whether government rests on rhetoric or actually seeks to enforce the new law, and
how Yahoo! (and Google and non-GNI companies) responds—will inform company
and government strategy in Vietnam 44 and suggest the capacity of a self-governing initiative to require its participants to not comply with the law when it conflicts with
international human rights standards.
As the GNI moves ahead, observers will rightly ask what to expect—how we will
know we have begun to impact company behavior, government approaches, and user
conduct online. Perhaps most importantly, they will ask what success will look like.
These are hard questions. The GNI was designed by a relatively small group with limited resources, and the fact that it has come this far in a relatively short period of time
is objectively impressive, but only when it is tested in the marketplace will the appropriateness of its design begin to become apparent. Initially, beyond reporting on basic
commitment, output measures will help, such as growth in participants, creation of
data and other learning resources, and policy engagement. Individual examples may
also be helpful, for instance, if GNI helps a company address a tough decision or anticipate an emerging issue.
Over time, we must expect positive outcomes, but with so many factors affecting the
protection and advancement of free expression and privacy—and the GNI—the causes
of success and failure will not always be clear. Measuring impact is difficult in part because the GNI will be successful precisely when it avoids problems and goes unnoticed.
Some useful proxies may be increased public awareness of the issues, enlightened government action, and ideally metrics for takedowns and information requests that suggest a combination of waning government abuse and avoidance of increased corporate
restrictions.
We are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place, particularly as society
undergoes the complicated process of integrating, adapting, and shaping the role of
new media. As it becomes integrated into our lives and livelihoods, the potential for
both good and harm continues to grow, along with the responsibility of the businesses
providing these services. Thus far, this adoption of the Internet and related technologies has brought not only new challenges, but new tools for addressing them. Rather
than resisting change, we need to consider how to guide it using a combination of
past experience and innovative approaches.
While there are other broad changes and trends with much deeper social, economic,
and political importance, the combination of reach, speed, and accessibility of new
media render it a poignant—and challenging—frontier for an increasingly globalized
world. The particular contours may well be indicative of other pressing (or emerging)
challenges, suggesting that our approach to addressing these challenges may also hold
broader lessons for new kinds of institutions and new approaches to policymaking at
the nexus of sectors and nations, economics and politics, culture and identity.
104
Colin M. Maclay
how Yahoo! (and Google and non-GNI companies) responds—will inform company
and government strategy in Vietnam 44 and suggest the capacity of a self-governing initiative to require its participants to not comply with the law when it conflicts with
international human rights standards.
As the GNI moves ahead, observers will rightly ask what to expect—how we will
know we have begun to impact company behavior, government approaches, and user
conduct online. Perhaps most importantly, they will ask what success will look like.
These are hard questions. The GNI was designed by a relatively small group with limited resources, and the fact that it has come this far in a relatively short period of time
is objectively impressive, but only when it is tested in the marketplace will the appropriateness of its design begin to become apparent. Initially, beyond reporting on basic
commitment, output measures will help, such as growth in participants, creation of
data and other learning resources, and policy engagement. Individual examples may
also be helpful, for instance, if GNI helps a company address a tough decision or anticipate an emerging issue.
Over time, we must expect positive outcomes, but with so many factors affecting the
protection and advancement of free expression and privacy—and the GNI—the causes
of success and failure will not always be clear. Measuring impact is difficult in part because the GNI will be successful precisely when it avoids problems and goes unnoticed.
Some useful proxies may be increased public awareness of the issues, enlightened government action, and ideally metrics for takedowns and information requests that suggest a combination of waning government abuse and avoidance of increased corporate
restrictions.
We are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place, particularly as society
undergoes the complicated process of integrating, adapting, and shaping the role of
new media. As it becomes integrated into our lives and livelihoods, the potential for
both good and harm continues to grow, along with the responsibility of the businesses
providing these services. Thus far, this adoption of the Internet and related technologies has brought not only new challenges, but new tools for addressing them. Rather
than resisting change, we need to consider how to guide it using a combination of
past experience and innovative approaches.
While there are other broad changes and trends with much deeper social, economic,
and political importance, the combination of reach, speed, and accessibility of new
media render it a poignant—and challenging—frontier for an increasingly globalized
world. The particular contours may well be indicative of other pressing (or emerging)
challenges, suggesting that our approach to addressing these challenges may also hold
broader lessons for new kinds of institutions and new approaches to policymaking at
the nexus of sectors and nations, economics and politics, culture and identity.
104
Colin M. Maclay