods to understand the policy process as a stakeholder analysis. It starts from the idea that a policy decision is ‘the result of a process characterized by the formulation of different views and interests, expressed by actors or stakeholders who adhere to a particular logic, engage in debate, and work towards a policy decision in relevant fora’. We will first explore

Page | 4

the questions of what is policy and how to retrieve and read policy documents. We will then move on to designing a research project and how to ask good research questions. Lastly, we will introduce stakeholder analysis as a form of policy research. We will discuss the various factors involved: Who are stakeholders? How can they be identified? How to identify ideas and relevant fora?

Readings:

1. Freedman, D. (2008) ‘Is policy political?’, in D. Freedman The Politics of Media Policy. Cambridge: Whiley.

2. Van den Bulck, H. (2013) ‘Tracing media policy decisions’, in M.E. Price, S. Verhulst & L. Morgan (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Media Law. Abingdon: Routledge.

DAY 2: TUESDAY, JUNE 27: COMMON ROOM AM, SEMINAR ROOM G PM 9:10-10:30: Media Ownership & Democracy Speaker: Tarlach McGonagle Media freedom and media pluralism are essential features of an enabling environment for freedom of

expression and public debate. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly held that States have a

positive obligation to guarantee media pluralism, but it has not given much guidance on how States should

accomplish that task. This is not surprising. Media pluralism is a complex concept and it tends to be

regulated in different ways in different countries, reflecting international/regional standards as well as

national constitutional, legislative and cultural specificities.

Those who own and control the media exercise considerable communicative power. They determine

access to channels and forums of public debate. They thereby shape the modalities of participation in

public debate and influence the nature and focuses of public debate. This power has traditionally been

wielded by the mass media, but it is increasingly wielded by new media actors, namely different types of

internet intermediaries who perform similar gate-keeping functions to ‘traditional’ mass media. Regulatory

frameworks for media pluralism – with their traditional focuses on mass media and distinct media markets

- need to reflect and respond to the fluid, multi-media nature of the current communications environment.

This session will use the Council of Europe’s standard-setting work on media pluralism as a case study and

a starting point for a wider-ranging discussion on how pluralism of media ownership can help to ensure

that public debate is characterized by a diversity of information, ideas and opinions.

Readings:

1. T. McGonagle, ‘The State and beyond: activating (non-)media voices’, in Helena Sousa et al., Eds.,

Media Policy and Regulation: Activating Voices, Illuminating Silences, (Braga, Portugal, Communication

and Society Research Centre, University of Minho, 2014), pp. 187-198.

2. Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2007)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member

states on media pluralism and diversity of media content, 31 January 2007.

Page | 5

10:30- 11:45: The Role of Platforms in Content Regulation Speakers: Monroe Price, Elizabeth Linder, Noa Elefant Policymakers and politicians around the world, in response to various perceived or characterized misuses of social media, have called for greater monitoring and responsibility for platforms such as Google, Twitter, and Facebook to police content on their platforms. The drumbeat for this kind of responsibility has arisen under various rubrics, including the spread of hate speech, extremist content, and fake news online. Long-term understandings about the duties of platforms, including histories of notice and takedowns, self-regulatory roles and contractual roles relating to terms of service are under intense reexamination. The UK Prime Minister and the new French President have announced new measures; in April, Germany introduced a draft bill that would oblige companies to remove "criminal" content and false news that incites hate or face fines up to 50 million euros; the European Union has introduced proposals to require platforms to regulate live-streaming video; and after the US election, platforms such as Google and Facebook announced that they would voluntarily increase efforts to self-regulate and monitor content using additional moderators and more effective use of algorithms. The panel discussion will review these developments and others (such as the so-called Right to be Forgotten). How are different companies and different regulators dealing with these issues? Is a changed model practical? What does it mean to transfer this kind of decision-making power, over what material can circulate online, from public regulators and courts to private companies? How does this affect freedom of expression? What does this mean for national sovereignty and democratic functioning? Does moving the responsibility onto platforms mean that there will be less transparency with regard to the process of content removal? Will companies, in an effort to stay within the bounds of these proposed laws and avoid heavy fines, proactively remove content? And how can and should companies review this content to determine if it is illegal or dangerous? How will international or regional or national norms change to incorporate these developments?

Readings:

1. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jun/16/facebook-moderators-identity-exposed-

terrorist-groups

2. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/27/facebook-report-government-

propaganda

3. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/15/asia/pakistan-blasphemy-facebook/index.html

4. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/12/opinion/making-google-the-censor.html

5. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/13/google-and-facebook-face-penalties-if-they-

dont-stop-online-

hate?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Media+briefing+2016&utm_term

=230545&subid=22512562&CMP=

1:30-2:45: Changing Roles of News Providers

Speakers: Gill Philips

This session will look at how the changing commercial and digital environment - the internet, technology, advertising and globalization - has impacted upon the traditional role of the traditional news providers - the legacy media. The impact has been manifest in many different ways: dwindling hard copy print sales, forcing a move to online news; increasing use of different platforms, from PCs to tablets to mobile

Page | 6

phones, all of which impacts on the way news is conveyed, accessed and consumed; there is greater plurality of voice and views but also greater domination by behemoths and those who can shout the loudest.

In order to consider the changing roles of news providers, we need to try and define the term "news provider"? Is this a fixed or flexible definition? Have news providers changed over time? Does this impact on "role" that has been "assigned" them? By what parameters do we seek to judge or assess change? What changes have there been?

Readings:

1. https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/feb/17/newsprint-newspapers-even-in-

the-digital-age-remain-very-special

2. Emily Bell, ‘As Publishers Lose Control are Newspaper Websites a Dead

Parrot?’ https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/21/publishers-adblocking-advertising-

mobile

3. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Digital-News-Report-2016.pdf

4. http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/publications/2017/developing-digital-news-public-service-

media/

5. http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/uncategorized/2017/beyond-article-frontiers-editorial-

commercial-innovation/

3:00-5:15: Methods Session 2: Interviews and Public Campaigns Speakers: Christopher Ali & Hilde Van den Bulck This session will introduce and discuss the basic tools (methods) to understand the policy process,

focusing on interviews. We will discuss the particulars of doing in-depth elite interviews, the dos and

don’ts, opportunities and pitfalls and we discuss how to develop an interview protocol. The final part of

this session looks at public facing campaigns: how do we get our research to the public? How can policy

researchers engage in active contribution to create an impact on policy making? How can policy

researchers best make use of social media?

Readings:

1. Herzog, C., & Ali, C. (2015). Elite interviewing in media and communications policy research. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 11(1), 37-54.

2. Freedman, Des and Obar, Jonathan A., Media Reform: An Overview (July 17, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2632151 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2632151

3. Braman, S. (2003c). Enduring tensions and lessons learned. In S. Braman (Ed) Communication researchers and policy-making (pp. 575-592). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Page | 7

DAY 3: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28: COMMON ROOM 9:10-10:30: A Primer on International Media Law and Policy Speakers: Joan Barata Mir Freedom of expression and freedom of information are fundamental human rights recognized and protected by several international legal instruments. The role of such standards is to establish a minimum and universal level of protection of such rights that needs to be upheld and developed at the national level for these international laws and norms to have bearing and legitimacy. International standards also establish the parameters according to which States may introduce regulations and eventually restrictions to the exercise of these rights. This session will describe and discuss such international standards and provide a general overview of the international mechanisms currently in place in order to guarantee a proper and effective protection of freedom of expression. The session will also focus on the example provided by the European model, by looking into organizations such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe (CoE) and the European Union (EU). Issues considered will not only be the protection of rights and freedoms but also the establishment of media policy and regulatory models at the European level, particularly regarding audiovisual services. Readings:

1. McGonagle, Tarlach (2015): “Freedom of Expression: Still a Precondition of Democracy?”,

Conference Report, Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/1707

2. Voorhorf, Dirk (2014): “The Right to Freedom of Expression and Information under the

European Human Rights System: Towards a more Transparent Democratic Society”, EUI

Working Papers, Florence: European University Institute.

http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/29871/RSCAS_2014_12.pdf?sequence=1

3. Richter, A. (2016). Defining media freedom in international policy debates. Global Media and

Communication, 1742766516652164.

10:30-11:45: Hate Speech, Blasphemy, and Extremist Speech: Contesting the Boundaries of Free Speech Speakers: Nani Jansen Reventlow, Tarlach McGonagle, Sejal Parmar

Drawing boundaries often leads to disputes, few of which are more contentious than those involving free

speech. Hate speech, blasphemy and extremist speech are all types of speech that are typically located in

the boundary regions of free speech protection. Each of them is resistant to legal definition and open to

varying interpretations. These types of speech affect individuals, groups and societies in different ways and

are therefore met with varying levels of tolerance. Depending on the legal framework and political and

societal context, they may find themselves on either side of the boundary of legal protection.

This panel will explore the main rationales for countering such types of speech, before critically examining

the regulatory frameworks that seek to articulate those rationales. Next, a selection of real-life examples

and (attempted) legal solutions will be presented to illustrate the complex, controversial and challenging

Page | 8

nature of fixing legal boundaries to free speech. The examples will include online hate speech, including

gender-related aspects, and genocide denial.

Readings:

1. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (esp. Arts. 4, 5

and 7): http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cerd.pdf

2. CERD General Recommendation 35, 'Combating racist hate speech'.

3. McGonagle, T. (2012). The troubled relationship between free speech and racist hate speech: the

ambiguous roles of the media and internet. Expert Paper, Day of Thematic Discussion “Racist

Hate Speech” UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, 81st Session, Geneva,

6-31 August 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/348

4. Jansen, N., Denying Genocide or Denying Free Speech? A Case Study of the Application of

Rwanda's Genocide Denial Laws (April 14, 2014). Northwestern University Journal of

International Human Rights, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2014. Available at

SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2425060

5. OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Communiqué 02/2015 on the growing safety

threat to female journalists online, 6 February 2015. Retrieved from

http://www.osce.org/fom/139186

6. The Guardian's portal site, The Web We Want:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/series/the-web-we-want

1:30-2:45: Participant Presentations

1. Media Development in the Digital Age Andreas Reventlow

2. Nationalism and Freedom of Expression Sanjana Srikumar

3. Online Safety of Female Journalists Jennifer Adams

3:00-5:15: Case Studies on Freedom of Expression Standards & National Laws Speakers: Silvia Grundmann, Simon Haselock, Willem Korthals Altes, Hawley Johnson, Joan Barata Mir This series of presentations will provide insight into several case studies in which a variety of actors (governmental organizations, funders, private actors, academics, and courts) work to uphold international standards of freedom of expression and grapple with legal challenges at distinct jurisdictional levels. The case studies provide an understanding of the interplay between international norms/laws, regional bodies, and national legal and social issues.

Page | 9

The Council of Europe & the Protection of Freedom of Expression: In this presentation, Silvia Grundmann will describe how the Council of Europe has managed to develop a series of standard and criteria to protect freedom of expression and freedom of information. It will also dwell on the different mechanisms that the Council has in order to monitor and guarantee the effective implementation of such standards, including formal institutions like the European Court of Human Rights or more informal and/or political mechanisms such as the online platform to protect safety of journalists.

Albany Associates: International Donors and Media Development in Somalia Simon Haselock from Albany Associates will present how certain projects funded by international donors may help national authorities in achieving a proper understanding and application of international standards and best practices regarding the protection of freedom of expression. The presentation will take as a good example the specific project in which Albany is collaborating with Internews Liberia within the context of the so-called Media Development Program.

Columbia University’s Freedom of Expression Project Hawley Johnson from the Columbia Global Freedom of Expression Project will present the Global Case Law Database which hosts analyses of over 1000 court judgments pertaining to freedom of expression from more than 103 countries in order to document international standards and track emerging norms. This session will present case two case studies, one on the right to information and one on the decriminalization of defamation. We will trace the global journeys of the two seminal judgments exploring how they have influenced courts outside their jurisdiction and contributed to the development of new international standards.

The Dutch Courts: Freedom of Expression & Offensive Speech Willem Korthals Altes’ presentation will deal with two criminal trials against Geert Wilders, an outspoken Dutch anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim politician. He was acquitted in one, but convicted in the other. What can a politician say and where are the limits when it comes to offending groups of people because of their religion and race and inciting hatred against them?

DAY 4: THURSDAY, JUNE 29: COMMON ROOM 9:10-10:30: The governance of media regulators: What is Good Regulation? Speakers: Krisztina Rozgonyi and Eve Salomon

Media regulators traditionally play a precarious role in ensuring freedom of expression and safeguarding pluralism. This role has been further enhanced by the rapidly changing technological environment of broadcast media and by challenges posed by globalization of markets. Regulators are in the position to consider the impact of these changes and implement regulations that keep pace with the increasing complexity of these issues. It is widely acknowledged by international normative standards that an independent regulator is best placed “to act impartially in the public interest and to avoid undue influence from political or industry interests” (UNESCO Report below). There is wide range of best practices on legal, structural, operational, cultural and behavioral characteristics of independence that serve as benchmarks when assessing trends in the region. These have been referred to as de jure independence (legal status, governance rules, sources of funding), as effective functioning (regulatory, monitoring and sanctioning powers; degree of international cooperation) and as accountability (formal accountability, transparency requirements and judicial review). The session will introduce the main concepts and elements

Page | 10

of what constitutes ‘good regulation’ with a special emphasis on independence. Presenters will discuss the role of national and supranational actors in the governance process, the questions on who and how to regulate regulators, the indicators of ‘good governance’ and the phenomena of ‘media capture’. Insights into the governance mechanisms of Ofcom will contribute to and serve as widely acknowledged best practice examples.

Readings:

1. UNESCO Report 2016 on ‘Independent regulation of broadcasting: a review of international

policies and experiences’ by Eve Salomon

2. Polyák, G. and Rozgonyi, K. (2015), ‘Monitoring media regulators’ independence – Evidence-

based indicators, Hungarian experience’, International Journal of Digital Television, 6: 3, pp. 257–

273, doi: 10.1386/jdtv.6.3.257_1

10:30-11:45: Media Regulation Across the World Speakers: Eve Salomon, Joan Barata Mir, Sudharma Yoonaidharma, Jeremy Oliver Moderator: Krisztina Rozgonyi

The panelists are to follow up the introduction of the morning session with providing global insights into ‘good governance’ of regulators. Discussion topics are to address “principles” of Good Regulation, including proportionality, accountability, consistency, transparency and regulatory targeting. The panelists will bring into national experiences with global relevance on how in in what manner are addressing these principles regulators in their operations. Questions to consider include: What kinds of policy approaches on remedies are best to meet proportionality? What are the key elements of an accountability framework set by regulators; How do you cope with emerging technological challenges to regulation while keep up with consistency? What are the pros and cons of transparent regulation? What are the tensions between focused and targeted regulatory interventions vs. complex and convergent regulatory objects and who should mitigate the tensions?

1:30-2:45: OfCom Regulatory Case Study 1: Net Neutrality Speakers: Jeremy Oliver

Ofcom – the UK regulator – is looked by many as the ‘role model’ of regulators. This distinguished status and appraisal is a result of decade-long, highly professional and exemplary rulemaking, accountable operations and standard-setting policy-making. Representatives of Ofcom will present case studies with global relevance whereby the several, inevitable and interrelated elements of ‘good regulation’ are to be traced. Case studies will include public service broadcasting, self and co-regulation, net neutrality, and cross-border regulatory issues. Readings: 1. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/internet-and-on-demand-research/net-neutrality

3:00-4:00: OfCom Regulatory Case Study 2: Impartiality Speakers: Maria Donde

Page | 11

Readings: 1. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/94271/Issue-317.pdf(Hannity, Fox News) 2. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/50507/issue_288.pdf(Genocide of Easter Ukraine, RT) 3. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/50436/issue_284.pdf(Today, NTV Mir Lithuania)

4:00-5:15: Participant Presentations

1. Media Self-Regulation in Georgia Nata Dzvelishvili

2. Issues of Online Media Regulation in Nepal Babu Ram Aryal

3. How are the 'Media Capture' and the 'Aggregator Problem' Connected and What are the

Consequences?

Tamas Tofalvy

DAY 5: FRIDAY, JUNE 30: SEMINAR RM A (AM); COMMON ROOM (PM) 9:10-10:30: Research Ethics & Security Practices Speakers: Christopher Ali, Bendert Zevenbergen, Jennifer Henrichsen

Introduction to Ethics for Media Policy Research: Chris Ali Like any discipline, policy research comes with a strict code of ethical guidelines to which the researcher must adhere. Learning these rules, their rational, and their application is easier for those located in an academic institution, many of which have their own ethics review committees and who may require students and professors to take modules on research ethics. For those not located in research institutions learning about research ethics can be a challenge. This presentation will introduce everyone to the ethics of policy research with a focus on the questions and considerations a researcher needs to be aware. This includes consent forms, introductory emails, the difference between confidentiality and anonymity, data storage, access, and permissions. It will also review the Institutional Review Board (IRB) functions at North American universities and provide non-university based participants valuable resources for obtaining more instruction. Lastly, this presentation will open up to a discussion, asking participants to pose research ethics questions to the panelists and to each other. This way, we can better understand the “messiness” of research and develop tools to draw on during the difficult ethical dilemmas all researchers encounter.

How Information Infrastructure Evolves & the Effects on Theory & Practice: Bendert Zevenbergen Computer science and the Internet are more powerful than they have ever been. Digitization of previously analogues information exchanges changes the fundamental properties of information. This in turn changes

Page | 12

the nature, operation, and reach of some important societal concepts that rely on information transmissions, such as freedom of speech, copyright, surveillance, and even social science research. With the underlying information infrastructure changing through technology, the assumptions about informational properties upon which some of these concepts are based, have changed. Ben will give an introduction how these social constructs may have changed in their operation due to societies' increasing reliance on the Internet. Possible questions for the session: how can we understand the impact of technologies and the information processing it enables on particular concepts? And how can we design internet technologies to enable and respect the fundamental ideas of these concepts without necessarily halting innovation in the information infrastructure? Which aspects/assumptions/properties of these do we need to rethink to be in line with modern information technology?

Ethics & Security Practices for Researchers, Journalists, Lawyers: Jennifer Henrichsen As flows of information, devices, and platforms are increasingly connected, so too are information security concerns. This presentation will extend the conversation on ethical research guidelines by relating ethics and research to information security concerns and practices. It will introduce everyone to common security concerns, which researchers, lawyers, and journalists may face during their work. Participants will be asked to share specific concerns or questions they may have about information security to facilitate robust discussion and ensure individuals leave the discussion with a framework for thinking about information security and risk awareness in a contextually specific way.

10:30-11:45: Surveillance & Global Activism Speakers: Claire Lauterbach In this talk, Claire Lauterbach will explore the different ways in which the nongovernmental sector, in particular Privacy International, has sought to roll back the unaccountable collection of personal data by governments and companies worldwide in a way that is consistent with those actors' human rights obligations. Through the presentation, she will also discuss the practical challenges of engaging in this kind of advocacy and explore a few key approaches, including strategic litigation, investigation, and public discourse-shifting, with reference to recent examples. Readings:

1. Watson, S. (2016), ‘Style Guide to Writing About Technology’. Tow Center. Available at

https://medium.com/tow-center/style-guide-for-writing-about-technology-8293e3d8251b

2. Halpern, S (2016), ‘They Have, Right Now, Another You’. The New York Review of Books. Available

at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/22/they-have-right-now-another-you/

12:15-1:30: (Optional) Lunch Workshop on Columbia Global Freedom of Expression Case Law Database Speakers: Hawley Johnson

Presentation of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression’s database with a discussion of some sample case analyses. We would like to have the students use the database to do specified searches and give us

Page | 13

feedback on its content, navigation and design. I would also like to discuss with them how they would use the database and what visualizations would be useful for their research. This would help inform our outreach and future development of thedatabase. I would also be happy to highlight other databases on freedom of expression such as IPI’s database on defamation laws and Social Media Exchange’s digital rightsdataset for the Middle East.

1:30-2:45: Participant Presentations

1. Exploring Dimensions of the Media Institution-Society Relationship John Lunsford

2. Democracy, Citizenship, and Political Polarization in Social Media: the Brazilian case

Maike Wile dos Santos

3. Which Civil Society? The Role of Traditional and Alternative Media in Shaping and Re-shaping

the Politics of NGOs in Egypt

Nermeen Kassem

3:00-4:15: Research Methods: The “Pitch” Speakers: Christopher Ali & Hilde Van den Bulck

By the end of the first week, each group should meet with either Christopher or Hilde to discuss their research proposal idea. This is an informal meeting that will allow Chris and Hilde to offer guidance and critique of the proposal and to point you in the right direction of relevant research. Each group will then ‘pitch’ their idea to the entire group of participants to get preliminary feedback on the idea and troubleshoot any issues. This informal presentation should be approximately 7-10 minutes.

4:15-5:15: Freedom of Expression Activism & the Role of Art: Examples from Around the World A Panel with PEN International: Arza Bektasagic, Zar Chi Oo, Danson Kahyana, Akram Rayess, and Sarah Clarke To Kill a Mockingbird, The Second Sex, Beloved are some of the books which have changed the world and the way society thinks about race, gender and justice. What is the role of art and literature in free expression advocacy? What are the most effective uses of creative advocacy? Are there pitfalls of putting art at the service of advocacy?

PEN International is a network of over 150 Centers in over 100 countries with some 30,000 writer members around the world who use literature to protect freedom of expression and writers at risk and promote tolerance and intercultural dialogue. This panel brings together PEN members from Uganda, Myanmar, Lebanon and Bosnia to discuss creative approaches to advocacy using the written and spoken word in advocacy in a wide array of contexts of freedom of expression.

1. Imposing Silence: The Use of India’s Laws to Suppress Free Speech http://www.pen-

international.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Cultures-Oxygen-The-PEN-Report.pdf

2. Journalism in the Shadows of Impunity in Honduras: http://www.pen-international.org/wp-

content/uploads/2014/01/Honduras-Journalism-in-the-Shadow-of-Impunity1.pdf

3. Culture’s Oxygen: The PEN report http://www.pen-international.org/wp-

content/uploads/2017/02/Cultures-Oxygen-The-PEN-Report.pdf

Page | 14

DAY 6: MONDAY, JULY 3: COMMON ROOM ALL DAY 9:10-10:30: Media in Restrictive Contexts: Case Studies from Thailand, Cuba, Sri Lanka, and Russia Speakers: Sara Garcia Santamaria, Sudharma Yoonaidharma, Thusiyan Nandakumar, Katya Fisher In Western media and academia, comparative media analysis has typically categorized media systems along the binary of “free” and “unfree”, with the “free” countries typically operating in democratic contexts and the “unfree” in autocratic countries characterized by varying levels of censorship and media restriction. However, this binary fails to capture the variations and complexities of media systems, particularly those in non-democratic regimes that might have alternative conceptions of the role of the media, the rights of journalists and citizens to free speech, and the relationship between the media and the government as well as the media and the citizenry. In this panel, panelists will be exploring the ways in which the media operates in several countries which have been characterized as “not free” by Freedom House’s freedom of the press report: Sri Lanka, Thailand, Russia, and Cuba. The goal of this panel is to better understand the ways in which the media operates in more restrictive contexts from the perspective of journalists, regulators, and academics and to challenge some of the existing assumptions that exist about “free” and “unfree” media systems. Readings:

1. Repnikova, M. (2015). Media oversight in non-democratic regimes: The perspectives of officials and journalists in China. PARCG Paper 3. Retrieved from http://media.wix.com/ugd/86a19a_45ae8786347749edb933aaa2fa25476d.pdf

2. Cuba (2016) from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/cuba 3. Thailand (2016) from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/thailand 4. Sri Lanka (2016) from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/sri-lanka 5. Russia (2016) from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/russia

10:30-11:45: Strategic Litigation for Freedom of Expression Speakers: Nani Jansen-Reventlow & Jonathan McCully How can the right to freedom of expression be protected and strengthened through the courts? In this session, Jonathan McCully of the Media Legal Defence Initiative and human rights lawyer Nani Jansen Reventlow will discuss by means of a number of case studies what strategic litigation is, how it can be used to protect and strengthen the right to freedom of expression, and how lawyers and non-lawyers can work together to make litigation a success. The session will be followed by a moot court exercise in the afternoon, during which everyone can test out their newly-learned lawyering skills on a case scenario and argue their case before the International Court of AnOx. Readings:

1. LISTEN: Radiolab presents More Perfect- The Imperfect Plaintiffs. Available at

http://one.npr.org/?sharedMediaId=483936416:483936418

2. Review: http://www.digitalrightscollaboration.org/

3. Rajah, Jothie, and Arun K. Thiruvengadam. "Of Absences, Masks and Exceptions: Cause

Lawyering in Singapore." (2014).

Page | 15

4. Cummings, Scott L., and Deborah L. Rhode. "Public interest litigation: Insights from theory and

practice." Fordham Urb. LJ 36 (2009): 603.

1:30-2:45: Participant Presentations

1. Media and Security in Somalia Fatma Ahmed

2. Comparing Zero Rating in Myanmar & India Gayani Hurelle

3:00-5:15: Moot Court at the International Court of ANOX

DAY 7: TUESDAY, JULY 4: SEMINAR ROOM C 9:10-11:45: Internet Governance in Practice: Negotiating the Internet Assigned Names Authority (IANA) transition Speakers: Bendert Zevenbergen & Corinne Cath This session will first provide a general background to the theory and practice of Internet governance, outlining the historical evolution of multistakeholder governance and the internet and an overview of the major current issues. The session will then seek to provide first-hand experience in the intricacies of multistakeholder governance through the case study of the negotiations leading up to the Internet Assigned Names and Numbers (IANA) transition. This exercise will allow participants to journey back in time to 2014 and translate the theoretical knowledge about Internet governance to the every-day reality of regulating the Internet. Recommended Readings: 1. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/multistakeholder-1.pdf 2. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/what-2012-02-25-en 3. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/04/us-government-internet-control-iana-address-book

1:30-2:45: Participant Presentations 1. EU’s Internet Policy for Data Protection: Proposed Classifications for Regulatory Instruments

Rotem Medzini

3. Digital Rights in Russia

Susan Coughtrie

4. TBD: Cynthia Khoo

Page | 16

3:00-5:15: Multistakeholder Governance in a Westphalian World Speakers: Lea Kaspar, Sarah Taylor, Katya Fisher, Chinmayi Arun The multistakeholder approach has come to be considered the default approach to internet governance. But when it comes to policy issues that have long been the prerogative of governments––including international peace & security and development––which now have an internet dimension, can the same approach be applied? As the lines between the offline and the online world get blurred, what is the appropriate governance approach to address these policy challenges? In this session, participants will be asked to explore the tensions between the multistakeholder approach and the existing global governance ecosystem.

Readings: 1. Contreras, Jorge L., Laura DeNardis, and Melanie Teplinsky. "Mapping today's cybersecurity

landscape." Am. UL Rev. 62 (2012): 1113.

2. Global Partners Digital. (2013). Internet governance: Towards greater understanding of Global South perspectives. Global Partners Digital. Retrieved from http://www.gp-digital.org/publication/global-south/.

3. Global Partners and Associates (2013). Internet governance: Mapping the battleground. Global Partners and Associates. Retrieved from http://www.gp-digital.org/wp-content/uploads/pubs/Internet-Governance-Mapping-the-Battleground.final_1.pdf.

DAY 8: WEDNESDAY, JULY 5: COMMON ROOM 9:10-10:30: Internet Architecture: How Technology Shapes Policy Speaker: Collin Anderson How does the Internet work? And how does the technical architecture of the internet shape internet policy? This presentation will provide an overview on the basics of network infrastructure, the policy issues that have arisen on Internet development around the world, and how measurement can shed light on issues of access. This will include identifying existing datasets and platforms that contain data relevant to researchers, as well as demonstrating tools for establishing more structural data collection. Through the use of real examples and data on topics such as censorship and network neutrality, the session will describe the technologies, practices and methodologies involved in order to provide a deeper understanding of the policy and technology issues in play. Readings:

1. Chiodi, P. C. (2014). A Technical Overview of content Blocking Methods. Retrieved from

http://www.pierky.com/docs/ATechnicalOverviewOfContentBlockingMethods.pdf.

2. Anderson, C. (2013). Dimming the Internet: Detecting throttling as a mechanism of Censorship in

Iran. arXiv:1306.4361. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.4361.

10:30-11:45: The Censor’s Toolkit: How Content is Regulated Online Speaker: Chinmayi Arun This session will focus on regulation of content online, especially on social media platforms, using hate speech and harmful speech as illustrations. It will cover government-mandated and government-induced

Page | 17

regulation of content, as well as other ways in which social media platforms deal with harmful speech online. [Please note that the reading material contains explicit language and descriptions which may be disturbing]

Readings:

1. Excerpt from Bambauer, D. E. (2012). Orwell's armchair. The University of Chicago Law Review, 863-

944.

2. Valenti, J. (2015). “The Word Troll Feels Too Childish. This is Abuse”. The Guardian

3. Newitz, A. (2016). “How Twitter Quietly Banned Hate Speech Last Year”. Ars Technica

4. Krause, T and Grassegger, H (2016). SZ International.

1:30-2:45: Participant Presentations

1. Social Media Perceptions & Policy/Regulation in select African Countries Chenai Chair

2. Twitter Trends During UK Debates & The Youth Vote

Mariana Sanchez

3. Populist Media Policies in the Latin American Left

Sanjay Jolly

3:00-4:30: Workshop: International Standards on Protection of Whistleblowers Speaker: Flutura Kusari You’ve likely heard about international whistleblowers Edward Snowden, Antoine Deltour or Maria Bamieh. But how familiar are you with the legal troubles they are going through? We will be talking about them from legal perspective in a workshop dedicated to whistleblowers protection. The objective of this workshop is to raise awareness about protection of whistleblowers. Specific elements such as protected disclosures, reporting channels, identity protection, confidentiality and protection mechanisms will be discussed. The workshop will last 90 minutes and will be divided in two parts. First part will be an interactive discussion of a fictional case of whistleblowing and second part will provide an overview international standards of the European Court of Human Rights and Council of Europe on protection of whistleblowers will be provided. Reading:

1. Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 of the Committee of Ministers to member

States on the protection of whistleblowers:

https://whistlenetwork.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/cmrec20147e.pdf

2. Freedom of Expression, the Media and Journalists: Case-law of the European Court of Human

Rights:

http://www.obs.coe.int/documents/205595/2667238/IRIS+Themes+III+(final+9+December+

2013).pdf/2e748bd5-7108-4ea7-baa6-59332f885418

Page | 18

3. Report of the Special Rapporteur to the General Assembly on the Protection of Sources and

Whistleblowers

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/ProtectionOfSources.aspx

4. Whistleblower Protection and the UN Convention Against

Corruption http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/ti_report_

/ti_report_en.pdf

4:30-5:30: Time for Group Work

DAY 9: THURSDAY, JULY 6: COMMON ROOM 9:10-11:45: Modern Propaganda & Strategic Communication Speakers: Monroe Price, Gregory Asmolov, Ping Shum, Efe Kerem Sozeri, Alicia Wanless How to define propaganda has and will remain problematic; but the existence of propagandizing efforts by states seems to be increasing and the techniques for effective propagandizing (by state and non-state actors) more complex and often tied to modern technologies. Governments are ratcheting up their effort to control narratives within their domain and affect narratives abroad. This panel discussion will touch upon old and new propaganda techniques, a variety of settings which provide case-studies in shifting modes of propaganda, and the evolution of international norms relating to propaganda, fake news and freedom of expression. Governments have developed new tactics for the creation and dissemination of content as well as for the stifling of dissent and control of counter-narratives: from Internet Firewalls to trolling, DOS-attacks to fake accounts. The menu is large and used creatively. Consequently, the complexity of the technology now available provides for new interactions between media producer and audience, creating new forms and variations of propagandistic communication: denial, message appropriation and transformation into opposite meaning, demonization, plot theory, the narrative of national security, foreign hand discourses, blocking or delay of information. The panel will look at how strategic communication and state propaganda are evolving in a variety of contexts reflecting a variety of styles and techniques (ISIS, Ukraine, Russia, China, Turkey, the US and the UK.). Readings:

1. Robinson, P. (2017). Propaganda Here and Now. Centre for Freedom of the Media. http://www.cfom.org.uk/2017/02/propaganda-here-and-now/

2. Social Media as a tool of hybrid warfare, http://www.stratcomcoe.org/social-media-tool-hybrid-warfare

3. Yesil, Bilge, Efe Kerem Sözeri, and Emad Khazraee. "Turkey’s Internet Policy After the Coup Attempt: The Emergence of a Distributed Network of Online Suppression and Surveillance." Internet Policy Observatory (2017).

4. http://www.poynter.org/2017/these-fake-fact-checkers-are-peddling-lies-about-genocide-and-censorship-in-turkey/461446/

5. Pötzsch, H. (2015). “The Emergence of iWar: Changing Practices and Perceptions of Military Engagement in a Digital Era.” New Media & Society, 17(1): 78–95.

6. Asmolov, G. and Kolozaridi, P. (2017). “The Imaginaries of RuNet: the Change of the Elites and the Construction of Online Space”, Russian Politics, 2, pp. 54-79.

7. Shum, P. Unpublished. “Internet Commentator as a Tool For Public Opinion Guidance,” From ‘Beyond Propaganda: The Chinese Party-State's Innovative Internet Strategies’.

Page | 19

8. King, Gary, Jennifer Pan, and Margaret E. Roberts. "How the Chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument." Harvard University (2016).

9. Wanless, A. (2017). Participatory Propaganda: A Model. https://lageneralista.com/participatory-propaganda-a-model/

10. Wanless, A. (2017). Anti-Establishment Blues: 2017 U.K. Election. https://lageneralista.com/anti-establishment-blues-2017-u-k-election/

11. Lazitski, O. (2014). Media Endarkenment: A Comparative Analysis of 2012 Election Coverage in the United States and Russia. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(7), 898-927.

1:30-2:45: Fake it ‘till you Make it: The Fake News Conundrum Speakers: Alicia Wanless & Filip Noubel Fake news has always been a problem. This talk explores the history of fake news in conflict, diplomacy, and politics, and how disinformation is changing in a Digital Age, drawing on examples from Venezuela, Syria, South Africa and the U.S, exploring some of the motivations and types of fake content. The second half of the presentation will provide an overview on some of the ‘fixes’ that have been proposed by both policymakers and companies and the potential issues with these proposals. While it is clear that many politicians, companies, scholars and journalists see the spread of disinformation as threatening democratic systems and public discourse, many of the suggested solutions are profoundly problematic and could potentially lead to intentional or unintentional restrictions on freedom of speech. Readings:

1. Silverman, C. (2015). Lies, Damn lies, and viral content. How news websites spread (and debunk)

online rumors, unverified claims, and misinformation. Tow Center for Digital Journalism.

2. Moore, A. (2015). Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories and Democracy. Political Studies Review,

1478-9302.,

3. Balmas, M. (2014). When Fake News Becomes Real: Combined Exposure to Multiple News

Sources and Political Attitudes of Inefficacy, Alienation, and Cynicism. Communication Research,

41(3), 430-454

4. Solon O., and Levin S., (2016, December 16). How Google's search algorithm spreads false

information with a right-wing bias. The Guardian. Retrieved 21 January 2017 from

http://bit.ly/2gSL7PJ

5. Manjoo, F. (2008). True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society. Wiley

6. Allcott, Hunt, and Matthew Gentzkow. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. No.

w23089. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017.

3:00-4:15: Communicating Democratisation conflicts: Media and Journalism in Troubled Times Speakers: Katrin Voltmer & Nicole Stremlau The experience of recent instances of democratic transitions has shown that neither competitive elections nor the abolition of censorship are a guarantee for a more peaceful and open society. In the contrary, transitions to democracy are frequently accompanied by deep conflicts and even the outbreak of civil violence, while sectarian groups use the open media space to stir inter-communal hatred. The rise of digital media and social network platforms has further intensified the struggle over the public commons: whose

Page | 20

voices are being heard, what vision of the future of the country emerges and whether bridges can be built between opposite factions. This session introduces the EU-funded project ‘Media, Conflict and Democratization’ (www.mecodem.eu), which addresses these issues. The project investigates the interconnection between public communication and post-transitional conflicts in four countries: Serbia, Egypt, Kenya and South Africa, each of which representing distinct constellations of democratic transformation. The session will review the transformation of citizenship in new democracies, strategic communication and hybrid governance, and the ways in which democracy is ‘interpreted’ in Egypt, Serbia, and South Africa.

Reading:

1. Barany, Z. and R.G. Moore (eds.) (2009) Is Democracy Exportable? Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

2. Cottle, S. (2006) Mediatized Conflict. Developments in Media and Conflict Studies. Maidenhead: Open

University Press.

3. Hallin, D.C. and P. Mancini (eds.) (2012) Comparing Media Systems beyond the Western World.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

4. Zielonka, J. (ed.) (2015) Media and Politics in New Democracies. Europe in a Comparative Perspective.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

5. Voltmer, K. (2013) The Media in Transitional Democracies. Cambridge: Polity

DAY 10: FRIDAY, JULY 8: AM (LECTURE THEATRE) PM (COMMON ROOM) 9:10-10:30: The Future of ICTs and Media Policy in Somalia

Speaker: Abdala Mohamud

10:30-11:45: Participant Presentations

1. The Boy in the Ambulance: Cosmopolitan Dimensions of Virality Stefanie Demetriades

2. The Gender Gap in the Consumption of Science News Stories

Lin Shi

3. TBD

Noeem Thanny

4. TBD

Natalia Timshina

1:30-2:45: Presentations and Discussion of Group Work

Page | 21

3:00-4:30: Presentations (Continued) & Key Takeaways & Future Collaborations Brainstorming Session This last session serves to provide participants with the opportunity to engage in a final discussion, to reflect on the institute as a whole, to discuss any issues that may be left unanswered as well as key takeaways. We will ask participants to each come up with ideas for a project (or two or three) that they would like to work on in the months following the institute, touching on the issues presented in the two weeks of the program and/or involving collaboration with other participants/speakers you’ve met through the program. In the context of an informal discussion, you will be asked to present your ideas for future projects. We want to hear your ideas for building on the discussions, friendships, and projects of these two weeks.

4:30-5:00: Award Ceremony

Page | 22

2017 ANNENBERG-OXFORD MEDIA POLICY SUMMER

INSTITUTE SPEAKER BIOS

Abdala Mohamud is a graduate from the University of West London with BSc Information Management & Publishing and holds an MA in E-Publishing from City University, London. In 2012 Abdala moved back to Somalia (Diaspora) after 18 years in UK first working as an Academic for Somalia University in Mogadishu, volunteered as a Basketball trainer, and in 2013 started working with the biggest Telecom Company in Somalia as a Chief Strategy Officer & Head of International Public Relations at Hormuud Telecom Somalia Inc. Based both in Nairobi, Kenya and Mogadishu Somalia, He constantly deals with the ever-changing business environment, government regulations, competition, over the border trade and the challenges of running a Telecom business in a politically unstable and hostile environment. In addition to Communications and PR, his areas of engagement and interest also include Regulations, Public Private Partnerships, Public Private Dialogue, Consortiums, expansion & investment, innovation policies, Fibre Optic Cable Internet business and internet governance. His International Relation’s department office produces a Telecom industry featuring quarterly Magazine, known as “Konnect Magazine” circulated in the Horn of Africa

Akram Rayess is a researcher, management consultant and trainer with more than 17 years of experience in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. His educational background is in Sociology - Anthropology (American University in Beirut AUB, 1991) and Business Studies (Lebanese American University LAU, 1994). Currently, he is pursuing a Master’s program in Public Policy & International Affairs (AUB, 2016 -). Akram has extensive experience in bidding and implementation of projects funded by the World Bank, EU and UN for capacity building, public sector reform and translation in the Levant region. He has designed and implemented several training courses, seminars and conferences covering management, bidding and quality assurance subjects. Parallel to his professional work, Akram is a researcher in Ethnomusicology with interest in music of the Levant, music theater, cultural development, modern heritage and documentation. He is a founding member of the Foundation for Arab Music Archiving and Research AMAR (2009- ), a steering Committee member of the Modern Heritage Observatory MoHO (2014 -) and a member of PEN Lebanon (2016 - ).

Page | 23

Alicia Wanless researches how we shape — and are shaped — by a changing information space. As the Director of Strategic Communications at The SecDev Foundation, Alicia develops campaigns and strategies for engaging beneficiaries in outreach and behavioral change. Her work includes developing a training program that deals with verifying information and the spread of content online, and has supported projects in the Middle East, Vietnam and the post-Soviet space.

Alicia has trained journalists, social activists, and military personnel, as well as given talks on the Age of (Dis)information and Participatory Propaganda, and has participated in events at Wilton Park, the Hedayah Centre, Ryerson University, Whitehall, and the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, among others.

Azra Bektasagic, PEN BIH, MA Leadership and Training - for the past 20 years she has been working in a non-government sector on projects related to community development and capacity building, maintaining position of project manager, member of the board or organizational development consultant. Since the transition in Bosnia-Herzegovina has been a long and difficult one, she had the opportunity to work in national and international organizations on multi-disciplinary projects, public outreach and advocacy programs, training programs, human rights initiatives etc. The research project for her MA in leadership was looking into leadership development opportunities in a national NGO that is currently leading BiH’s EU integration process. She is also a partner in a medium-size private company that facilitates trade and consulting in telecommunications services, in charge of strategic management and human resource management. Having a cross-sectorial experience, she is well positioned to discuss and understand challenges, interdependencies and opportunities between these “spheres” in creating social change and generating employment.

Bendert Zevenbergen is a visiting research scholar at the CITP. His work is mostly multidisciplinary investigations in the ethical, social, and legal impacts of Internet technologies, and vice versa. At CITP he is working on case studies to further develop a framework and theory about the design of Internet projects that take social functional requirements into account in a meaningful way. Ben is currently working on a Ph.D. at the Oxford Internet Institute where he uses socio-legal methods to investigate the upcoming field of privacy engineering. Next to his doctoral work, Ben been working actively with computer scientists and network engineers to develop a set of guidelines of ethics in networked systems research. Before returning to academia, Ben was a policy advisor to a politician in the European Parliament, working on Europe’s Digital Agenda and other Internet policy. Previously, Ben worked as an

Page | 24

ICT/IP lawyer and policy consultant in the Netherlands. Bendert holds a degree in law, specializing in Information Law.

Chinmayi Arun is Executive Director of the Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi, where she is also an Assistant Professor of Law. She is a member of the Indian Government's multi stakeholder advisory group for the India Internet Governance Forum and has been a consultant to the Law Commission of India. She is also a Faculty Associate of the Berkman Klein Centre at Harvard University. Chinmayi has published academic papers on surveillance and the right to privacy in India, and on information gatekeeper liability in the context of internet intermediaries. She is lead author of the India country report in Freedom House's Freedom on the Net report for 2014 and 2015, and of the India report in the Global Network of Center's study of online intermediaries. Chinmayi has studied at the NALSAR University of Law, and London School of Economics and Political Science. At the LSE, she read regulatory theory and new media regulation, and was awarded the Bernard Levin Award for Student Journalism. She has worked with Ernst & Young and AZB & Partners, Mumbai in the past, and has taught at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences where she introduced courses on regulatory theory and communication regulation. She teaches courses on information policy and Internet Governance at National Law University Delhi.

Christopher Ali is an Assistant Professor in Department of Media Studies at the University of Virginia. He obtained a PhD at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. He also holds degrees from Concordia University (Montreal, Canada) and the University of Alberta (Edmonton, Canada). Dr. Ali’s research interests lie at the intersection of communication policy and regulation, critical theory, comparative media systems studies, and localism. More specifically, his research has attempted to better understand local, public and community media regulation, policy and discourse in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada through a critical lens. His doctoral dissertation was a comparative critical analysis of “localism” in communication regulation from 2000-2012 in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada. He has served as an intern to the FCC’s Office of Strategic Planning and Policy, working on the noncommercial and public media chapters of the 2011 Information Needs of Communities report. He has also been a researcher for the Center for Social Media at American University working on various

Page | 25

projects cataloguing innovations in local and public media. Dr. Ali has published in numerous scholarly journals and has c-authored (with Dr. Elihu Katz and Dr. Joohan Kim) the book, Echoes of Gabriel Tarde: What we know better or different 100 years later (USC Annenberg Press. 2014).

Claire Lauterbach leads the Research and Investigation Team at Privacy International; she focuses on the use and abuse of surveillance technologies globally.

Collin Anderson is a Washington D.C.-based researcher currently working on documenting online activism, electronic surveillance and Internet censorship in the Middle East, specifically Iran and Syria. Currently, Collin is developing mechanisms to detect and measure the usage of filter circumvention methods, to quantify the proliferation of tools among the general public in Internet-filtering countries. He has also been involved in identifying the international flow of surveillance equipment and exploring alternative means of communications that bypass normal channels of state-control. His participation in issues of connectivity has led to documenting of availability and legality of online communications services to the public under sanctions restrictions, as well as the ramifications of export regulations to democratization movements.

Corinne Cath is a doctoral student at the Oxford Internet Institute and the Alan Turing Institute for data science. Her research focuses on the politics and ethics of Internet governance and the management of the Internet’s infrastructure. Prior to joining the OII for her DPhil, she worked as a program officer for the “Digital Team” of human rights NGO ARTICLE 19, and as policy advisor for the US House of Representatives in Washington D.C. Corinne has an MSc in Social Science of the Internet from the University of Oxford and an MA in International Relations from the University of Utrecht.

Page | 26

Damian Tambini is Senior Lecturer at the London School of Economics and an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR),[1] and at the Oxford Internet Institute. He is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and serves on the advisory Groups of the Oxford Media Convention and Polis.[2] He also teaches for the TRIUM Global Executive MBA Program, an alliance of NYU Stern, the London School of Economics and HEC School of Management. Damian Tambini is on the Advisory Board of the Center for International Media Ethics.

Danson Sylvester Kahyana is President, Ugandan PEN. He teaches in the Literature Department at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda. He holds a PhD in English from Stellenbosch University, South Africa. He has published short stories and poems in anthologies like Dance the Guns to Silence (2005), Michael’s Eyes: The War against the Ugandan Child (2005), and We Have Crossed Many Rivers: New Poetry from Africa (2012), and a children’s novel, Biira’s Success (2009). He is a former Fellow of the African Humanities Program of the American Council of Learned Societies (2015-2016).

Efe Kerem Sözeri is a PhD candidate at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and is writing his dissertation on Turkish migrants’ political behaviur in Europe and Turkey. He completed his MA thesis at the same university. Next to his academic work, Efe writes about press freedoms and censorship for the Daily Dot, Vocativ and Global Voices in English; P24 and Bianet in Turkey, and TAZ in Germany.

Page | 27

Elizabeth Linder is the Founder and CEO of The Conversational Century, and Politics and Government Specialist at Facebook (2011–16). She has advised politicians, government officials and civil society leaders on changing patterns of communications and connectivity in more than 40 countries. She founded and headed Facebook’s Politics & Government programme for the Europe, Middle East and Africa region as the Arab Spring swept across the region, new political parties challenged the status quo, and political content on Facebook dominated the conversations of millions of people. She launched her career at Google, building out YouTube’s Global Communications and Public Policy team.

Eve Salomon has significant experience in both statutory and self-regulation. A solicitor by background, she is an international legal expert for the Council of Europe and the author of the UNESCO Guidelines for Broadcasting Regulation. Eve has advised governments, regulatory authorities and international organizations (UNESCO, European Commission, World Bank, Council of Europe) on media-related issues in dozens of different countries.

In the UK, Eve has chaired the Regulatory Board of RICS (the global professional body for surveyors), the Horniman Museum and Gardens, and until 2012 was chair of the Internet Watch Foundation. She is a trustee of Privacy International and a former Press Complaints Commissioner and Gambling Commissioner. In an executive capacity, she worked for the UK broadcasting regulators Ofcom, the Radio Authority and the Independent Television Commission and the broadcasters Capital Radio and Channel 4.

Page | 28

Filip Noubel is an international political science and news media expert. Filip has been deeply involved with Asian and post-Soviet media for over two decades. Currently based in Prague as Innovation Advisor for the Prague Civil Society Centre, he spent the last ten years in Beijing focusing on various projects on media development, social media innovation, media law, digital media narratives and gamification. After studying Soviet and East Asian studies in Tokyo, Paris, Prague and Beijing, Noubel began working in Prague as an editor for an Internet publication covering news from Central Europe, Russia and China. He then returned to Central Asia (where he grew up) as an editor, and later as a media analyst for organizations including Internews, the United Nations and the International Crisis Group. He also worked as a political analyst for international organizations in Nepal, Bhutan, the Caucasus and Central Asia. Because of his involvements in these areas, Noubel advises experts at media, private sector, governmental, civil society, think tank, and donor levels. He has also won an award for social media innovation. Noubel is an Asia Society Fellow and a frequent speaker at events including TED, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Institute for the Future, the Aspen Institute, and various United Nations conferences. Since October 2015, he is mostly based at the Prague Civil Society Center, researching and training post-Soviet civil society on the use of social innovation and technology (drones, data-mining, sensors, gamification, alternative business models, responses to fake news), and developing regional events such as Unlock 2017.

Flutura Kusari is a human right activist focused in media law. Flutura has worked for ten years in different civil society organizations in Kosovo including the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network and the Kosovar Stability Initiative focusing on projects related to human rights, media, rule of law and the judicial system. For several years Flutura has legally edited complex investigative articles and TV programs and worked closely with Kosovar journalists in terms of fact checking, protection of sources, whistleblowing, access to public documents and copyrights. She writes on the latest developments regarding the right to freedom of expression and the freedom of the media and is a contributor in Strasbourg Observers. She holds a LLB and LL.M degree in Law and is currently pursuing her Ph.D. studies in Media Law at Ghent University in cooperation with EIJC.

Francisca Sibanda Chamunokara is a freelance filmmaker/ journalist and writer- a story-teller who articulates mainly on issues that affect

Page | 29

women or the least predominant individuals in society- she is a social commentator in her own respect. She has been in the industry since 2009 and recently ventured into documentary filmmaking. She wrote and directed a short awareness documentary on Obstetric Fistula in Zimbabwe targeted at informing the general public about a little known condition affecting women in Zimbabwe, pointing out the social stigma and rejection the women face because of the ignorance that clouds the condition. She also put together a documentary on the positive effects of male circumcision on their female partners. Francisca is multi-talented and her strengths are news-gathering, writing, script writing, narrative writing, photography and film directing. Documentary filmmaking is a culmination of her strengths together with her desire to address the communally repressed in society mainly women and children. She is based in Harare the capital of Zimbabwe, born and raised in a patriarchal society where the desire ignited to see a better way of living for the disadvantaged. She has been writing and winning prizes since was 14years old and writing is her passion. She is an award winning journalist and filmmaker respectively (Gender sensitive media award with the Federation of African Media Women-FAMWZ 2009) and Best Upcoming Director at IIFF (International Images Film Festival 2012) in the Shasha/Ingcitshi category with her 25 minute graduation film project Mpiyabo.

Gill Phillips is Director of Editorial Legal Services for Guardian News & Media Limited (publishers of the Guardian and Observer newspapers and theguardian.com). She qualified in 1984 and joined the BBC as an in-house lawyer in 1987, later working for News Group Newspapers and Times Newspapers. She moved to Guardian News & Media in May 2009 and has advised on phone-hacking, Wikileaks, the Leveson Inquiry, the NSA leaks from Edward Snowden and most recently the HSBC files. She also sits as a part-time Employment Tribunal Judge and co-authors the College of Law Employment Law handbook.

Page | 30

Gregory Asmolov is a PhD researcher at Media and Communication Department at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His PhD research investigates the role of digital networked technologies for state-citizen relationships in crisis situations (in particular natural disasters). His additional research interests include the role of crowdsourcing platforms and social networks in international conflicts; the dynamics of political innovation and the role of Internet regulation for the relationship between citizens and institutional actors. A list of his publications can be found here: http://lse.academia.edu/Asmolov. Gregory taught master-level courses and seminars in the Media and Communication Department at the Higher School of Economics (Moscow) and at LSE, as well as undergraduate courses at School of Communication at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya (Israel). He has consulted on information technology, new media, and social media projects for The World Bank and Internews Network, and worked as a research assistant at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, Harvard University. Gregory is a co-founder of Help Map, a crowdsourcing platform, which was used to coordinate assistance to victims of wildfires in Russia in 2010 and won a Russian National Internet Award for best "State and Society" project. Gregory previously worked as a journalist for Russian newspapers Kommersant and Novaya Gazeta, contributing editor for Global Voices Online and served as news editor and analyst for Israeli TV.

Hawley Johnson is the Project Manager for Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, an initiative to advance the understanding of international and national norms and institutions that best protect the free flow of information and expression in an inter-connected global community. Hawley has over twelve years of experience in international media development both academically and professionally, with a focus on Eastern Europe. She recently worked with the award winning Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project to launch the Investigative Dashboard (ID), a joint effort with Google Ideas offering specialized databases and research tools for journalists in emerging democracies. Previously, as the associate director of the Media and Conflict Resolution Program at New York University, she oversaw the implementation of over eight US government sponsored media development programs in eleven countries. In 2012 she completed her Ph.D. in Communications at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism. Her dissertation – a study of the evolution of media development policies in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia – was grounded in extensive field research in the region. She has an M.A. from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs and a B.A. in international affairs from American University.

Page | 31

Hilde Van den Bulck, Ph.D. is a full professor of Communications Studies and director of the research group Media, Policy and Culture in the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Antwerp, Belgium. She studied Communications Studies at KU Leuven (B) and University of Leicester (UK) and obtained her Ph.D. at KU Leuven. Her academic interests and expertise lie in media policies and structures with a focus on public service broadcasting. She studies the impact of technological, economic, political and cultural developments on media policies, aiming for international comparative work. She takes particular interest in methods for media policy analysis. In addition, she has done research in media culture and identity, focusing most recently on the role of media in celebrity culture, especially in the role of celebrities activism and philanthropy. Hilde Van den Bulck is involved in Flemish media policy, amongst others, as vice chair of the Flemish Media Council and is published widely in her field.

Jeremy Oliver is Head of Internet Policy at Ofcom; his responsibility is policy development across a broad range of issues, including the evolution of audiovisual media regulation, net neutrality, protection of minors, and the regulation of OTT services. Mr Olivier's current focus is on the EU Digital Single Market programme, and in particular the revision of Audiovisual and Telecommunications regulatory frameworks. Before Ofcom, Mr Olivier worked at the BBC, providing strategic advice to the Directors of the BBC's Online and Television services.

Joan Barata is an international expert in freedom of expression, media freedom and media regulation. He has been the Principal Adviser to the Representative on Freedom of the Media at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Dr. Barata is an affiliate to the Center for Global Communication Studies at the University of Pennsylvania and Research Fellow at the Center for Data and Communication Studies at Central European University in Budapest. Before that he has been holding different academic and visiting positions in several countries. His areas of expertise include topics such as freedom of expression, media regulation, public service broadcasting and political and legal media transitions. He has provided assistance to several institutions and organizations regarding these issues in countries such as Thailand, Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon, Jordan, Albania, Hungary, Liberia, Egypt, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Ecuador and the United States. He also has a strong regulatory experience as Head of President’s

Page | 32

Cabinet (2005-2009) and Secretary General of the Catalonia Audiovisual Council (2009-2011) and member of the Permanent Secretariat of the Mediterranean Network of Regulatory Authorities (2006-2011). He has also provided assistance to several international organizations, including the Council of Europe.

Jonathan McCully is a Legal Officer at the Media Legal Defence Initiative. In this role, he has been involved in cases before the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. He has also worked on cases before domestic courts in Uganda, Singapore, The Gambia, Italy and Tanzania. He has trained lawyers from East and Southern Africa on freedom of expression and media law, and is a supervisor at the University of Edinburgh Freedom of Expression Law Clinic. He is also Editor of Columbia Global Freedom of Expression’s database of case law analyses. Jonathan has a Bachelor of Laws from Trinity College Dublin, and a Masters of Laws in Information Technology, Media and Communications Law from the London School of Economics and Political Science. He has a particular interest in media law matters; and has published widely on freedom of expression, privacy, open justice, human rights, and intellectual property. His articles have been published by the International Forum for Responsible Media (Inforrm's) Blog, the Media Law Resource Centre, the Harvard Cyberlaw Clinic Blog, PEN America and the Net Politics Blog.

Katrin Voltmer is Professor of Communication and Democracy at the School of Media and Communication at the University of Leeds. Her main research interest focuses on the role of the media in emerging democracies. She is Principal Investigator of the international project “Media, Conflict and Democratisation” (www.mecodem.eu), funded by the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme. She has also widely published on the changing relationship between politics and the media in established western democracies. Recent books include The Media in Transitional Democracies (2013, Polity Press), Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy: Challenging the Primacy of Politics (2011, ed. with Kees Brants, Palgrave), and Public Policy and the Mass Media. The Interplay of Mass Communication and Political Decision Making (2010, ed. with Sigrid Koch-Baumgarten). Katrin Voltmer is Global Fellow of the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO). She is member of the Editorial Board of the Reuters Institute

Page | 33

for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford and Associate Editor of Communications. European Journal of Communication Research.

Katya Fisher is an attorney based in New York City. Katya represents a number of prominent Russian companies and individuals doing business in the United States, particularly in the fields of media, entertainment and IT. Katya's practice focuses on general corporate law and business immigration. Katya has been selected to Super Lawyers as a "Rising Star" in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017. Katya is a chair of the Young Friends Committee for the Hermitage Museum Foundation. She is a graduate of New York University, the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and a former visitor and Howard M. Squadron Fellow at the University of Oxford's Programme in Comparative Media Law & Policy (PCMLP), where she served as editor of The Media Law Assistance Website (MLAW), developed in conjunction with the National Endowment for Democracy's Center for International Media Assistance and The Center for Global Communication Studies at the Annenberg School for Communication.

Krisztina Rozgonyi is a senior media, telecommunication and IP regulatory and legal/policy consultant. She is Assistant Professor with the Media Governance and Media Industries Research Lab at the Department of Communication of the University of Vienna. Dr. Rozgonyi works with international and European organizations (such as ITU/UN, Council of Europe, European Commission, World Bank InfoDev and BBC MA), with national governments, regulators, and companies as senior adviser on media freedom, spectrum policy and copyright legal frameworks re: digital audiovisual archives. She has worked for the gvm’ts of Serbia, Rwanda, Thailand, United Arab Emirates as well as for global organizations in the Ukraine, Israel, Poland, and Egypt. Between 2004-2010 she served as the Chairperson/Deputy Chairperson of the Telecoms Authority in Hungary.

She holds a Doctor Juris in Law and State Sciences (Eötvös Lóránd University, Faculty of Law, Budapest); an MA in Communication Sciences (Eötvös Lóránd University, Faculty of Liberal Arts, Budapest); and an MBA (Central European University).

Dr. Rozgonyi is a regular speaker at the Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute at Oxford University and has taught at ELTE University, Budapest; Janus Pannonius University, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law, Pécs. Dr. Rozgonyi is member of the advisory board of the International Journal of Digital Television and the chair of the Media and Advertising Division of the Hungarian Lawyers Association.

Page | 34

She speaks English, German and Hungarian.

Lea Kaspar is the Executive Director of Global Partners Digital (GPD). Since 2012, she has been working at the intersection of human rights and digital communications, concentrating upon facilitating multistakeholder dialogue and effective civil society engagement in international forums and processes. These have included capacity building and advocacy initiatives at the Global Conference on Cyberspace (GCCS), the WSIS+10 Review process, and the International Telecommunication Union. She is currently working on the development and implementation of GPD’s cyber capacity building programme, which aims to make cyber policy-making processes around the world more open and inclusive. She is the co-Chair of the Advisory Board of the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, a member of the Internet Governance Forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group, the UK Multistakeholder Group on Internet Governance, and the UN CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. Lea also works closely with governments in the Freedom Online Coalition, for which GPD performs a secretariat function. She is a member of the European Council on Foreign Relations.

Maria Donde joined Ofcom in 2009, initially working in content standards enforcement. Since 2012, she has been the International Team’s Policy Manager with responsibility for broadcasting and content issues, and with a specific focus on the AVMS Directive. She has worked previously in advertising regulation, as a media analyst and as a radio producer at the BBC. She has a degree in Modern Languages from Cambridge University and a Masters in Literary Translation.

Page | 35

Monroe Price serves as Director of CGCS and Director of the Stanhope Centre for Communications Policy Research in London. Professor Price is the Joseph and Sadie Danciger Professor of Law and Director of the Howard M. Squadron Program in Law, Media and Society at the Cardozo School of Law, where he served as Dean from 1982 to 1991. He graduated magna cum laude from Yale, where he was executive editor of the Yale Law Journal. He clerked for Associate Justice Potter Stewart of the U.S. Supreme Court and was an assistant to Secretary of Labor W. Willard Wirtz. Professor Price was founding director of the Program in Comparative Media Law and Policy at Wolfson College, Oxford, and a Member of the School of Social Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. He was deputy director of California Indian Legal Services, one of the founders of the Native American Rights Fund, and author of Law and the American Indian. Among his many books are Media and Sovereignty; Television, The Public Sphere and National Identity; Routledge Handbook of Media Law; and a treatise on cable television. His most recent publication, Free Expression, Globalism, and the New Strategic Communication, is now available.

Nani Jansen Reventlow is an Associate Tenant at Doughty Street Chambers and a 2016-2017 Fellow at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. She is a recognized international lawyer and expert in human rights litigation responsible for groundbreaking freedom of expression cases across several national and international jurisdictions.

Between 2011 and 2016, Nani has overseen the litigation practice of the Media Legal Defence Initiative (MLDI) globally, leading or advising on cases before various national and international courts. At the Berkman Klein Center, Nani's work focuses on cross-disciplinary collaboration in litigation that challenges barriers to free speech online. She also acts as an Advisor to the Cyberlaw Clinic.

Page | 36

Nicole Stremlau is Head of the Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy and a Research Fellow in the Centre of Socio-Legal Studies. Nicole Stremlau’s research focuses on media and governance, particularly in areas of conflict and insecurity in Africa. Her most recent projects examine the role of new media in political participation and governance; media law and regulation in the absence of government or in weak states; the role of media in conflict, peacebuilding and the consolidation of political power; and how governments attempt to engage citizens and communicate law-making processes. Stremlau’s doctoral work explored the role of media during the guerrilla insurgencies in Uganda and Ethiopia, and how the successive governments used the media to consolidate political power in the aftermath of violence.

Noa Elefant-Loffler is a senior public policy manager at Google. She leads Google public policy work in Israel, including initiatives around safer internet, counter speech, digital growth and inclusion. Noa Elefant-Loffler has been in the the public policy sphere for 20 years. Prior to joining Google, she worked for the Israeli media regulator as Head of Research and Chief of Staff. Before that, she worked at the Knesset and had central part in forming the Knesset’s Research and Information Center. Noa is a mother of three young girls. She was born and raised in Haifa and lives in Hod Ha-Sharon. She has a bachelor degree in political science from Haifa University and master's degree in political communications from Tel Aviv university. Noa participated in the Annenberg-Oxford Institute 12 years ago and is a proud ANOX alumnus.

Ping Shum, a journalist turned academic, is a Fellow at the Center for Media, Data and Society, Central European University in Budapest. He is a final year PhD candidate enrolled in a joint degree program of King's College London and the National University of Singapore. His research focus is the Chinese party-state's innovative use of Internet technologies to mobilise public support and enhance legitimacy. Prior to his current position, Ping worked for news media outlets in Hong Kong and the UK. He joined the BBC World Service in London in 2004 where he covered mainly Chinese politics and international news, including the 2009 Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, 2010 Nobel Peace Prize Awards Ceremony in Oslo, as well as interviewing the Dalai Lama in India. Ping was a participant at the Annenberg-Oxford Media Policy Summer Institute in 2015. He obtained master’s degrees from the University of Cambridge and the Australian National University, and a BA from China. In his spare time, Ping enjoys cooking, photography, playing badminton and traveling.

Page | 37

Sara Garcia is a journalist and a postgraduate researcher at the Department of Journalism Studies, University of Sheffield. She holds a BA in Journalism Studies from Universitat de Valencia (Spain). Having worked for three years as a foreign affairs web editor and media watch, she gained a scholarship from La Caixa Foundation to undertake postgraduate studies in the UK. In 2012, she completed an MA in Global Journalism at University of Sheffield with first class honors, and started a PhD at the same institution, looking at media and populism in revolutionary Cuba. Over the last four years, she has worked as a Teaching Assistant, leading lectures and seminars on a wide range of modules regarding civic media and global journalism. Sara’s research has benefited from grants from the Institute of Latin American Studies (ILAS), the Society of Latin American Studies (SLAS), and the David Nicholls Foundation (University of Oxford). Thanks to these grants, she has conducted fieldwork at the Faculty of Communication, University of Havana (Cuba) between 2013 and 2015. Sara has published over fifteen academic works and journalistic reportages on media and polarization in Latin America (see Zielonka, 2016, Oxford University Press; Henken, 2017, University of Texas Press, among others). She has also participated in over twenty international conferences, including ICA, IAMCR, and LASA. Finally, she has been a founding convener of the conference Media and Governance in Latin America (University of Leeds).

Sarah Clarke is the Policy and Advocacy Manager for PEN International, the global association of writers which works to defend freedom of expression and promote literature. Sarah leads PEN’s advocacy on freedom of expression and writers at risk at the UN, regional institutions and with governments. A graduate of Trinity College Dublin and Oxford University, she frequently consults for UN agencies and NGOs on issues of human rights and forced migration. She has previously worked for the UN OHCHR, UNHCR, Front Line Defenders and Harvard’s Carr Centre for Human Rights, amongst others. She is currently training as a barrister at the English Bar where she is an Exhibition Scholar of the Inner Temple.

Page | 38

Sarah Taylor has spent 15 years working in local, national and international government. She started her civil service career in the Cabinet Office before moving to New York working for the United Nations Security Council. She returned to London to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport where she worked on the 2005 Gambling Act through Parliament, served as Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary, and latterly ran the International and Internet Team, in which role she chaired the Government’s Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group on Internet Governance and led the UK delegation to the World Summit on the Information Society at the UN General Assembly. Sarah also spent time on secondment to the Olympic Host borough of Hackney during London 2012. Recently Sarah joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as Director for Cyber and Full Spectrum, where, inter alia, she is responsible to the UK policy on the application of law and norms to state behavior in cyberspace.

Sejal Parmar is Assistant Professor of Law at the Department of Legal Studies and a core faculty member of the Center for Media, Data and Society (CMDS) at the School of Public Policy at CEU. She is currently on leave from CEU while serving as Senior Adviser to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Representative on Freedom of the Media. Her main field of expertise and research is international and European human rights law, particularly on freedom of expression. Parmar is researching and writing a monograph entitled Freedom of Expression Under Pressure which looks at the significance of the UN human rights bodies’ approaches to the most pressing contemporary sources of pressure on freedom of expression.

Silvia Grundmann works for the Council of Europe in Strasbourg as Head of the Media and Internet Division. She holds both German law degrees with distinction, a Master of Common Law from Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. and she passed the New York State Bar Exam. For her PhD thesis she analyzed competition laws. Silvia was a lawyer in private practice in Brussels, Washington D.C. and Düsseldorf and thereafter a judge and professor at a University of Applied Sciences in Northern Germany until 2004, when she joined the Council of Europe’s department for the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. She was an advisor for two Council of Europe’s Commissioners for Human Rights prior to her current function.

Page | 39

Simon Haselock is co-founder and Director of Albany Associates and a pioneer in media intervention in countries emerging from violent conflict.

Following the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement in late 1995 and throughout 1996 he was the NATO Spokesman in Sarajevo. He stayed on in Bosnia from 1997 until early 2000 as Deputy High Representative for Media Affairs in the Office of The High Representative responsible for the public presentation of policy and media reform.

As Temporary Media Commissioner in Kosovo in 2000 he began the process of building the professional, legal and ethical structures necessary for the independent media to flourish there. He then served as the Director of Public Information for the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) from 2001 to spring 2003 when he went on to head the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Media Development and Regulatory Advisory Team in Iraq.

Since co-founding Albany he has directed projects in Kosovo, Darfur, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Somalia. He is an Associate of the Program for Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCLMP) at Oxford University and served for 23 years in the Royal Marines attending the Royal Navy Staff College in 1986.

Sudharma Yoonaidharma is the Dean of the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce. Before joining the Law School, Dean Yoonaidharma worked as the country’s first National Telecommunications Commissioner. His expertise covers international trade laws, utility and transport law as well as intellectual property. Apart from teaching and consulting, Dean Yoonaidharma is also appointed Adjunct Judge in the Central Intellectual Property & International Court. Some of his past professional experience includes: a negotiator (telecom & broadcast) of many trade negotiation such as the Thai-Japan FTA negotiation, Thai-US FTA negotiation, Thai-Australia, Thai-ASEAN RTA; legal advisor to Prime Minister, advisor to Foreign Minister, advisor to Minister of Transport and Communications; a World Bank legal expert on privatization attached to Ministry of Finance and; Director General of the Chulalongkorn University Intellectual Property Institute. Dean Yoonaidharma received his LL.M from Harvard Law School and the New York University School of Law

Page | 40

Tarlach McGonagle is a senior researcher and lecturer at the Institute for Information Law (IViR), Faculty of Law, University of Amsterdam and at the School of Human Rights Research in the Netherlands. He regularly writes expert reports on freedom of expression, media law and policy and journalism for various branches of the Council of Europe, OSCE, other IGOs and NGOs. He is currently Rapporteur of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Experts on protection of journalism and safety of journalists. He is a member of the Euromedia Research Group and a member of the Editorial Board of IRIS – Legal Observations of the European Audiovisual Observatory. At the University of Amsterdam, he is academic coordinator of the specialized masters program, Informatierecht (Information Law). McGonagle’s main research interests include freedom of expression; international and comparative media regulation and policy; the future of news and journalism; minorities and the media (the focus of his Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2008), and the interface between (information and communication) technologies and human rights. In Spring 2013, McGonagle was a Visiting Scholar at the Center for Global Communication Studies, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania and at the Rutgers Institute for Information Policy and Law (RIIPL), Rutgers School of Law-Camden, New Jersey. His latest book (co-edited with Y. Donders) is: The United Nations and Freedom of Expression and Information: Critical Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, 2015).

Thusiyan Nandakumar is a member of the editorial board of the Tamil Guardian, a prominent news website that has been covering Tamil and Sri Lankan affairs for over 16 years. The Tamil Guardian has been recognized as a leading commentator on the ethnic conflict on the island, having carried op-eds from notable policy makers from across the world. He graduated from King’s College London from the MBBS program with an intercalated BSc in Global Health. Since then, he has been a guest lecturer on conflict and security at the King’s College London Summer School, on the MBBS Global Health special study module and the iBSc Global Health program at the university.

Page | 41

Willem F. Korthals Altes (1949) has been a judge in The Netherlands since 1995, serving in the trial court (Rechtbank or District Court of Amsterdam) and in the appellate court (Gerechtshof or Appellate Court of Arnhem). He is currently a Senior Judge in the Insolvency Law Division of the District Court of Amsterdam. After working as an attorney-at-law with Loeff & Van der Ploeg in Amsterdam (1976-1981), Mr. Korthals Altes moved to academia after two years of study and research at New York University (M.C.J. ’82). He spent one year as an Assistant Professor at the Institute of Social Studies in The Hague and in 1985 joined the Faculty of Law of the University of Amsterdam, where he specialized in media and telecommunications law. In 1989, he took his Ph.D. at the University of Amsterdam on the basis of a treatise on the journalists’ privilege of confidentiality of sources. He has published numerous articles, both in The Netherlands and abroad. In 1992, Mr. Korthals Altes became a Visiting Professor at New York Law School, where he has taught European Media Law and European Criminal Law. He has also acted as an instructor in many seminars and trainings on freedom of the press for judges, lawyers and journalists in so-called transitional democracies, such as Russia, Georgia, Macedonia, Mongolia, Slovakia, Ukraine and Albania, and as a European Union expert in Twinning Projects in Turkey.

Zar Chi Oo was born in 1977 and studied English literature in Dagon University and was graduated in 2003. She has finished her postgraduate studies in teaching in 2009. She worked as a Tutor of English Department, University of Computer Studies, Yangon from 2004 to 2011. In 2011, She transferred to Computer University, Myeik (the lower region of Myanmar) as the head of the English Department. She studied postgraduate diploma in International Relations and Comparative Politics in International Centre of Excellence, a joint program of Yangon University and John Hopkins University. She worked as a Survey Team Leader at Internationals Organization for Migration in 2015 in the Research on impact of migrations on Children. Later she joined International Labor Organization as a National Research Coordinator and did two research on Child Labor (Knowledge , Attitude and Practises studies and Rapid Assessment). In June 2015, she joined PEN Myanmar as a Program Manager and assisting its member to make their dreams come true, defending free expression and promoting literature.