Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Symbolic Power and Legitimacy Theatre: Constructing Legitimacy in Global Internet Governance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Global Free Expression - Governing the Boundaries of Internet Content

Part of the book series: Law, Governance and Technology Series ((LGTS,volume 28))

  • 773 Accesses

Abstract

How can this global system of expression governance be justified? On which actors and institutions does it base its legitimacy? How can it continue to govern internationally, despite on-going predominance by a small set of countries and corporations? This chapter will argue that the picture, painted to the public of Global Internet Governance, has little to do with the actual governance practices. In conclusion this chapter will suggest that multi-stakeholder model of Internet Governance has devolved into a theatrical performance. It is practised at international conferences and events around the world and it has become common for all actors to pay lip service to their support of it. However, it has thus far had little influence on actual practices of Internet Governance.

An earlier version of this chapter was first presented at Aberystwyth University on 11 February 2013. More information about the presentation can be found here:

http://www.aber.ac.uk/en/media/BenWagner_A4.pdf.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The author spent several months as a Visiting Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and discussed this topic with numerous staff from European Foreign ministries over the past 3 years.

  2. 2.

    Explicitly excluded from this narrative are more technically oriented standard-setting bodies like the IETF. While their decisions may have certain policy relevance like any other international standard setting body (Hofmann 2005, 2007), they have a limited ability to shape broader questions of Internet Governance or Internet Policy. Debates on issues such as Censorship, Privacy or Fundamental Rights do take place infrequently, but are typically pushed out of what is essentially still a technical body. Jesse Sowell (MIT) is also working on a PhD on this topic that should provide additional insight into IETF governance soon.

  3. 3.

    For a full discussion on the management of the ageing phone book see Chap. 3 for further information domain name system (DNS) and ICANN.

  4. 4.

    Personal conversation with persons intimately familiar with the original WSIS process. December 2008, Hyderabad, India.

  5. 5.

    United Nations Documents are notoriously hard to cite. As such the original U.N. document numbers will be used in the following, which can be used to retrieve U.N. documents from the official U.N. document system here: https://www.un.org/en/documents/ods/

  6. 6.

    Information about this decision can be accessed in the notes of this meeting: http://unctad.org/en/docs/ecn162011_draftresolutionwsisfollowup.pdf

  7. 7.

    For a full version of the UNESCO constitution see:

    http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002161/216192e.pdf#page=6

  8. 8.

    Figure 8.1 was developed by the author.

  9. 9.

    Figure 8.2 was developed by the author.

Bibliography

  • Ackerman, John. 2004. Co-governance for accountability: Beyond ‘exit’ and ‘voice.’. World Development 32(3): 447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballamingie, P. 2009. Democratizing public consultation processes: Some critical insights. Journal of Public Deliberation 5(1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, Marian, Janet Newman, Andrew Knops, and Helen Sullivan. 2003. Constituting ‘the public’ in public participation. Public Administration 81(2): 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechmann, G., and I. Hronszky. 2003. Expertise and its interfaces: The tense relationship of science and politics. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendiek, Annegret, and Ben Wagner. 2012. Die Verfassung Des Internets. IP – Die Zeitschrift Jahrgang 2 (November/December).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergh, Sylvia, and Mostafa Jari. 2009. Spaces for change? Decentralization, participation, and local governance innovations in the MENA region. 13. Retrieved http://www.eui.eu/Documents/RSCAS/Research/Mediterranean/Mrm2009/MRM2009Ds10.pdf.

  • Bond, C.S. 2004. Web users’ information retrieval methods and skills. Online Information Review 28: 254–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. 2007. New forms of accountability and EU-governance. Comparative European Politics 5: 104–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cammaerts, B., and C. Padovani. 2006. Theoretical reflections on multi-stakeholderism in global policy processes: The WSIS as a learning space. IAMCR Conference, Cairo, July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, Madeline. 2012. The political history of the internet: A theoretical approach to the implications for U.S. power. In Cyberspaces and global affairs, ed Sean S. Costigan and Jake Perry. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, Wendy Hui Kyong. 2006. Control and freedom: Power and paranoia in the age of fiber optics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de la Chapelle, Bertrand. 2007. Multi-stakeholder governance – Emergence and transformational potential of a new political paradigm. In Managing complexity: Insights, concepts, applications, ed. Dirk Helbing. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denardis, Laura. 2008. Architecting civil liberties. In Global Internet Governance Academic Network annual meeting. Hyderabad: GIGANET.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doria, Avri, and Wolfgang Kleinwächter. 2008. Internet Governance Forum (IGF): The first two years Geneva: Internet Governance Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, Daniel. 2004. The global governance of the internet: Bringing the state back in. Political Science Quarterly 119(3): 477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn Cavelty, Myriam. 2007. Cyber-security and threat politics: US efforts to secure the information age. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn Cavelty, Myriam. 2012. Cyber-security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, E. Donald. 1992. Re-inventing rulemaking. Duke Law Journal 41(6): 1490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, J., and G. Giacomello. 2006. The information revolution, security, and international relations:(IR) relevant theory? International Political Science Review 27: 221–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, J., and G. Giacomello. 2007. International relations and security in the digital age. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, J., and G. Giacomello. 2009. Who controls the Internet? Beyond the obstinacy or obsolescence of the state. International Studies Review 11(1): 205–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishkin, J.S., R.C. Luskin, and R. Jowell. 2000. Deliberative polling and public consultation. Parliamentary Affairs 53(4): 657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyverbom, Mikkel. 2011. The power of networks: Organizing the global politics of the Internet. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fountain, Jane E. 2001. Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Marianne. 2013. Digital dilemmas; Power, resistance and the Internet. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, Jack L., and Tim Wu. 2006. Who controls the Internet? Illusions of a borderless world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grek, S. 2013. Expert moves: International comparative testing and the rise of expertocracy. Journal of Education Policy 28: 695–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurstein, M. 2012. Towards the Internet as a global public good. The Journal of Community Informatics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gusfield, Joseph R. 1974. A dramatistic theory of status politics. In Life as theater: A dramaturgical sourcebook, ed. Brissett Dennis and Edgley Charles. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hague, William. 2011. London conference on cyberspace: Chair’s statement. Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO). Retrieved March 7, 2013, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/london-conference-on-cyberspace-chairs-statement

  • Hally, C.J., and K.A. Koch. 2004. Virtual address bar user interface control. EP Patent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hally, J.C., K.A. Koch, and M.R. Ligameri. 2007. Virtual address bar user interface control. US Patent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintz, A. 2007. Deconstructing multi-stakeholderism: The discourses and realities of global governance at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). SGIR Pan-European Conference on International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintz, A., and S. Milan. 2009. At the margins of internet governance: Grassroots tech groups and communication policy. International Journal of Media & Cultural ….

    Google Scholar 

  • Hocking, A.F.C.B. 2000. Governments, non-governmental organisations and the re-calibration of diplomacy. Global Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, Jeanette. 2005. Internet governance: Zwischen Staatlicher Autorität Und Privater Koordination. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft 10–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, J. 2007. Internet governance: A regulative idea in flux. Internet governance: An introduction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, D. 2002. ICANN and the concept of democratic deficit. Loyola of Los Angeles Review 36: 1149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, Daniel. 2003. Rethinking governance: Empirical lessons challenge orthodoxy. papers.ssrn.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lackman, Jon. 2010. It’s time for Pundits to stop using the word ‘Kabuki.’ – Slate magazine. Slate Magazine. Retrieved August 28, 2013 http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2010/04/its_time_to_retire_kabuki.html.

  • Lazonder, A.W. 2000. Exploring novice users’ training needs in searching information on the WWW. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16: 326–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiner, Barry M., et al. 2011. Brief history of the Internet|Internet Society. The Internet Society (ISOC). Retrieved January 25, 2012 http://www.internetsociety.org/internet/internet-51/history-internet/brief-history-internet.

  • Levin, N. 2001. The Kabuki Mask of Bush v. Gore: Bush v. Gore, 531 U. S. 98. The Yale Law Journal 111(1): 223–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, A., and S. Funtowicz. 2003. ‘Democratising’ expertise’, expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? Science and Public Policy 30: 146–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansell, Robin. 2012. Imagining the Internet: Communication, innovation, and governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1984. The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. The American Political Science Review 78(3): 734–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauer, V., and S.F. Krishna-Hensel. 2007. Power and security in the information age: Investigating the role of the state in cyberspace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, Franz. 2000. Europe and the internet: The old world and the new medium. European Journal of International Law 11: 149–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer-Schoenberger, V., and G. Brodnig. 2001. Information power: International affairs in the cyber age. Kennedy School Faculty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton. 2002. Ruling the root: Internet governance and the taming of cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton. 2010. Networks and states: The global politics of Internet governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Milton, J. Mathiason, and H. Klein. 2007. The internet and global governance: Principles and norms for a new regime. Global Governance 13(2): 237–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Janet. 2007. Rethinking the public in troubled times. Public Policy and Administration 22(1): 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Janet, Marian Barnes, Helen Sullivan, and Andrew Knops. 2004. Public participation and collaborative governance. Journal of Social Policy 33(2): 203–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyer, Jurgen. 2012. The justification of Europe: A political theory of supranational integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Padovani, C. 2005. WSIS and multi-Stakeholderism. D. Stauffacher und W. Kleinwächter (Hg.): The World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J.N., and J.P. Singh. 2002. Information technologies and global politics: The changing scope of power and governance. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, Fritz. 1997. Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoker, G. 2006. Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance? The American Review of Public Administration 36(1): 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stronge, Aideen J., Wendy A. Rogers, and Arthur D. Fisk. 2006. Web-based information search and retrieval: Effects of strategy use and age on search success. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48(3): 434–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J.A. 2011. Fifteen years of fame: The declining relevance of domain names in the enduring conflict between trademark and free speech rights. The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law 11: 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trechsel, Alexander H. 2007. Inclusiveness of old and new forms of citizens’ electoral participation. Representation 43(2): 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsingou, E. 2009. 2 regulatory reactions to the global credit crisis. … in Crisis: The Politics of International Regulatory.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations, and International Telecommunication Union. 2005. Tunis agenda for the information society.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eeten, M.J., and M. Mueller. 2012. Where is the governance in internet governance? New Media & Society 15(5): 720–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, Ben. 2011. ‘I have understood you’: The co-evolution of expression and control on the internet, television and mobile phones during the jasmine revolution in tunisia. International Journal of Communication 5(2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, Ben. 2012. Push-button-autocracy in Tunisia: Analysing the role of internet infrastructure, institutions and international markets in creating a Tunisian censorship regime. Telecommunications Policy 36(6): 484–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, Ben. 2013. Responding to a unilateral veto: European ‘cyber diplomacy’ after Dubai. The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, Ben, Kirsten Gollatz, and Andrea Calderaro. 2013. Common narrative – Divergent agendas: The internet and human rights in foreign policy. In The 1st international conference on internet science, ed Christopher T. Marsden. Brussels/Belgium: Network of Excellence in Internet Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R.H., and M. Grosz. 2009. Legitimate governing of the Internet. International Journal of Private Law 2: 316–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, J. 2000. ICANN and the problem of legitimacy. Duke Law Journal 50: 187–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Charles. 2005. Science, technology and international relations. Technology in Society 27: 295–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Internet & Human Rights, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt, Brandenburg, Germany

    Ben Wagner

Authors
  1. Ben Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wagner, B. (2016). Symbolic Power and Legitimacy Theatre: Constructing Legitimacy in Global Internet Governance. In: Global Free Expression - Governing the Boundaries of Internet Content. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 28. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33513-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33513-1_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-33511-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-33513-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation