Why propose principles for Internet freedom and a "Digital Bill of Rights" when existing ones will do?
How the Bill of Rights is being upheld in a digital context is, to say the least, an interesting living story to follow.
The passage of a resolution that human rights must also be protected on the Internet in the United Nations Human Rights Council was a historic affirmation of the principle that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online.”
This affirmation may play well in the headlines, but it does raise some practical questions. For instance, would this high-level resolution by the U.N. Human Rights Council inhibit member countries if they violate their citizens’ right to freedom of expression online, if such countries are already violating human rights offline? Or would the U.N. Security Council ever vote for sanctions over Internet censorship of political or religious content that might be online speech in one country and deemed blasphemous or even illegal in another?
Violators could include Iran, Russia, Cuba, Syria — but also Pakistan, China, India or the United States or United Kingdom, should a livestreamer’s smartphone be taken away during a march or cell service shut down during a protest, as it was at a BART in San Francisco.
In this context — and related to their concerns about similar bills to the Stop Online Piracy Act and PROTECT IP Act — Rep. Darrell Issa and Sen. Ron Wyden proposed a “Digital Bill of Rights” at the 2012 Personal Democracy Forum in New York City this summer.
In a phone interview last month, I asked Rep. Issa about the ideas behind the proposal principles and freedom of expression online.
12 talks from the 2012 Personal Democracy Forum worth watching and sharing.
The ninth Personal Democracy Forum explored the nexus of technology, politics and campaigns. What's happening online matters offline. Indeed, the barrier between the virtual and physical worlds has fallen.
Health IT and HIE advances in Massachusetts may lead to national shifts.
Although health information exchange should be identified as a process, having the structures and organizations to facilitate exchange is a challenge facing health care. A recent conference articulated these issues, and presented clear plans on how Massachusetts is addressing them.
Dr. Lauren Thompson discusses the Federal Health Architecture.
In this interview, Federal Health Architecture director Dr. Lauren Thompson discusses the state of health information exchange.
Second health privacy summit delves into means for protecting trust
Privacy is caught up with issues of security, clinical decision-making, mobile health, and medical errors. So the topics at this conference are relevant to all the issues health care advocates talk about regularly: data exchange and ACOs, clinical research, the
use of apps on mobile devices, the Quantified Self movement, and social networking in patient empowerment.
A convocation of trend-setters and organizational leaders in U.S. health care advised two government organizations driving health reform–the Office of the National Coordinator at the Dept. of Health and Human Services, and the Dept. of Veteran Affairs–how to push forward one of their top goals, patient engagement.