Thank you for listening to Depiction's Media Radio. Welcome to Policy Rights to show
about government policy and human rights. Welcome back to Policy and Rights here in
Depictions Media Radio. I'm your host, Michael Clogs. And in this next
show, what we're going to hear about is that the United Nations the Secretary
General Antennio Guerreras. He's talking about responsibility in social media and digital information sharing,
and there are some legitimate points to, Hey, if you're gonna share
something on on social media, especially if you're a journalist or a professional fact
checking, make sure that it's accurate before you start spreading it around. There
are a lot of people out there they want to spread missing information and spread
if it did simply just scares people. And there are also in some respects
With that being said, while there are some groups out there that want to
sidetrack our society, there are also major corporations out there that want to control
our society so that they can just simply sell more product. As journalists become
more into podcasting and blogging and things like that, if you're going to go
against the mainstream, fat check it, make sure that it's accurate. There
is a point to that and if it turns out to be something that is
more opinion based than fact based, say so, say hey, this is
more opinion than it is fact base. Tell the people that so, and
maybe point them in a direction so they can also go do their own research
outside of using you as a source. So with that being said, I
want you to listen to what was an announced in the press room at the
United Nations with Antonio Gerers speaking about the digital platforms and information sharing and for
that matter, also artificial intelligence. Good afternoon, welcome to this briefing.
The Secretary Journal is here to launch the policy brief on Information Integrity on Digital
Platforms. Joining him is Melissa Fleming, the Under Secretary General for Global Communications,
whose department has the lead on issues relating to information integrity and digital platforms,
and whose department produced the brief that you've had since last week. So
Secretary General, you have the floor, and then we'll take some questions distinguish
members of our press corps. New technology is moving headwarp speeds, and so
are the threats that come with it. Alarm bells over the latest form of
artificial intelligence. Generity of AI are deafening, and they are loudest from the
developers who designed it. The scientists and experts have called on the world to
act, declaring AI and existential threat to humanity on a par with the risk
of nuclear war. We must take those warnings seriously. Our proposal Global Digital
Compact New a Gender for the Peace and Accord on the Global governance of AI,
will offer multilateral solutions based on human rights. But the advent of generalitive
AI must not distract us from the damage digital technology is already doing to our
world. The proliferation of hate and lies in the digital space is causing grave
global harm. Now it is full in conflict, death and destruction. Now
it is threatening democracy and human rights. Now it is undermining public else and
climate action. Now. When social media emerge a generation ago, digital platforms
were embraced as exciting new ways to connect, and indeed they have supported communities
in times of crisis, elevated marginalized voices, and help to mobilize global movements
for racial justice and gender equality. Social media platforms have helped United Nations to
engage people around the world in all pursuit of peace, dignity, and human
rights on a healthy planet. But today the same technology is often a source
of fear, not hope. Digital platforms are being misused to subvert science and
spread disinformation and hate two billions of people. Some of our own UN peacekeeping
missions and humanitarianade operations have been targeted, making their work even more dangerous.
This clear and present global threat demands clear and coordinated global action. Our Policy
Brief on Information Integrity on Digital Platforms puts forward a framework for a concerned international
response proposed. Its proposals are aimed at creating guard rails top governments come together
around guidelines that promote facts while exposing conspiracies and lies and safeguarding freedom of expression
and information, and to help tech companies navigate difficult ethical and legal issues and
build business models based on a healthy information ecosystem. Governments have sometimes resorted to
drastic measures, including blanket Internet shutdowns and bands that lack any legal basis and
infringe on human rights and around the worlds and tech companies have done far too
little, too late to prevent their platform from contributing to violence and hatreds.
The recommendations in this brief seek to make the digital space safer and more inclusive
while vigorously protecting human rights and they will inform a un Code of Conduct for
information integrity on digital platforms that we are developing ahead of next year's Summit of
the Future. The Code of Conduct will be a set of principles that we
hope governments, digital platforms, and other stakeholders will implement voluntarily, so dear
friends. The proposals in this policy Brief in preparation for the Code of Conduct
include a commitment by governments, tech companies, and other stakeholders to refrain from
using, supporting, or amplifying this information and aid speech for any purpose approached
by governments. To guarantee a free, viable, independent and plural media landscape
with strong protection for journalists. The consistent application of policies and resources by digital
platforms around the world to eliminate double standards that allow eighth speech and disinformation to
flourish in some language and countries while they are prevented more effectively in others.
Agreed protocols for a rapid response by governments and digital platforms when the stakes are
highest in times of conflict and disocial tensions. And a commitment from digital platforms
to make sure all products take account of safety, privacy, and transparency that
includes urgent and immediate measures to ensure that all AI applications are safe, secure,
responsible, and ethical and comply with human rights obligations. The brief proposes
that tech companies should undertake to move away from damaging business models that prioritize engagement
above human rights, privacy, and safety. It suggested advertisers were deeply implicated
in monetizing and spreading damaging content should take responsibility for the impact of their spending.
It recognizes the need for a fundamental shift in incentive structures this information,
and they should not generate maximum exposure and massive profits. The brief suggested users,
including young people who are particularly vulnerable, should have more influence on policy
decisions, and it proposals that digital platforms make a commitment to data transparency.
Users should be able to access their own data, and researchers should have access
to the vast quantities of data generated by digital platforms while respecting user privacy.
Dear friends, I hope this policy brief will be a helpful contribution to discussions
ahead at the Summit of the Future. We are counting on broad engagement and
strong contributions from all stakeholders as we work towards the UN Code of Conduct for
Information Integrity on digital platforms. We do not have a moment to lose.
And I thank you for your attention and for your presence. Thank you,
Valeria, thank you the fun. Thank you Secretary General for Dispress Conference on
behalf of the United Nations Correspondent Association, Valeria Robecco from Anson US wire.
So my question is how confident you are that tech companies and governments will take
concrete steps to make the digital space safer and more inclusive, and how long
it could take to see concrete results? And if I may, can I
also ask you a comment on the death of the former Italian prime ministers if
you Berlusconi, thank you so much. That's a former prime minister. I
can only express my condolences to the family and naturally to the Italian government and
the Italian people. Now, how confident I am, That's a question I
ask myself. We are dealing with the business that generates massive profits, and
we are dealing also, in some situations, with the governments that do not
entirely respect human rights. So this is a constant battle. And in this
constant battle, we must mobilize all those that are committed to information integrity in
digital platforms, and that means mobilizing governments, mobilizing platforms, mobilizing people and
mobilizing those that advertise in platforms. And there are many initiatives taking place.
We have in the U not only a act but also a Code of Conduct,
and this is a very important initiative, even if for the European space
we have other governments that have started to look into forms of regulation. But
there is a conscience that regulation is not easy because things are moving very quickly,
and so we need to find other mechanisms, including multi stake the approaches,
to define guard rails, to define red lines, and at the same
time to exchange best practices and to make sure that the business models are put
into question. And there there is a central aspect. Of course, these
platforms must make money, but the problem is that the present business model prioritizes
engagement in relation to privacy, truth and the human rights of people. Study
by the mit AS demonstrated that false information tends to multiply six times more than
true information in one of the platforms. I'm not going to quote which the
platform is, but the study was done in relation to one of the platforms.
So it is important that platforms understand that having naturally a profitable activity,
that profitable activity cannot create massive profits at the expense of a model of engagement
that goes before any other consideration human rights, privacy, safety. So everybody
needs to be engaged. And this code of conduct that we hope will be
published in the movement towards the Summit of the Future is of course not a
solution alone in itself, but it will be global, not in reaction to
any specific part of the world, and it will be, as it is
on a voluntary basis, I hope, a very strong instrument in order to
allow all those interested to commit to what needs to be done in order to
guarantee or at least to seriously promote information integrating digital platforms. Thank you very
much, mister Secretary General Leaders Letterer from the Associated Press. I know you.
You, you and your predecessors have all said that the greatest power of
the United Nations is its power to convene with artificial intelligence, which you just
mentioned yourself, and this letter signed by three hundred and fifty of the top
scientists, including its makers. Don't you think that the United Nations should use
its completing convening power to immediately in the coming months, at in September,
when all the world leaders are gathered here to at least start a discussion.
When you have the whole world here on trying to figure out how the world
should address both artificial intelligence and at the same time misinformation, disinformation and hate
speech on the internet, well, we are very committed to do everything possible
in these regards. First of all, we will not be competing for summits.
There is already an indication of a member state as announced its intention to
convene a summit on artificial intelligence this year, and will of course not try
to create conditions of competition who will support that initiative. On the other hand,
we believe that the summit must be preceded by serious work. I am
going to point in the next few days a scientific advisory board that includes a
number of experts from outside, including two experts on artificial intelligence and the chief
scientists a UN agencies and namely ITU and UNESCODE that have been very active in
this regard. It is also my intention immediately after the summit, the STG
summit, and as you know, there is a very strong commitment by member
states to make sure that the STG summit is the central summit of our meetings
in September, but immediately after it's my intention to create an I level advisory
body on artificial intelligence to prepare seriously prepare the different kind of initiatives that we
would be able to take. So on the other hand, I would be
looking favorably into any initiative a Member states. This is one of the areas
that has been already discussed by several sectors. Of course, it depends on
Member states initiatives, but I would be favorable to the idea that we could
have an artificial intelligence an agency with I would say I was inspired by what
the International Agency of Atomic Energy is today. So I do believe that there
are a number of things that it is important to move forward. They require,
of course, some of them initiative a Member states, others, good
will of the parties, and we will try to be in the center of
all the networks and movements that will be created in order to make this agenda
move forwards. Knowing that it's not easy to move forward in an agenda in
which I've been saying it many times. The world has not invested sufficiently in
the last decades in the quality of public administrations, and today we feel how
difficult it is for states and for international organizations to compete from the scientific and
technical point of view with the platforms that in between have acquired an enormous potential
and an enormous knowledge. So this is not going to be an easy question.
It also requires the commitment of the platforms themselves and AI creators themselves.
But we will do our best to be a platform where everybody can be together
in order to make this agenda advanced positively. Just as a quick follow up,
could you expand on how you would envision this agency like the IAEA for
artificial As I said, this is the this is something that depends on member
states will only member states can create it, not a secretariat of the United
Nations. But what I said is that this has been discussed in different platforms.
This is something I would see positively. What is the advantage of the
IAA is that it is a very solid knowledge based institution and at the same
time, even if limited, it has some regulatary functions. So I believe
this is a model that could be very interesting. Linda, then James,
Linda Fasulo NPR. My question is you mentioned, of course business and countries
that have closed down Internet services. So you have democracies basically trying to make
money watching their state, you know, with their stock market prices rise.
You have non democratic societies that are turning turning down their Internet. How do
you see you know, this approach seems so disparate, and how you deal
with each side? What do you see as the first steps in terms of
what really needs to be done, because you have to obviously take different approaches.
So I was just wondering how that would work. I don't think that
is the first step. I think all steps are necessary, and the question
is here, it is not easy to establish a regulatory framework like the ones
that exist in areas that do not evolve very quickly. It is practically impossible
to establish a solid regulatory framework in each everything is decided forever. This doesn't
work in something that moves so quickly, So we need to have some inter
governmental processes defining some red lines. To give an example, I've been consistently
appealing for the prohibition of autonomous weapons happens that are able to kill without human
agency. Has been my appeal. This is the kind of regulatory framework that
can only be done by member states if they want to have international law in
relation to this. So there are areas where international law is possible, depending
on the wiel of member states to establish it. But there are areas where
things move so quickly that if you establish a set of norms today, they
will probably be outdated tomorrow. So we need a process, a constant process
of intervention of the different stakeholders working together to permanently establish a number of soft
law mechanisms, a number of I would say norms, codes of conduct and
others. And it is in that approach of trying to bring together the different
actors that will be working and this code of conduct that we intend to prepare
and that will be issued before the Summit of the Future and then my authority
is something in which we hope, with the consultations that will be established before
and with its nature, we hope it will be supported and commitments will be
made based on it by governments, by platforms, by advertisers, and by
civil society organizations. James Den Pam James Space from Out Zero Secretary Journal.
You've been speaking about AI for quite a long time, and I'm sure i've
been thinking about it as well. In your opening statement, you quoted scientists
and experts saying that it could be a risk as high as nuclear war.
Some are also though, saying that it could cure cancer. So, just
like your assessment, what do you think are the challenges and the opportunities of
AI. I think the opportunities are immense. If you look at health,
if you look at environment, if you look at education, what AI can
produce can be an extremely important factor to make the sustainable development goals a reality.
So AI as an enormous potential. But it is clear that AI as
a serious problem, which is the possible removal of human agency, and that
for me is the central question. It is absolutely essential that human agency remains
present in everything that is built with artificial intelligence, and the risk is,
of course, if that principle is put aside completely. Now, when I
look into these testimonies, I take them seriously. But as I said in
the beginning, the fact that we look at catastrophic consequences might come from artificial
intelligence in the future should not distract us from what's happening today in the digital
world that is contributing to people being killed, to human rights be violated,
to our privacy being completely destroyed, and for the data that is produced by
us to fully escape or control. So many things are happening today that we
need to deal with, but at the same time we need to do everything
possible to make sure that the future evolution of AI doesn't go into the logic
that completely abolishes human agency and creates a monster that nobody will be able to
control. Pamed and Maggie, thank you very much. Steff, thank you,
Secretary General. It's Pamela fa from CBS News could to see you and
hear about this. My question is about the inputs. Have you spoken with
most of the AI generating digital platforms, how supportive are they? And to
the ds she as well, how supportive are they of this? Many of
my colleagues have mentioned or a few the AI Open AI proposal for UN agency
to be involved. And how concerned are you in that context that the governments
are now being pulled in to regulate this. I mean you were a Prime
minister. We know that governments are not where AI principally was developed. So
are you in any way concerned about government interference in the development in this code?
Thank you? First of all, we had recently in our Senior Management
Group a meeting in which the CEO of open AI was together with several other
experts and we were discussing seriously these questions. And it is interestingct to see
that today those that are in the frontline of the development of AI are the
first to say that regulation is needed. Now it's not clear what exactly some
of them mean, but it is obvious that there is an understanding that what
they are developing as some risks and that those risks need to be contained.
Now. I don't think this problem can be solved by saying you regulate and
we don't care, we will follow the regulations. It's too complicated for that.
I think both governments and platforms and developers, scientists and the civil society
need to be together to find ways in which there is a consensus on how
we can move in the right direction. So it's not enough. It would
be a disaster to say we don't want to be regulated, we want to
do it as we like. It would also be a disaster to say now
government should regulate and we do what we want. No. I think there
is a common responsibility here. This is too big to be handled without a
stronger engagement of all parties, and there is a lot that needs to be
brought together. I must say I've listened to several scientists. I've listened to
several I mean people involved in these platforms themselves, and it is clear that
there is a lot to be done to reach a common understanding about how we
can move forward to the benefit of humankind and avoiding the risks that are still
oppening. Maggie, already happening, so not still Thank you Maggie. Then
Michelle, good morning, Secretary General. It's Margaret Pischier, Voice of America.
Secretary General. When do you envision this code of conduct going into effect?
And what's the reaction been from the member states you've consulted with about it?
And if I could just ask you separately. On Sudan, the fighting
has resumed. The twenty fourth hour ceasefire has ended. Mister has been declared
persona on garda. Is there any realistic, effective political role for the United
Nations right now in Sudan? Of course there is. I mean, there
is a massive engagement of the UN in relation to the humanitarian aid in Sudan.
All our agencies are deeply involved. The Deputy as is in Sudan coordinating
that effort and at the same time we will be as we said since the
beginning, supporting an African solution for the problem, supporting the African Union and
supporting the EGAD, and we will be totally committed to do it. We
don't intend to have any protagonism. We never did. We are here to
support the African solutions for the Sudanese problem. So you don't see a primary
role then for the United Nations. Since the beginning, we have said that
we are there and we are parts as you know, of the initiative that
the African Union recently launched, and there was a mechanism that was created to
which we belong and we are there to essential from the beginning to essentially support
an African initiative that can lead to a solution, hopefully a solution of the
problem, with of course, our deep condemnation by all the killings and the
violence that is taking place. Coming back to sorry, this is the first
part of when you expect this code of conduct to go into effect and what's
the reactions. So the code of conduct now we have presented these set of
principles based on the set of principles. Will conduct a number of important consultations
with governments, with the platforms, with the scientists, with civil society,
and it's my intention to issue the Code of Conduct after all these consultations before
the Summit of the Future. The Code of Conduct is not something to be
approved by the General Assembly. It is something that will to be our contribution
and we hope, of course that that contribution can be useful for all parties,
for governments, for platforms, for serial society, for scientists, and
for those that advertise in platforms and have a very important role to play.
Michelle, then Allen, thank you. Secretary General Michelle Nichols from Routers.
I need to ask you about Ukraine while we have you, how concerned you
that Russia will quit the Black say Grindal next month? And on the use
of drones in Ukraine. The US and others have accused the Run of supplying
Russia with drones for use in Ukraine. Your report on the implementation of Resolution
to two three one is due to go to the Council shortly. What has
that determined regarding the wreckage of drones found in Ukraine? Where where they made?
Who sent them? Did you send experts to inspect them. Thank you
so First of all, I am concerned and we are working hard in order
to make sure that it will be possible to maintain the Black Sea initiative and
at the same time that we are able to go one in our work to
facilitate Russian exports. We will be making our report following strictly the norms that
were established in the resolution for the elaboration of reports. Thank you Alan so
much. Alan Bugati from Rihanna Agustinias Agency, Mister Secretary General. In your
draft Code of Conduct, you mentioned you're mentioning the fight with misinformation and disinformation.
What kind of body or framework do you propose to judge where is the
true and where is the misinformation? Who should do that? I think all
are needed for that. It is important that platforms have their own systems that
are able to filter disinformation and misinformation. It is important that the civil society
is attentive to this. It is important that users are themselves empowered in this
regard, and it is important that governments established, as it was the case
of the European Union, some mechanisms that are possible in regulatory frameworks that being
difficult at least we have a demonstration that they are possible to a certain extent.
So everybody must be involved, and advertisers have a key role to play
in order to make sure that they do not advertise in ways that support the
expansion of misinformation. Yvonne, then Joe and they will have to close.
It's actually Irish Media RTE. Thank you very much for this briefing. My
question is about disinformation, which is often an accusation leveled against journalists, especially
those operating in authoritarian states. How do you come up with a code of
conduct that protects journalists without handing another stick to authoritarian governments to be journalists with
One of the principles that is in the preparation of the kind of conduct is
is the support for independent media. And one of the concerns that these set
of principles established is that this should not be a pretext to limit freedom of
information and that it's essential to support and protect journalists in this contact. It's
not if you look at misinformation and disinformation. Let's be frank, this is
not the product of journalism. This is the product of people that are interested
in for political reasons, for economic reasons, or for other kinds of interests
that are interested in leading the public into a complete misperception of the challenges that
we face in today's world societies freely and openly, but not in authoritarian ones.
So how do you address that issue? Because authoritarianism is clearly growing.
Our position has been very clear condemning strongly all violations of human rights of journalists,
and this is an area where we will go on very actively condemning.
And we know that more journalists have been killed last year than ever in recent
times, I think forty percent more than in the previous year. And this
is just the most radicals. We have Imprisonment, we have harassment, we
have all those things, and these are areas, very strong areas of our
advocacy. But of course it's not in our power to change the nature of
governments. That I'm not yet able to select the governments around the world.
But this is not I have not yet that capacity, Joe, and I
don't think I should have, you know, Joseph Kleient, Canada, Free
Press, and thank you serve for this briefing. A number of tech executives,
including some AI innovators, have called for a pause in the very rapid
development of AI technology before it gets completely out of control, so that scientists
and policymakers can assess where this is going and perhaps suggests some guard rails,
possibly including human agency. Do you support such a pause and do you see
the board that you are setting up including AI scientists as helping in that process
of educating during such a pause. I think a pause can be an instinct
idea, but I don't think a pause will solve the problem because we all
know of situations in which that is a pause and then everything goes on the
same. I think that independently of the fact that the pause being a positive
possible idea, we need to make sure that we move forward and they move
forward as quickly as possible in all the other mechanisms that we have been discussing.
Thank you very much, sir, Thank you, Melissa, thank you,
Okay, thank you for listening today. Final thought, Be responsible and
what is it you're sharing. Make sure that it is definitely fact based,
or say it is a pinion based and or there may be some misrepresentation in
there, and point people in the direction so that they can go make up
their own mind. We have a responsibility, yeah, as broadcasters, podcasters,
bloggers to our listeners, our readers, our viewers, that we give
them accurate information and make sure that they can make up their own minds,
and that we aren't just simply spreading propaganda that's going to hurt people. So
with that being said, please go and find that subscribe button so you can
get continued updates from us here at Depictions Media Radio and from this particular show
Policy and Rites m H. The show has been produced by Depictions Media.
Please contact us at depictions dot media for more information. M