- KICTANet - KICTANet

[Fwd: [AfrICANN-discuss] Ten Guiding Principles for E-civil Service]
by alice 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

Very interesting read in view of what is currently going on........ best alice http://egov-india.blogspot.com/ Monday, December 01, 2008 Ten Guiding Principles for E-civil Service <http://egov-india.blogspot.com/2008/12/ten-guiding-principles-for-e-civil.h…> /*Ten Guiding Principles for E-civil Service by D.C.Misra**/ _____________________________________________________________________________________ /*I Introduction*/ Is there anything called e-civil service or electronic civil service? If so, what is it? How does it differ from the traditional civil service? How can it keep pace with technological developments? What role does it have in Government 2.0? Is there any conflict between old conduct rules for the civil servants and the new environment? What role does e-civil service play in the development of e-government? Does it require separate recognition as an entity and support so that it can accelerate the pace of development of e-government worldwide? Questions like these must be asked and replies attempted as they have direct bearing on the future course of development of e-government. /*II E-civil Service*/ There are two primary drivers of e-government: technology vendors and civil service. Technology vendors have succeeded in promoting e-government but to a limited extent. Their limitation is that their promotion of e-government is limited to their own technology. Civil service has also promoted e-government but to a much lesser extent. Its limitations are that it works under a rule-bound environment, is always caught napping in technology developments, and above all, has no motivation to promote e-government. Among the two, however, civil service has greater stakes in e-government as it is required to serve the government in power as well as citizens. Government implements its decisions through civil service. The civil service also provides policy inputs. Civil service is appropriately described as the backbone of government as government policies and programme can fail in implementation by the civil service or wrong policies can be formulated with its help. What, however, is not recognized is the quiet emergence of e-civil service or electronic civil service in tandem with the emergence of e-government since mid-1990s. If e-government is to succeed, not only the emergence of e-civil service has to be recognized but strengthened as well so as to enable it face the new challenge of e-government competently. /E-civil service /or /electronic civil service /may be defined in two important and markedly different senses: /E-civil service /or /electronic civil service/: As the civil service using information and communication technology (ICT) in conducting its internal work and external public service delivery. It differs from the traditional civil service on a number of important parameters. We will refer to it as e-civil service or electronic civil service. /Ai-civil service /or /artificial intelligence (AI) civil service/: As artificial intelligence (AI) agents performing the civil service jobs, say, determining amount of fine in traffic violations. Chun (2007) describes application of artificial intelligence (AI) in immigration control in Hong Kong special administrative region (SAR) by using assessment rule engine, schema-based reasoning engine, workflow rule engine, case-based reasoning (CBR) engine, and self-learning engine. E-civil service and AI- civil service can be distinguished. The emergence of e-government has increased the responsibility of civil service by incorporating the requirements of e-civil service and ai-civil service. In the initial stages of development of e-government, the traditional civil service, e-civil service and ai-civil service will all co-exist. E-civil service and ai-civil service are thus add-on to the existing civil service and not its replacement. It is only in the final stage that one can think of e-civil service and ai-civil service replacing the traditional civil service, and that too only in part, notwithstanding the projections of futurologists. However, e-civil service and ai-civil service both will gain increasingly more ground with the passage of time. In the new environment of e-governance, therefore, the task of civil service has become quite enormous, unprecedented and, yes, very challenging. /*III An E-democracy Model Highlighting the Key Role of E-civil Service*/ An e-democracy model highlighting the key role of e-civil service can now be proposed. The model proposes that (i) e-civil service is the backbone of government and e-government, (ii) e-civil service is required to serve democracy and e-democracy on the one hand and citizen and e-citizen on the other, (iii) Democracy is characterized by rule by majority, and adult suffrage, (iv) E-democracy is characterized by the Internet and e-engagement, (v) Democracy-performance mismatch has resulted in widespread embracing of e-government, and (vi) e-engagement is an integral part of e-government. /*IV Guiding Principles for Development of E-civil Service*/The e-democracy model proposed above (Section III) highlights the key role of e-civil service in promoting e-democracy. The coming into being of e-civil service is raising a number of important issues, many of which are unprecedented, which require to be addressed. Fountain (2007:6-7) observes "In one sense, digital tools merely enhanced the power of a set of reforms already underway and accepted as legitimate and appropriate by civil servants. Yet the extraordinary power of the internet to allow citizens to access government "anytime, anywhere," greatly increased accessibility and made abstruse government documents and procedures, now online, more glaringly unresponsive to citizens." The following ten guiding principles are suggested for the development of e-civil service. /*Principle 1. Recognise the Emergence of E-Civil Service*/ E-civil service is quietly entering the governments worldwide. However, it has so far not been formally recognized. This has twofold consequences. First, the non-recognition deprives e-civil service of any systematic development as a result of which the quality of e-government is adversely affected. Secondly, the non-recognition is leading to piling up of issues which, with passage of time, are only getting more complicated making their subsequent solution elusive, time-consuming and costly. Thirdly, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to civil service tasks has given rise to, what this author has called, artificial intelligence (AI) civil service, has also not being recognized. New technologies create policy vacuums (Moor 1985). However, the policy vacuum created by the emergence of e-civil service has so far not been filled. It has thus become essential to formally recognize the emergence of e-civil service. /*Principle 2. Encourage Civil Service to Work Online*/ One of the main conclusions of case studies of e-government projects in five countries-Argentina, Mexico, India, United Arab Emirates, and Tunisia- analyzed to see how personnel issues slowed implementation of e-government projects is that "High-level support does not ensure staff buy-in." (WB 2005). There is so far no incentive for civil servants to work online. As a result, adoption of e-government practices is slow in civil service. The typical incentives are an entry of work done online in annual performance appraisal, grant of an increment in salary for doing good work, and formal recognition by grant of award for exemplary work in e-government. These are, however, mundane incentives which have only limited impact, if any. A mandatory policy may prove to be counter-productive as it may invite hostility from civil servants. Likewise an absence of policy will only maintain status quo. A middle path may be a practical strategy. For example, a mandatory policy may be adopted for routine tasks in the civil service like sanction of casual leave, approval of tour programme and filing of property returns. For rest of the tasks, civil service has to be encouraged to work online by providing appropriate incentives. /*Principle 3. Encourage E-civil Service to Use Web 2.0 Technologies*/The essence of Web 2.0 or Social Web is interactivity. And Web 2.0 is a reality. Many civil servants lurk in discussion groups but do not actively participate in discussion for fear of violating conduct rules and inviting the wrath of their superiors. On their part, the governments too have so far also not issued any guidelines on this issue. In a pioneering attempt, Cabinet Office in United Kingdom has issued the following guidelines: 1. Be credible, 2. Be consistent, 3. Be responsive, 4. Be integrated, and 5. Be a civil servant (CO 2008). Clift (2008) notes: "Every country needs a similar policy guide or alternatively as a whole, their government will become irrelevant to most people. Countries with civil servants disconnected online, have disconnected democracies." Our civil services are still steeped in 19th century ethos. They must now become civil services of 21st century. One way to achieve this objective is to encourage e-civil service to use Web 2.0 technologies. /*Principle 4. Recognise New Demands of Citizens on Civil Service*/ Civil service is known for not changing its way of working. History proves this statement. Change when introduced is easily absorbed into the system and the civil service quickly reverts to its old ways of working. All this, however, appears to be changing in the age of e-government. The emergence of e-government since mid-1990s has started placing new demands on civil service. Not only is e-government changing the way e-government works (for example, making it more technology-oriented) and the work it does (for example, adding the online work) but also citizen expectation from civil service. Citizens now want value-added, tailor-made public service delivery online and, what is more important from civil service point of view, hold the civil service, and not its political masters, directly responsible for it. So far civil service has worked protected under the cloak of anonymity. This is no longer possible in the age of e-government which espouses the cause of open and transparent government. These new demands of citizens on civil service, therefore, need to be recognized. /*Principle 5. Treat E-civil Service as an Instrument of Administrative Reforms*/ Administrative reform is an uninspiring term. Its poor reputation comes from its poor record of achievements so far. Kraemer and King (2005:2) are of the view that "information technology has never been an instrument of administrative reform; rather it has been used to reinforce existing administrative and political arrangements." It is difficult to subscribe to this view. If improving internal processes of government is part of administrative reforms, then application of information technology (IT) to government is very much a move for administrative reforms. However, and it is important, application of information technology (IT) to government, by itself, is not e-government. What makes it e-government is the involvement of citizens in decision-making processes of government, a dimension altogether missing in earlier phases of application of information technology (IT) to government. Since e-civil service, an altogether new development, is the backbone of e-government, it has to be treated as an instrument of administrative reforms. /*Principle 6. Set Up an Exclusive Portal for E-civil Service*/E-civil service now requires an exclusive portal for itself, catering to the needs of civil servants in the era of e-government. Such a portal will keep the civil servants fully updated about the latest rules and regulations, up to date civil list, sanction of leave, physical fitness exercise programmes and guidance, settlement of traveling allowance (T.A.), medical and miscellaneous claims, career advancement opportunities like mid-service training programmes, availability of online inter-active training programmes and online technical support for computer maintenance and use, annual performance appraisal, job opportunities and career counseling. It should provide RSS feed so that civil servants can keep themselves up to date with any development. Likewise it should have a discussion group or blog and a wiki so that civil servants could participate in them. This will be a closed portal accessible only to serving civil servants and managed by an officer of sufficient seniority. It will thus be a comprehensive one-stop service to civil servants. Some governments have set up such sub-portals but they do not provide comprehensive services. /*Principle 7. Introduce E-recruitment to Civil Service*/ A Government Guide to Best Practice defines e-recruitment, also known as online recruitment, as "the use of Internet and intranet technology to recruit including candidate attraction, employer branding, candidate tracking, candidate selection, and hiring." (CO 2007:65).The components of e-recruitment are: (i) attracting candidates online to your website or your organization, (ii) communicating your employer brand and recruitment proposition online, (iii) tracking, communicating with and selecting candidates online, (iv) testing candidates online, and (v) on-boarding (otherwise known as welcoming and induction) candidates online (ibid.:7). Many developed countries have set up recruitment gatways. In United Kingdom, for example, the Cabinet Office has set up a Civil Service Recruitment Gateway at http://www.careers.civil-service.gov.uk/Index.asp?txtNavID=322&635132= <http://www.careers.civil-service.gov.uk/Index.asp?txtNavID=322&635132=>. Likewise Singapore Government has set up a recruitment portal at https://app.vog.gov.sg/Presentation/index.aspx which it calls VOG (lateral image of GOV). Other countries should follow suit. /*Principle 8. Deal with Disciplinary Cases Online*/One of the sore points with civil servants is the inordinate delay which the disciplinary proceedings against them take in completion. Such disciplinary proceedings call for penalties ranging from mere warning to dismissal or removal from service and are typically launched while the civil servant is in employment. These come in the way in his promotion as and when such an opportunity occurs. The procedure involved in dealing with disciplinary cases against the civil servants is quite complicated and time-consuming. It is a case of e-government that such cases can be expedited if dealt with online. In such a case the cause list can be posted online, so also the documents upon which the department proposes to rely to prove its case. The documents are required to be supplied to the concerned civil servant under rules. The final order too can be posted online. In case the facility of video-conferencing is available, hearings in the case as well as recording of evidence can be done online. /*Principle 9. Sort Out Ethical Issues of E-civil Service*/ A number of ethical issues have started emerging as a result of civil servants surfing the Internet while in office and otherwise also. First is the maintenance of blog. Can a civil servant have a blog of his own covering a subject dealt with by him? Second, can a civil servant actively participate in discussion groups, communities of practice (COPs) and social networking sites and defend or clarify his department's position? Among these concerns, use of email at workplace has gained attention as it is most widely used tool in e-government. Oregon State Archives and Oregon Association of Municipal Recorders have issued a very comprehensive E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government (OSA n.d.) which has a template also. In India, the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) has issued comprehensive guidelines on use of email with due emphasis on e-mail as an official record (DARPG n.d.). But not many civil servants are either aware of these instructions or have only vague idea about them. The emerging ethical concerns need to be sorted out. /*Principle 10. Train E-civil Service in Government 2.0*/ Training is time-tested method for upgrading knowledge and skills of civil servants. It is generally quite a challenging task when the trainees are in-service civil servants but it is more challenging in case of e-government as it involves concurrent training in technology also. Schelin (2004, Table 5:272) suggests a training curriculum based on six modules in which Digital Civic Engagement is the sixth model. Whichever training module is selected, it is necessary that the civil servants are systematically trained in Government 2.0, whose essence is inter-activity which has been possible only by e-government tools, as against out-of-date Government 1.0, which is based on one-way communication from government to citizens. Training in Government 2.0 will include understanding the new role of civil servants, appreciation of emergence of e-citizen and e-citizenship, understanding of e-concepts associated with e-democracy, knowledge of e-engagement and e-participation tools and, finally, involvement of e-citizens in public policy formulation actively supported by e-civil service. /*V Concluding Remarks*/ Weberian bureaucracy characterized by objectivity, administration by rules, and anonymity is a remarkable improvement over earlier form of civil service characterized by subjectivity and administration by whims and fancies. The practice of Weberian bureaucracy, however, revealed a number of weaknesses as a result of which a number of measures of administrative reforms were undertaken in many countries prominent among which is the re-inventing government movement or new public management which requires running of government as a private sector corporation. This too had a very limited success as the two- government and private sector corporation- are based on fundamentally different premises, namely, the former is based on service-orientation and the latter on profit-orientation. E-government is the latest measure in administrative reforms which makes a powerful assault on the weaknesses of existing governments, particularly in their relation with their citizens. However, the realization of full potential of e-government is still eluding us. This can be achieved only if the emergence of e-civil service is formally recognized and it is supported to enable it discharge its new role. Ten guiding principles for e-civil service developed here can help us in this regard. References Chun, Andy Hon Wai (2007): Using AI for e-Government Automatic Assessment of Immigration Application Forms, http://www.cs.cityu.edu.hk/~hwchun/research/PDF/iaai_2007.pdf <http://www.cs.cityu.edu.hk/%7Ehwchun/research/PDF/iaai_2007.pdf> (accessed : November 25, 2008). Clift, Steven (2008): UK Government Advises Civil Servants How to Participate Online, DoWire.org, June 21, http://www.dowire.org/notes/?p=417 (accessed: November 25, 2008). CO (Cabinet Office) (2007): E-recruitment projects in the public sector: A Government Guide to Best Practice, Second Edition,Written By WCN Plc on behalf of HM Government, http://www.careers.civil-service.gov.uk/userfiles/DTI/e-recruitment%20guide… <http://www.careers.civil-service.gov.uk/userfiles/DTI/e-recruitment%20guide…> (accessed: November 29, 2008) CO (Cabinet Office) (2008): Principles for participation online, London, United Kingdom, the Author http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/iam/codes/social_media/participation.asp (accessed: November 25, 2008). DARPG (Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances) (n.d.): E-mail Management Guidelines, http://darpg.nic.in/arpg-website/eReference/e-mail-mgmt.doc (accessed: November 29, 2008) Fountain, Jane E. (2007): Bureaucratic Reform and E-Government in the United States: An Institutional Perspective, Amherst, University of Massachusetts, National Center for Digital Government, Center for Public Policy and Administration, Department of Political Science, NCDG Working Paper No. 07-006, September 18, http://www.umass.edu/digitalcenter/research/working_papers/07_006FountainBu… (accessed: November 26, 2008). Kraemer, Kenneth and L. John Leslie King (2005): Information technology and administrative reform: will e-government be different? August, http://www.si.umich.edu/~jlking/IJEGR-Final.pdf <http://www.si.umich.edu/%7Ejlking/IJEGR-Final.pdf> (accessed: November 28, 2008) Moor, James H. (1985): What is Computer Ethics? in Bynum, Terrell Ward (ed.) (1985), Computers & Ethics, Blackwell, pp.266 – 75, http://www.southernct.edu/organizations/rccs/resources/teaching/teaching_mo… (accessed: November 24, 2008). OSA (Oregon State Archives) and Oregon Association of Municipal Recorders (n.d.): E-mail Policy Manual for Local Government, http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/recmgmt/train/erm/email/emailman806.pdf (accessed: November 29, 2008) Schelin, Shannon Howle (2004): Training for Digital Government, in Pavlichev, Alexei and G.David Garson (eds.) (2004): Digital Government: Principles and Best Practices, Hershey, PA, Idea Publishing, Chapter XVII, pp 263-275. WB (World Bank) (2005): Staff incentives and project implementation: lessons from e-government, PREM notes: Public Sector, October, Number 101, http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/PREMNotes/premnote101.pdf (accessed: November 26, 2008). _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN(a)afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann

1 0

W3C Call for Participation: Africa Perspective on the Role of Mobile Technologies in Fostering Social and Economic Development April 1-2 2009, Maputo, Mozambique
by alice 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

(Apologies for cross posting) http://www.w3.org/2008/10/MW4D_WS/ The W3C Workshop on the "Africa Perspective on the Role of Mobile Technologies in Fostering Social Development" aims to understand specific challenges of using mobile phones and Web technologies to deliver services to underprivileged populations of Developing Countries, and to capture the specificities of the African context. There are today more than half of the population living with less than 3$ a day, and lacking all kind of services (health, education, government...). The incredible growth of the mobile penetration rate last few years is providing a new hope. The potential of simple ICT services on mobiles to improve people's income has indeed been largely demonstrated. The aim of this workshop is to explore how to leverage these success stories and create an enabling environment that would drive the appearance of numerous services all over the Developing World. People and organizations who have an interest in the role of mobile phones and the Web in social and economic development and who wish to participate in the workshop are invited to submit statements of interest / abstracts / position papers to the Workshop Committee (by email to: team-m4d-ws-submit(a)w3.org) This is a Workshop of the W3C Mobile Web Initiative (MWI), which aims to identify and resolve challenges and issues of accessing the Web when on the move. This Workshop is part of the the Digital World Forum project (European Union's 7th Research Framework Programme - FP7) which explore how to take advantage of the new paradigm of low-cost technologies in broadband infrastructure and devices to bridge the digital divide and connect the unconnected. W3C thanks Workshop host, the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Government of Mozambique. Sponsorship: You are cordially invited to sponsor this workshop. Following in the model of the successful sponsorship program developed for the 2006 Mobile Web in Developing Countries Workshop, and the 2008 Workshop on the Role of Mobile Technologies in fostering Social Development, we expect you will want to consider participating in the program for this important meeting. This sponsorship program is a marketing opportunity that enable sponsors to showcase their organization and underscore its commitment to the shared goals of the W3C. Sponsors reach those who are making decisions about the future of the Web, as well as those in the public who have come to rely on the Web as critical infrastructure for development and to help bridging the Digital Divide. Sponsors will be associated directly with the event which will gather at the same place experts in mobile Web technologies, and experts in the Digital Divide in order to use the Web and mobile phones to leverage development in rural areas of developing countries. There are three levels of sponsorship, Platinum-Gold-Silver, offering a panel of benefits. All the details of each level are available from the Sponsorship Program page. This sponsorship program is designed to enable participation by individuals and organizations with particular expertise, but who might not otherwise be able to attend due to travel or other costs. For further information and expression of interest, please contact Stéphane Boyera (boyera(a)w3.org) or Marie-Claire Forgue (mcf(a)w3.org) The deadline for requesting to take part in this opportunity is March 15, 2009. Background ------------------------------ Since its creation in 1989 by Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the Web has grown from one user to more than 1.5 billion of users in 2008, creating services, providing information, connecting people, creating new jobs and completely new sectors of activities. Despite this incredible success in a such a short timeframe, there are still today more than 4.5 billion people that are not benefiting from this Information Society. However, the Web, and Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in general, has been recognized as a great tool to potentially resolve the historical divides between developed and developing economies by providing an infrastructure to deploy minimal services (Health, Education, Business, Government...) to rural communities and under-privileged populations. That is why many actions have been engaged in the last twenty years towards bridging the so-called Digital Divide. Unfortunately, these actions - often focussing on telecenters - have had little success so far. This model has encountered many difficulties due to the local conditions (lack of electricity, lack of maintenance skills….) and very few have reach long-term sustainability and continued operation. Since 2-3 years a new hope is coming with the very high penetration rate of mobile telephony in developing countries. Now a minimal infrastructure (GSM networks) and minimal computing power (mobile phones) are available in the pockets (or at least in their very close environment) of billions of people, including the poorest segment of the population. Most developing countries who missed the telephony revolution due to lack of infrastructure and required investments have participated in the mobile revolution directly. Can this be repeated for the Web? Four years ago, the W3C with the mobile industry have launched the Mobile Web Initiative to make mobile phone users first class Web citizen, and the number of people accessing the Web from mobile phones is growing very quickly. Would it be possible that, like for telephony, most Developing Countries will skip the PC-Web revolution and jump directly on the next phase, the Mobile Web? In May 2008, W3C has launched the Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group to explore this direction, and understand the type of actions that could support and leverage this transition. This is the theme of this workshop. For under-privileged people to benefit the Web, they need to be able to access it, and find accessible, usable and useful information and services that would help them, and that is worth the resource they put to learn and connect. Therefore, it is critical to explore the two aspects of access and content, as well as the education needs. Regarding access, it is critical to understand the key challenges and barriers that targeted end-users (underpriviledged populations of Developing Countries) have to access and use mobile services. This includes affordability, usability, illiteracy, accessibility and internationalization/localization issues. Regarding content, the key question is creating an enabling environment for the creation of information and services that people need and that would improve their lives. In the last 2 or 3 years, we witnessed the appearance of success stories of that demonstrated how relatively simple services on mobile could be really helpful. However, the number of these success stories is still low, and they are all based on a limited technology, SMS. This workshop is aiming at identifying the issues, barriers, needs and challenges the potential providers of development-oriented services, mostly NGO/grass-root organizations and governments/public sector have to develop and deploy those services, and to exploit the potential of the mobile platform. Regarding education, it is essential to understand what are the needs of the different actors (NGO/grass-root organizations, IT sector, potential entrepreneurs,...), and what kind of education material could help disseminating the expertise and enabling people about developing services and content on mobile phones. As an input to this workshop, the W3C team has written a public white paper that summarizes some of these issues. The W3C Mobile Web for Social Development Group is also developing a set of documents which should serve as input to potential participants. Scope The goal of the workshop is to provide input and feedback to the W3C Mobile Web Initiative, and its Mobile Web for Social Development Interest Group. The following topics are of particular interest: * Analysis of use-cases / real-world projects on o use of mobile phones in development projects, o use of the Web in development projects, o deployment of public services using mobile devices in developing countries. * Strengths and weaknesses of SMS technology vs mobile Web vs voice technology * Regional differences in Asia/Africa/Central Europe/Middle East/South America/etc. * Challenges of integrating ICTs in rural communities * Usability and Human-Computer Interfaces (HCI) challenges of mobile browser and mobile content for population without technological background and prior computer experience * Challenges and potential solutions against illiteracy * Usage of mobile technologies in emergency responses in rural areas * Analysis on the way the mobile phones and/or the Web could improve people's lives in Developing Countries (education, healthcare, etc.) * Role of voice and multimodal technologies/applications * Challenges of developing and deploying numerous ICT services to rural communities * Comparison between different potential platforms to support ICT's deployment (mobile phones, low-cost laptop, telecenters, and so on) * Opportunity and challenges of ICTs in social/human development * Challenges of sustainability, scalability and replicability * Challenges and opportunity of integrating mobile phones in specific domains: eGovernment projects (mGovernment), e-health projects, disaster management,.... Who should attend ? W3C encourages W3C Members and public to participate in the Workshop. Workshop organizers expects that this workshop should be of particular interest to people with following backgrounds: * Charitable Foundations funding and/or managing Development projects using ICTs * Companies or Organizations providing ICT-related products, services, content, applications or infrastructure in Developing Countries. * People with grassroots experience on the use of ICT in Development * People from the ICT for Development (ICT4D) domain * People with a mobile background * People with an eGovernment background * Web experts * Accessibility experts * Digital Divide experts * People expert in mobile HCI in Developing Countries * People expert in the use of mobile phones in Development Workshop Dates The workshop will take place on April 1-2 2009. Venue The exact venue is still under consideration. Details will be soon available. Languages Statements of Interest, abstracts, position papers and presentation slides must be in English. The workshop will have a real-time simultaneous translation in Portuguese, English and French. Therefore, speakers and presenters can use any of these three languages. Participation To ensure productive discussions, the workshop is limited to 100 attendees. Participation is open to non-W3C members. Each organization can provide at most two attendees. Statement of interest are required in order to participate in this workshop (except for W3C team members). Each organization or individual wishing to participate must submit a statement of interest at team-m4d-ws-submit(a)w3.org explaining their interest in the workshop as soon as possible and no later than February 12, 2009. The intent is to make sure that participants have an active interest in the area, and that the workshop will benefit from their presence. The Program Committee will select attendants based on their statement of interests and the number of available seats. Each organization or individual wishing to have a position paper published on the workshop web site and/or wishing to make a presentation during the event must submit an abstract no later than January 12, 2009. The Program Committee will then review these abstracts, select some of them for presentation, and request the full papers from the authors. The decision of the Program Committee will be notified to the authors by January 25, 2009. Send abstract (in valid XHTML/HTML (please use the W3C Markup Validation Service) or PDF or Plain Text - 1 to 2 pages) to: team-m4d-ws-submit(a)w3.org All papers from accepted abstract will be available from the workshop Web site. The workshop Web site will be public, so papers and slides must be suitable for public dissemination. Speaker slides will also be available at the Web site after the workshop. There will not be printed proceedings. To attend, you must register by filling out a registration form. The URI for the registration form will be sent to you after your statement of interest is accepted. There will be no participation fee. Press representatives must contact w3t-pr(a)w3.org and/or Marie-Claire Forgue, W3C Communications (mcf(a)w3.org) Agenda The agenda will be published after the selection of abstracts by the Program Committee. Important Deadlines Please note the following dates: * As soon as possible - Statements of interest * January 12, 2009: Abstract submission * January 25, 2009: Committee Decisions on participations and abtract selection * February 20, 2009: Agenda and registration open * March 15, 2009: Final presentations available and registration closed * April 1-2, 2009: Two Days Workshop in Maputo, Mozambique Contact Enquiries or comments on the workshop can be sent to the public mailing list public-mw4d(a)w3.org.

1 0

Re: [kictanet] 1 million Laptops for who?
by Faima Basly 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

Mr Robert, I read the article in the papers yesterday and couldn’t help but echo some of your questions on this mail list that unfortunately have not yet been responded to. Of key interest is the following: Whats the plan for procurement? tender or 'donated'? To me this is a perfect opportunity to set up a partnership for local assembly with any of the big boys - Acer, Dell, HP etc to set up an assembly plant with a 2 year clear handover to Kenyans, part of the deal should have initial 80% local employment with clear skill transfer built in so that in 18 months you have 99% local employment at the plant. Do the math 1,000,000*40,000 kshs ( assumed price) = Lots of money. This is a deal that anyone would salivate for. Will the computers have MS Office or Linux - Again do the math as its likely to be the former. What about capacity building? Planned for or just wish ful thinking? Was there a need analysis carried out to determine that it is indeed Laptops required? So to me procurement of laptops should never be an option. As we already have the madaraka project in place, why not up skill and upscale this to meet this demand for the 1 million laptops. Or is Madaraka over? Secondly , the target group, I think you have it right, whats this about 'rural'? What is rural in Kenya? is it Turkana, Marsabit, Wajir, Nyeri, Malindi, Kibira? We need a clear cut definition and probably a sector by sector prioritization based on Vision 2030 and logically what will reap benefit to the Kenyan economy. Don’t get me wrong we must develop Kenyans consistently with a strong plan not hide behind the Rural Urban divide. I raise some of these concerns because last week I was eavesdropping on a launch at one of our Key hotels in Kenya . A Major computer chip manufacturer was launching their East African offices. They showcased their effort being a certain school in Nairobi having received some special student laptops and the school was showing how learning was improved. All good, but the purpose of the Launch? To make an appeal to the PS MOE to consider 'partnering' with this company to sell 240,000 laptops to the teachers in Kenya( wow I thought what a marketing gimic is this how it’s done?)Will this lead to a pronounce from MOE of some 240,000 Laptops for teachers???? Hook and bait? Anything further than this would be speculation. I agree teachers need laptops (computers maybe), but once again can we plan collectively as a government to work in unison and benefit locals on employment and empowerment? It CAN be done. Which brings me to the reason for this email. Shouldnt there be some kinds of checks and balances in place in our Ministries? Is there a way that 'we' can be involved before some of these utterances are made? We have two PS's of different Ministries each thinking along the same paths both with good ideas, but I worry on the path to execution. Of these 1 million Laptops Ndemo speaks of - what percentage for his fellow teachers? Jua Kali artisans?, Medical students. Is there a master plan being followed? or is it pure chance ? Dr Ndemo,I am sure there is a simple enough response to the queries raised above. I sincerely hope you will take the time to respond, and put my mind and probably others as well? at rest. Ms. Basly. ______________________________________________________________________ Hi Dr. Ndemo,I felt it would not be fair to close the year with one final outburst on your ministries policies.It was good to see that the governement will be giving laptops to youth in the rural area. http://www.nation.co.ke/business/news/-/1006/499894/-/jh30hdz/-/index.html Last time I checked 80% of the students in the University are from the "rural areas" would it not make more sense to first equip them with the necessary tools. I recently talked to IT degree students at Nairobi university and was shocked to find that less than 5% have computers dedicated to them and this are not provided by the institution but have been bought privately.It is good to talk of empowering the rural folk but is this the best way, should we not begin at the top and work our way down. This computers would also provide greater mileage if we example they where to be giving to to students in teacher training colleges so that they can take technology to the schools, country wide that they will be posted to after they graduate?Also do not forget the medical students who would be able to provide better medical services if they knew how to use and had access to the internet's resources.Another major issue that is lacking from the story is how the laptops are to be procured, is there any likelihood that they will be assembled locally as if they are we shall be killing to birds with 1 stone. Robert YaweKAY System Technologies LtdPhoenix House, 6th FloorP O Box 55806 Nairobi, 00200Kenya Tel: +254722511225, +254202010696 _______________________________________________kictanet mailing listkictanet@lists.kictanet.or.kehttp://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet _________________________________________________________________ Discover the new Windows Vista http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

9 17

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment)Bill: Is media overacting?
by Mike Theuri 15 Dec '08

15 Dec '08

David, The top level meetings apparently yielded some results. Apart from the Minister, it would be interesting to see how the legislators who were consulted voted or if they even attended the session. The efforts with the parliamentary committee did not go to waste, Hon. Rege did attempt to introduce amendments based on the meetings, but it has been reported that only 25 MPs were present. The media could have done better in lobbying MPs to be present for the vote. Had the media managed to locate 30 legislators in favour of the amendments and ensured they attended the proceedings, the matter would not be in its current state. I think it would be quite reasonable if the media accepted to have a compromise on the issues. It would not be right for the media to declare that it is for 'all or nothing at all', it would be selfish and self serving to deny the public of the bill's greater benefits by failing to compromise. The controversial clause has been present for many years now, if someone wanted to lynch the media, they would not need the new bill to do so. At the same time is the media aware of an event that will certainly occur that could be termed a national emergency resulting in 'raids'? Does the media have something up its sleeve that it is not keen to reveal publicly? I believe the answer to both of these questions is no. The media has nothing to worry about if it self regulates and exercises good judgement. The media has had many opportunities to self regulate, but some content that is broadcast or published is appalling, inappropriate and is certainly a factor that had led many to believe that the media needs hand holding. Sensationalism is not a prerequisite for good journalism, neither do newspapers need to turn into tabloid publications in order to sell. Professional and objective journalism will always sell itself without having to stoop low. As the saying goes, chema chajiuza, kibaya chajitembeza. The media might be surprised to find that favour can be found by approaching the issue in a positive rather than in a doom and gloom manner. The media/activists are reported to have spent Ksh 2m to advertise a 'prayer meeting' this past weekend. Wouldn't the media have done well to use such resources to educate the public positively and not engage in what borders on incitement? It is not necessary to label everything 'bad'. For example, why not publish or explain, what clause 88 is, its history, what is means for the industry and offer a number of alternative scenarios and recommendations on what should be done. A good example would be how commercial concerns express their views in opposition to legislative proposals without appearing to be antagonistic, given the focus of this forum, an ICT example would fit in well: http://www.ebaymainstreet.com/federal/net-neutrality/ The failure to recommend or offer suggestions as to what should be done does not help the media's case. If the President does not sign the bill, he will have to send the bill back to Parliament with a memorandum, how are the public, legislators and concerned parties supposed to know what the media would like the memorandum and bill to contain? By embracing the positive aspects of the bill, the media is likely to find allies in both the public and private sectors willing to support their position. When businesses, banks, investors are turned off by the media's approach of 'killing' the entire bill and wading in dangerous territory, the media is bound to seen as a villain of the very parties it relies on for some of its revenue. It is not an extraordinary effort for the media to seek out 50 MPs even 100 or more if need be, some of whom may not have read the bill, put forward the media's case while also advocating the same for the memorandum. A little more restrategizing and reorganisation on this could accomplish a lot more than engaging in uncivil disruptions. Diplomacy is never dead, it can fail, but it can also be revived. There is an opening for a revival to take place if the media seizes the opportunity. On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 1:35 PM, <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Theuri > Very well put. The media has certainly not handled the aftermath well but I > see it as a reaction to the failure of diplomacy. To be fair, the media did > quite a bit of that. Top level meetings were held one after another with > pogisho, ndemo, kalonzo, karua, raila, and twice with rege and his parl > committee. That's quite an effort. > Truth is, at this pt, better the bill fell apart, regrettably to the > detriment of the ict components, and we have the sect 88 intact, than pass a > new law with all those flaws and inherent danger. Some1 is waiting to latch > on to that law soon as its assented, to lynch the media. > Yet I totally appreciate we need some urgent regulation of the broadcast > sector. But not such crass controls as the bill provides. > The trouble is that the media can't dedicate too much time to the good > parts because, well, that won't help to cure the bad! And our suggestion was > to drop the broadcast parts and have the ict and comm parts sail but > ministry people don't want that! They want to force it through and the mps > who have been swearing to tame the media even didn't want to consider the > minor changes the committee and ministry had proposed. That's malice > aforethought. That's why this has turned into a free for all betwn > supporters and opponents of the media. > Am inclined to think this is a battle the media shouldn't lose in the > interest of our democracy and civil liberties. > David > > Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device > > ------------------------------ > *From*: "Mike Theuri" > *Date*: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:19:01 -0600 > *To*: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> > > *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications > (amendment)Bill: Is media overacting? > David, > > What happens if the media campaign succeeds, the bill is not signed and > Parliament fails to override thus killing the bill? Section 88 will remain > where it is and neither the media nor the public will have gained. > > The media could gain some traction by objectively covering the bill in its > entirety. The media could do well to inform readers of what's new, what's > positive and what's negative. A well reasoned approach would reveal for > instance concerns revolving around the appointment of officials to the > commission or positives such as the bill's approach to e-crimes. The media's > approach needs to embrace diplomacy and be willing to engage in compromise. > For instance instead of calling for the deletion of section 88, the media > could seek common ground and offer among its alternative suggestions to > deletion, provisions that prevent abuse of section 88. > > While the media did not mobilise the masses, the media appears to be > engaged in what could end up inciting those who have already "self > mobilised" or are united as a result of food insecurity and related economic > issues. The media and the public stand to gain nothing by taking advantage > to fuel a volatile situation. > > The media already has painted a bad image of itself, through the actions of > a few. It is likely that the chief executives of media establishments could > have sought audience with the President and/or the PM to discuss their > concerns and made more traction in getting the bill sent back to Parliament > than have individuals engage in disruptions and heckling. A rational > approach has a better chance of succeeding than an antagonistic one. The > media hopefully has that in mind as they plan their next move. > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:37 AM, <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put across >> your cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of course >> not opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out to >> support the bill and not been given airtime. >> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or employed any >> of the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't need >> to go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. The >> worst have taken place under the current regime! >> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just a >> little more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of >> the media lacks foundation. >> David >> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >> >> >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by emko＠internetresearch.com.gh 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Murigi, I stand correct........ Thanks for the assurance that all is well, really thats what we all want so we can build our Africa. Have a goodnight. Eric here > Eric, > > To the contrary, things are very good in Kenya. Two unrestrained animals > (parliament and the media) are tying a noose around each others neck. > Few of us have little sympathy for either side and expect them to tame > each other. > > Murigi > > emko(a)internetresearch.com.gh wrote: >> Good people, >> >> At this point, finger pointing does not help and really "two wrongs does >> not make a right" because tempers are going high and Bill established >> what >> i was driving at, things could get back like before and you dont want >> that. >> >> Please lets appeal to the voice of reasoning and apply measures that >> would >> retract this track because all you need is like what happened in Greece >> the other day, a police officer deliberately or not shot a teenager and >> that country has not known peace. >> >> For Kenya, we dont even have the luxury of the Greece situation given >> the >> legacy so please i would put my weight behind Bill's proposals below, >> lets >> move quickly to calm tempers and defuse the tension. >> >> I left Nairobi this morning for Accra and trust me, the atmosphere was >> not >> good for my liking. >> >> Eric here >> >> >> >>> Wainaina/Alice et al, >>> >>> 1. How can Kictanet help package the following for consumption in the >>> public >>> domain?? >>> 2. How can stakeholders in this forum help guide this paradigm >>> shift...i.e...that there is a different school of thought that cares >>> about >>> the rest of the bill and is willing to champion dialogue rather than >>> fighting the Media?? >>> 3. At Mediacorp, we can support Kictanet with 1/2page space in a >>> leading >>> daily (if need be) to pioneer dialogue and consensus building >>> activities. >>> We >>> believe that kictanet can help cool temparatures before our businesses >>> are >>> affected for the second time this year. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Wainaina Mungai >>> <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> To add to Alice's point, it is clear the media is determined to >>>> exclude content that would inform and empower the public...if the said >>>> content does not serve short-term interests of the media owners. The >>>> freedom of the media should not be at the expense of public interests. >>>> >>>> For instance, it is common knowledge that many objective and >>>> professional editors find themselves at the mercy of their employers >>>> whenever a news piece does not favour a friend of the owner. That is >>>> how we ended up with a media with blood in it's hands during the >>>> post-election crisis. It's all about the biased reporting the media >>>> has resorted to in fighting the Bill. >>>> >>>> So who should determine the direction and nature of content? An >>>> independent government regulator or the media owners? Maybe a mix of >>>> the two would be a step forward...which is what the amendments would >>>> result in. >>>> >>>> If the President passes the Bill, the big change for media would be on >>>> matters of programming codes. The other big issue of Section 88 is >>>> neither here nor there because failure by the President to ascent will >>>> leave us with the same provision under KCA (1998). >>>> >>>> Wainaina >>>> >>>> On 12/14/08, alice <alice(a)apc.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> David, >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the media could start by reporting accurately. Some of the >>>>> sections the media find so offensive already exist in the 1998 >>>>> communications act. So why not present the big full picture to all >>>>> and >>>>> especially the public? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> alice >>>>> >>>>> (Views expressed are personal and not a reflection of any of the >>>>> organizations I am affiliated with) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> dmakali(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>> I can't argue against your sources but am certain that stage of >>>>>> black >>>>>> >>> out >>> >>>>>> for mps hasn't been reached at all. In fact we are meeting tue to >>>>>> >>> evaluate >>> >>>>>> exactly the import of the passage of that bill and bring every1 on >>>>>> the >>>>>> same page. >>>>>> Of course blacking out not just some 25 mps but all is very much a >>>>>> possible line of action. And for good reason- these mps did not >>>>>> consider >>>>>> ANY of the changes we proposed. That gang approach doesn't lend >>>>>> itself >>>>>> >>> to >>> >>>>>> decent engagement frm the media. They have abused their power and >>>>>> >>> ignored >>> >>>>>> our views, not reasonably but glibly. >>>>>> I am totally in agrment with thoz who argue the broadcast media >>>>>> needs >>>>>> regulation, because it is true. I don't even share some defensive >>>>>> views >>>>>> about ownership held by moa- I see no value in nmg getting more >>>>>> radio >>>>>> or >>>>>> tv frequencies for eg coz they already have too many, or royal media >>>>>> having all thoz frequencies. Its simply obscene. But that is a diff >>>>>> >>> story >>> >>>>>> frm govt getting into micro management of media conent or , the >>>>>> minister >>>>>> having power to raid and confiscate equipment or occupy or take over >>>>>> a >>>>>> media house. There was no emergency wen michuki used mercenaries to >>>>>> raid >>>>>> standard. >>>>>> Plus the ethical issues being raised about content can and are >>>>>> already >>>>>> addressed under the media act. The worst thing you want is to invite >>>>>> >>> govt >>> >>>>>> fiat into content matters. You will rue the day you get a >>>>>> dictatorial >>>>>> govt. Examples are many. >>>>>> Similarly, how do you allow the minister to give directions to a >>>>>> commission that's supposd to be independent? He shud take its advice >>>>>> not >>>>>> rubber stamp his decisions. And how do you have a commission >>>>>> appointed >>>>>> solely by the minister without any guidelines? Criteria to follow? >>>>>> Finally did you see the clause about kbc? Nothing about its roles, >>>>>> and >>>>>> obligations? Even the principal act is beta! >>>>>> Well, wainaina and other kictanets, it would be useful to speak to >>>>>> these >>>>>> issues even as you condemn the media for obviously lopsided >>>>>> reporting >>>>>> >>> and >>> >>>>>> wailing. >>>>>> David >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:53:55 >>>>>> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com>; KICTAnet ICT Policy >>>>>> Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) >>>>>> Bill: >>>>>> >>> Is >>> >>>>>> media overacting? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> David, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am very much involved the media and you & I know that it was >>>>>> agreed >>>>>> that the Action Plan includes a "blackout to..." as well as all the >>>>>> issues I indicated.The point is clear. I have told the truth >>>>>> relating >>>>>> to the content of the Action Plan. >>>>>> >>>>>> The question of execution is separate. Ndemo having been on K24 is >>>>>> does not change much but it is not in line with the Action >>>>>> Plan....meaning, we need to complement K24 for that step. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's be honest in our submissions especially concerning such >>>>>> >>> revelations. >>> >>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/14/08, dmakali(a)yahoo.com <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put >>>>>>> across >>>>>>> your >>>>>>> cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of >>>>>>> course >>>>>>> >>> not >>> >>>>>>> opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> support the bill and not been given airtime. >>>>>>> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or >>>>>>> employed >>>>>>> >>> any >>> >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't >>>>>>> >>> need >>> >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> worst >>>>>>> have taken place under the current regime! >>>>>>> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> little >>>>>>> more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> media lacks foundation. >>>>>>> David >>>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:08:09 >>>>>>> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> >>>>>>> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications >>>>>>> (amendment) >>>>>>> Bill: Is media overacting? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The truth is that the "supporters" you see on TV, hear on radio, >>>>>>> read >>>>>>> in papers are not by accident. The Media Owners Association (MoA) >>>>>>> crafted a campaign strategy that includes the "media blackout to >>>>>>> all >>>>>>> MPs who supported the Bill and The Ministry of Information & >>>>>>> Communications". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> According to persons privy to the media campaign strategy, we have >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> big problem here and it's about time Kenyans were told the >>>>>>> objective >>>>>>> truth. Unfortunately, the people who own the media houses are >>>>>>> determined to use every possible means to ensure the Bill is not >>>>>>> signed. You will not hear a supporter of the Bill being given >>>>>>> coverage. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The strategy is clearly not intended to yield an objective result. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> intention is to shape public opinion even through biased reporting. >>>>>>> The strategy includes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Ensure President dioesn't sign the Bill, by publicly petitioning >>>>>>> >>> him. >>> >>>>>>> 2. Take advantage of Jamhuri Day to show images of raids conducted >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> previous regimes. >>>>>>> 3. Run a media campaign that includes 'same headline' in all papers >>>>>>> and similar headlines on electronic media. >>>>>>> 4. Shape public opinion through campains and show that the Bill is >>>>>>> unconstitutional...etc etc >>>>>>> 5. Blackout all supporters of the Bill, Ministry & only invite >>>>>>> civil >>>>>>> society players who support the interests of the media. Keep >>>>>>> watching >>>>>>> and you'll notice the biased reporting. >>>>>>> 6. The coverage of the issue in the weekend papers (circulation) is >>>>>>> also part of the strategy. This will not stop until the President >>>>>>> yields to the Media's agenda. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The media has the right to petition the President but the problem >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> their campaign is that Media Owners have actually agreed not to >>>>>>> cover >>>>>>> the issue objectively. They have conspired to shape public opinion >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> all possible means including excluding all those who have a >>>>>>> different >>>>>>> opinion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In doing so, they demonstrate the need for legislative regulation. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> nation is now at the mercy of the media and the public will only be >>>>>>> fed with one side of the story. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Over to you. >>>>>>> Wainaina >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 12/14/08, Kinuthia Muchane <muchanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Habari, >>>>>>>> Maybe the media is overacting, maybe the the MPs are wrong... But >>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>> interesting thing about this issue is the timidity of the MPs, to >>>>>>>> >>> begin >>> >>>>>>>> with, in the news all I am hearing are our dear elected >>>>>>>> >>> representatives >>> >>>>>>>> vowing their undying support for all sorts of freedom, including >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> >>> of >>> >>>>>>>> Press, so my question is, isn't there one, single MP who supported >>>>>>>> passing of the Bill who can come out in defence of his or her >>>>>>>> stand? >>>>>>>> >>> Or >>> >>>>>>>> is it because they always pander to the Press, they do not want to >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> seen in 'bad' light . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, most of us take what we hear on the radio or >>>>>>>> watch >>>>>>>> >>> on >>> >>>>>>>> TV as gospel truth, and the unfortunate fact of life is that the >>>>>>>> majority of us have no other source of information, or do not >>>>>>>> seek >>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>> avenues of >>>>>>>> getting information, a fact very well >>>>>>>> known by members of the so called "Fourth Estate". So when they >>>>>>>> drench >>>>>>>> us with "details" about the dangers of the bill's amendment no >>>>>>>> matter >>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>> skewed their >>>>>>>> opinion is, we will believe them hook, line and sinker! >>>>>>>> If you ask me, in a country like ours with a very shaky social, >>>>>>>> political and economic foundation, these merchants of >>>>>>>> "information" should be very closely and regularly monitored, a >>>>>>>> Radio >>>>>>>> Mille Collines can happen here very easily... >>>>>>>> In any case, ain't all these media 'houses' just commercial >>>>>>>> >>> enterprises >>> >>>>>>>> out to make a tidy profit? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kinuthia... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> ke-internetusers mailing list >>>>>>>> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>>>>>>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> http://www.bungesms.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >>>>>>> >>>>>>> KABISSA.org - >>>>>>> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >>>>>>> >>>>>>> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> kictanet mailing list >>>>>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>>>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This message was sent to: dmakali(a)yahoo.com >>>>>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com >>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> kictanet mailing list >>>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>>> >>>>> This message was sent to: wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org >>>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/wainaina%40madeinkenya… >>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>> >>>> --- >>>> http://www.bungesms.com >>>> >>>> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >>>> >>>> KABISSA.org - >>>> >>> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >>> >>>> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >>>> >>>> >>> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> kictanet mailing list >>>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>>> >>>> This message was sent to: billkagai(a)gmail.com >>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>>> >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/billkagai%40gmail.com >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Bildad Kagai >>> MD - MediaCorp Limited >>> Nairobi Stock Exchange Authorised Information Vendor >>> Suite B2, Tetu Court, State House Avenue >>> P. O. Box 20311 - 00200 >>> Nairobi, Kenya >>> Tel. 254 20 272 8332 >>> Fax. Rendered Obsolete >>> S - 1°17'13.8" >>> E - 36°48'22.7" >>> www.mediacorp.co.ke >>> --- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> kictanet mailing list >>> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >>> >>> This message was sent to: emko(a)internetresearch.com.gh >>> Unsubscribe or change your options at >>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/emko%40internetresearc… >>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: murigi.muraya(a)gmail.com >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail.… >> >> > >

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by Wainaina Mungai 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Bw. Ndemo, Agreed. I have even challenged Editors at one media house to call in experts to explain the provisions of the Bill. First, the Media should rise to the "statemanship" they demand of the rest of us and accept the offer to openly and fairly debate the issues. They may televise this live on all channels since they have proved they can easily agree on collective approach. Secondly, we need to lobby individual media owners to tone down aspects of their campaign that have degenerated to an abuse of the national resources delegated to them. Genuine dialogue will be possible after they put their weapons away and pursue what is in the longterm interest of Kenya. Regards Wainaina On 12/15/08, bitange(a)jambo.co.ke <bitange(a)jambo.co.ke> wrote: > Dear Wainaina, > If Media is as objective as David says, I will avail myself for a debate > with whoever they select in order to help Kenyans understand these > amendments. > We must move from petty arguments to discussing real issues. I want to take > this opportunity to thank the many jounalists who have expressed solidarity > with Government to regulate electronic media. Reading through their smss > and e_mails it is clear that the greatest threat to media freedom are media > owners. > > They rightfully point out that: > The KCA ammendments is not a media bill as it seeks to introduce electronic > transactions and broadcast; > Electronic Media world over is regulated and this is what the bill seeks to > achieve: > Noone should be above the law; and > We must salvage our moral standing by regulating content. > > The rightful body that should be raising issues in this saga is the Media > Council but instead it is the MOA. Just ask yourself what it is that MOA > has to do with the rights of a journalist? > > Ndemo. > > > Sent from my BlackBerry(R) > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> > > Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:53:55 > To: <bitange(a)jambo.co.ke> > Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> > Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) > Bill: Is media overacting? > > > David, > > I am very much involved the media and you & I know that it was agreed > that the Action Plan includes a "blackout to..." as well as all the > issues I indicated.The point is clear. I have told the truth relating > to the content of the Action Plan. > > The question of execution is separate. Ndemo having been on K24 is > does not change much but it is not in line with the Action > Plan....meaning, we need to complement K24 for that step. > > Let's be honest in our submissions especially concerning such revelations. > > Wainaina > > On 12/14/08, dmakali(a)yahoo.com <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> That's not true. You have obviously exaggerated in trying to put across >> your >> cheap propaganda. Ndemo was on k24 this morning and he was of course not >> opposing the bill. Plus, you should ask yourself, who has come out to >> support the bill and not been given airtime. >> Yes, the media is campaigning, but it has not yet agreed or employed any >> of >> the strategies you have listed. Their time is coming. And we don't need >> to >> go to previous regimes to show brutal attacks against the media. The >> worst >> have taken place under the current regime! >> You have more to be grateful than disgusted with the media. Be just a >> little >> more reflective and considerate otherwise your diabolical hatred of the >> media lacks foundation. >> David >> Sent from my BlackBerry(R) wireless device >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "Wainaina Mungai" <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> >> >> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:08:09 >> To: <dmakali(a)yahoo.com> >> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications >> (amendment) >> Bill: Is media overacting? >> >> >> The truth is that the "supporters" you see on TV, hear on radio, read >> in papers are not by accident. The Media Owners Association (MoA) >> crafted a campaign strategy that includes the "media blackout to all >> MPs who supported the Bill and The Ministry of Information & >> Communications". >> >> According to persons privy to the media campaign strategy, we have a >> big problem here and it's about time Kenyans were told the objective >> truth. Unfortunately, the people who own the media houses are >> determined to use every possible means to ensure the Bill is not >> signed. You will not hear a supporter of the Bill being given >> coverage. >> >> Why? >> >> The strategy is clearly not intended to yield an objective result. The >> intention is to shape public opinion even through biased reporting. >> The strategy includes: >> >> 1. Ensure President dioesn't sign the Bill, by publicly petitioning him. >> 2. Take advantage of Jamhuri Day to show images of raids conducted by >> previous regimes. >> 3. Run a media campaign that includes 'same headline' in all papers >> and similar headlines on electronic media. >> 4. Shape public opinion through campains and show that the Bill is >> unconstitutional...etc etc >> 5. Blackout all supporters of the Bill, Ministry & only invite civil >> society players who support the interests of the media. Keep watching >> and you'll notice the biased reporting. >> 6. The coverage of the issue in the weekend papers (circulation) is >> also part of the strategy. This will not stop until the President >> yields to the Media's agenda. >> >> The media has the right to petition the President but the problem with >> their campaign is that Media Owners have actually agreed not to cover >> the issue objectively. They have conspired to shape public opinion by >> all possible means including excluding all those who have a different >> opinion. >> >> In doing so, they demonstrate the need for legislative regulation. The >> nation is now at the mercy of the media and the public will only be >> fed with one side of the story. >> >> Over to you. >> Wainaina >> >> >> On 12/14/08, Kinuthia Muchane <muchanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Habari, >>> Maybe the media is overacting, maybe the the MPs are wrong... But one >>> interesting thing about this issue is the timidity of the MPs, to begin >>> with, in the news all I am hearing are our dear elected representatives >>> vowing their undying support for all sorts of freedom, including that of >>> Press, so my question is, isn't there one, single MP who supported >>> passing of the Bill who can come out in defence of his or her stand? Or >>> is it because they always pander to the Press, they do not want to be >>> seen in 'bad' light . >>> >>> On the other hand, most of us take what we hear on the radio or watch on >>> TV as gospel truth, and the unfortunate fact of life is that the >>> majority of us have no other source of information, or do not seek >>> other >>> avenues of >>> getting information, a fact very well >>> known by members of the so called "Fourth Estate". So when they drench >>> us with "details" about the dangers of the bill's amendment no matter >>> how >>> skewed their >>> opinion is, we will believe them hook, line and sinker! >>> If you ask me, in a country like ours with a very shaky social, >>> political and economic foundation, these merchants of >>> "information" should be very closely and regularly monitored, a Radio >>> Mille Collines can happen here very easily... >>> In any case, ain't all these media 'houses' just commercial enterprises >>> out to make a tidy profit? >>> >>> Kinuthia... >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ke-internetusers mailing list >>> ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net >>> http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >>> >> >> -- >> Sent from my mobile device >> >> --- >> http://www.bungesms.com >> >> TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms >> >> KABISSA.org - >> http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network >> >> KAMPALA Workshop presentation - >> http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kictanet mailing list >> kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet >> >> This message was sent to: dmakali(a)yahoo.com >> Unsubscribe or change your options at >> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.com >> > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > --- > http://www.bungesms.com > > TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms > > KABISSA.org - > http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network > > KAMPALA Workshop presentation - > http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya… > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > This message was sent to: bitange(a)jambo.co.ke > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/bitange%40jambo.co.ke > > ---------------------------------------------- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by Jambo MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --------------------------------------------- > "easy access to the world" > > -- Sent from my mobile device --- http://www.bungesms.com TWITTER - http://www.twitter.com/bungesms KABISSA.org - http://www.kabissa.org/about/news/member-spotlight-made-kenya-network KAMPALA Workshop presentation - http://m4d.kcl.co.ug/sites/default/files/presentations/BungeSMS_MadeinKenya…

1 0

Media Institute on Recent Media furore
by Brian Longwe 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

The price of negligence and incompetence [image: PDF]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=573> [image: Print]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5…> [image: E-mail]<http://www.eastafricapress.net/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform…> OUR VIEW While the Media Institute condemns the outrageous selfishness exhibited by Members of Parliament in passing what is clearly a retrogressive law, the media must not escape culpability for what has befallen it. It has become norm for the media to cry wolf when faced with any encroachment on its turf, especially its own welfare. In fact, in the public domain, the strident wailing of the media has become all too familiar and sympathy is waning. And why not; there are many sectors of our society whose cry for attention when their welfare is similarly threatened by government action or legislation hardly get a fraction of the interest the media devotes to its own selfish interests. Truth be told, the media is insensitive and uncaring most of the time. And it gets worse. The media are not even competent in superintending over their own matters either because they are out of depth, they cant fathom the implications of some developments - such as the just enacted Bill - or they are just consumed by their pursuit of profit and basic competition to comprehend the threats to their survival or operations. That cannot be said of the ICT sector, which too is the subject of the same Communications Amendment Bill 2008, but which has had its issues discussed and thrashed out in numerous online lists and discussion forums. Not surprisingly, some media chiefs only came to grips with the implications of the Bill when it had sailed through the First Reading in Parliament a month ago. They long left the job of minding the rights enjoyed by the media almost exclusively to non-governmental organisations that the media cares less about. Consider this: A fortnight before the Bill went to the Third and final phase in the House, an alarmed International Commission of Jurists (Kenya) called a meeting to sensitize the media about the impending law. And when they turned up, some of the media chiefs not only knew zilch about the Bill but what they did after that was even more scandalous. All of them were unavailable for the action proposed to forestall the passage of the law. Even when a press conference was called to raise the alarm, all of them were either busy or conveniently absent. Rather than mobilize the sector, they retreated to their usual boardrooms and adopted the ineffective strategy of molly-coddling MPs, ministry of information officials and other emissaries through informal methods to drop selective clauses deemed to be threatening to commercial interests (principally, the prohibition of cross-ownership). The media did not even give adequate publicity to the Bill prior to the brouhaha, let alone the other aspects relating to ICT. Needless to say, we failed spectacularly and now we are back in our regular dark pit of moaning. What was a clear case of an attempt to abridge freedom of speech was conveniently couched in terms of commercial interests, protection of frequencies, turfs, and so forth. The reporting of the aftermath itself has been terribly wanting. The Communications Bill has all of a sudden become ICT Bill, Media Bill, and other names we have baptised it. How is the public to keep track of our lamentations? In our bid to attract sympathy, ok appeal, to the public, we have also pressed the sensational button, and the inaccuracies are staggering. For one, the offending Sect. 88 was not introduced by the new Bill. It is already in the existing Communications Act and what was on the table was whether to repeal it. That of course, is clouding issues and confusing the bigger picture. At stake is an attempt by the political class to equip itself with the ammunition to circumscribe the fundamental freedom of expression, and arm itself with the ammunition to control the media if it is deemed as unbecoming or threatening to its interests, diverse as they may be. In this regard one cant help but sympathise with the wing of the coalition that is always crying about being shortchanged in the power sharing deal - of what benefit is this new law to the objective of freedom of information in this country? Yes, to be candid, the media is far from innocent. Some of the vulgar content on the airwaves at supposedly neutral hours should not be allowed. Yes, on their own they have demonstrated utter irresponsibility in setting standard thanks to the greed for profit. But to sit and wait for government to legislate their content is perhaps the worst demonstration of lack of leadership among the media management. While the Media Institute joins others in appealing to the Head of State to demonstrate statesmanship and respect for democracy by not assenting to the law, it must be observed that the media has overspent its goodwill and earned its just fruits. Our hope is that the President will not be motivated by short-term parochial interests to endorse a bad law. The Bill clearly impinges on freedom of expression and the media, which are democratic principles that he and other leaders have professed to respect. To turn around and begin to claw back on that at a time when the country is on the democratic assent and awaits proper constitutional reform will be both anachronistic and an undeserving of his legacy. http://www.eastafricapress.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=57…

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [ke-internetusers] Kenya communications (amendment) Bill: Is media overacting?
by Mike Theuri 14 Dec '08

14 Dec '08

Alex, The issues that present themselves are multifaceted in nature and cover many matters. The protests in question however appeared to cover two areas 1) The KCA Amendment Bill 2) Rising Food Prices and Taxation matters Mars Group is part of a coalition of numerous groups numbering over 2000 across the country. Mars Group has been known for exposing matters relating to governance, malfeasance and corruption and has in turn transformed itself into a form of alternative internet based media which is likely to speedily grow if the traditional print media reverts to the oppressed position it was in the 90s leading up to 1997. http://www.marsgroupkenya.org/partnershipforchange/ Mars Group sent out a message on behalf of the "partnership for change" on Dec 10 which stated in part: "All our actions are legal and non-violent. We can get the change we want without heckling or losing self-control. We are in charge of our country and its destiny. We don't need to heckle or misconduct ourselves if we are in charge. Change starts with us changing our behaviour and as we change so too will our country change. Our leaders will follow our lead. >From now on." Mars Group's actions were apparently aimed at protesting issue # 2. It is apparent that because protesters of both issues were at the same venue, the two issues became intertwined. At least one can conclude that Mars Group did not ask those participating to engage in disruptive conduct prior to the event. Has the media been irresponsible? Indeed they have, with media freedom reaching unprecedented levels. What were once professional media turned reputable papers into tabloid publications, and some journalists fabricated stories or accepted brown envelopes to write stories on behalf of interested parties. Naturally such occurrences are scattered and there are still a number of professional members of the media who uphold journalistic ethics. The industry needs to reign in the elements who bring a bad name to the industry. The below provides an insight into some of the decay in media standards in the country: http://okongospolicy.com/?p=127 Had the industry done a better job at self policing, chances are that they may have had more support in getting section 88 deleted. Some sections of the media today are under the control or ownership of personalities with vested political interests some of them in elected office today. What Alex has predicted happening in 2012 will almost certainly take place then and it has happened in the past before on a smaller scale both politically and for commercial reasons. The government is by the people for the people. High handedness in government and obliviousness to what one's employer is saying is a dangerous catalyst for chaos when the employer acts out of desperation. Now the media has become the scapegoat for supposedly mobilising the masses! Issue #2's seriousness should not be underestimated for what seemingly has the early makings of a massive movement with economic hardship being the common denominator. Would the masses adopt the media issue if they were not vested in issue #2? It would be difficult if not unlikely considering that it is apparent that the media issue is a relic from the past and what the media appear to be protesting is its non removal rather than what the general public believes to be an addition. What is clear is that this "relic" manifested in section 88 does not have favour with the public and will soon join the long list of grievances associated with issue #2. It is said that a hungry man is a angry man, blaming the media for mobilising the masses when the truth of the matter is that the proponents (the general public) of issue #2 will adopt any issue that shows disaffection with those perceived to be in a position to determine whether one can put food on the table or not, is what one could term as acting oblivious or what the proverbial ostrich would do were a lion to approach. Can the 'masses' be calmed downby deleting section 88? Temporarily, yes, but only until the next feelings of hunger propel issue #2 back to the forefront. On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Alex Gakuru <gakuru(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Grace, > > This is a difficult subject but I guess keeping quiet about it does not > make it > go away;) Let me start with an excerpt on recent conversation with a media > practitioner. > > --excerpt-- > > But a professional journalist cannot accommodate judgmental or > pre-concluded opinion diagonally opposite to their trade fundamentals > [for @newbies http://blogs.salon.com/0002007///2003/08/17.html and > http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2007/11/journalism-101.html ]. > > After internalising "independence" pretexts when their respective > coverage were biased towards certain differing quarters, recent > lessons have now led to our media houses contemplating declaring their > political ideological alignments (parties or candidates) in future. Do > not be surprised to find such declarations on TV and radio stations > or on Newspapers come 2012. > --excerpt-- > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Grace Bomu <nmutungu(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I had signed up for the mars group protest yesterday on the > > representation that it was a protest on food prices and MP'S refusal > > to pay taxes. > > I am disgusted that the media have used our voices for their causes > > exclusively, disregarding ours. > > What does the Mars Group say about this? Are you likely to participate > on a similar other initiative under the same circumstances? Do you trust > our media as mere conduits of information to consumers? > > > As a Kenyan, i think there should be a review on cross-ownership of > > media if democracy is to thrive. Also, considering the role of the > > media in fueling ethnic/ regional backlash since 2003, isn't there > > need for a check on them? > > Part One: > Imagine a situation where one 'Private Sector' tycoon owned *all* > media outlets. His/her network of companies is chasing a lucrative > government contract. Some Public Procurement and Disposal Act > law-abiding Civil Servant detects fraudulent practices, collusions, > etc (and as a reminder these are presently worth 700 billion/year) > and disqualifies the bid. > > The tycoon's network of media outlets decides it's time that Public > Servant was sacked! Do you think he/she can survive the adverse > orchestrated negative media coverage? Would the successor be as > stringent when it came to the bids from the tycoon networks? > > Part Two: > It would be mistaken for anybody to try and defend the media on > their polarising role towards last years elections and their coverage. > Clearly, they all had candidates they wanted in power, why?above? > > What is "media" is it countable big media houses. Remember they > are businesses and if something adversely affects their revenue lines > they will either silently kill it, massage the opinion and expressions > to conform to (or at least not threaten) their business interests. This > is what happened to your Mars Group representation? > > > There may be misgivings on the arbitraly powers conferred to the > > Minister in charge of security but media has to be checked. > > The media should give suggestions on alternative ways to check them > > instead of using all their airtime and acres of newspapers to win > > public sympathy. > > I am concerned with 'arbitrary powers' implications on expression > I have not read the new version thus I am speculative here... > > The last I heard about this was that it had been agreed to BUT a > committee (not an individual minister) would make that decision. > The thinking was that a committee would make a fairer decision. > > Imagine a situation where the police were denied powers to raid > any premises where crimes were ongoing? > > > Finally, they should stop branding it ' media bill' as the bill is not > > a conspiracy against media but a bill to amend the communications act. > > > > Our society amazes on its ways of corrupting things, people, ideas, > movement, even concepts.... > > Conclusion: > If either government or the media were left alone, the public would > suffer badly. > Excessive government powers+high handedness plunged us into dictatorships. > Unchecked media excesses gone wild on "Fourth Estate" public watchdog role > pursuing purely commercial interests would be a very bad thing for > democracy. > Between media and government, consumer interests are better served by the > media. But recall a recent post to the effect that the internet > remains consumers > best saviour? For these reasons, I hope our media away from seeking > "pity" tries > "earning" public respect.Only then can we rise up aggressively defending > media. > > In the meantime, kindly email to me the "Blue Copy" for my perusal. > _______________________________________________ > ke-internetusers mailing list > ke-internetusers(a)bdix.net > http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers >

2 1

I have seen the future of the marine cable
by robert yawe 13 Dec '08

13 Dec '08

Today I saw the future of Kenya after the fiber land and I feel duty bound to share the experience. For many years my business has provided server solutions to multinationals for groupware, our main selling point for having servers located locally was always the unreliable internet links. Today one of my clients, a multinational company has moved their servers to Europe and are using thin client technology to connect the desktop user. I saw a similar scenario when multinationals where allowed VSAT terminals, as many technical activities got consolidated either at head office in Europe/USA or regional processing centers in India. What we were left with was clerical and other none core activities. With the downturn in the world financial markets expect more centralised control of corporate activites and offshoring of currently local functions. I assure the advocates of BSP and call centers that they will achieve their objective of turning Kenya into a clerical hub for the rest of the world. Which is historically what Kenya's role was always meant to be within the British Empire. We are soon to become a nation of overqualified call center operated involved in an activity that does not provide skills transfer. Come January I will have lost a prime revenue earner as all that will be expected from us will be blowing the computers and offering 1st level support on productivity applications and printing issues. This will mean that I have no need to retain high skilled personnel. What use is it then for us to be setting up Universities all over the country yet all we shall need are large armies of fellows with good spoken english, maybe french or chinese with an average IQ and basic level of education. Am I an alarmist? I do not think so I am a realist, I am reengineering to meet the challenge but can someone provide a condusive environment. Ndemo can we get collocation centers made available, the newly redressed ISPs are not about to add value in this direction. Can the government take the lead in outsourcing its activites, we are ready to setup a call centre for the Government in ISIOLO or at RIAT in Kisumu, I dare you to give me the challenge. Have a god filled christmas & a proserous new year Robert Yawe KAY System Technologies Ltd Phoenix House, 6th Floor P O Box 55806 Nairobi, 00200 Kenya Tel: +254722511225, +254202010696

7 7

Re: [kictanet] " Houston : We have a problem... "
by aki 12 Dec '08

12 Dec '08

Thats right, we do and I speak for data. > > My sincere apology for the cross posting and am just sharing my > experience that the situation on network quality in our country is getting > out of hand. I cannot expect telco CEOs / MDs like the Mr Joseph, > Mr Saint-Jean or Mr Murray or even from any Network Operators etc to roll up > their sleeves and go down to their respective Network Centres or Operations > and reboot caching servers or load balancers! > > Network management of data services has reached a point where I'm forced to > use strong words that either most of kenyan networks are run by people who > do not undestand them or that there are no quality of service systems in > place. This is scary given that we hope to provide at least some tiered > services to a potential audience in the near future. Most technology > equipment is useless and awaits data entry from skilled operator to turn > devices into anything meaningful. Are the skilled personell or systems doing > their jobs? I'd highly recommend to the management of network companies to > re-evaluate their technologies or even staff and put in place systems that > allow for real time analysis of their systems and performances. Even a 1% > packet loss in a modern network is totally unacceptable. Local loop > latenices must be maintained within 50-200ms and not the 1000-2000ms seen. > Just one simple question : If it was done right the first time then why keep > tinkering with it?! > > Even if we received some out of the world super submarine fiber, the whole > process is useless if we cannot maintain/run internal networks to > international standards. Which leads to a further question : how stable is > the fiber between Mombasa, Nairobi to kisumu? We need some serious thoughts > on quality by respective players in the industry so that in future marketing > as say eg a telecom hub, some investor somewhere does not ask an insulting > question : how reliable are your networks? > > Asante and Happy Jamhuri Day. > > > > > > > >

1 0