The first World Social Forum, held in Porto Alegre, Brazil in 2001, defined this ongoing process as an “open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and interlinking for effective action” for movements and organisations opposed to “domination of the world by capital and any form of imperialism.”
It was within this context that Tunis hosted the 2015 World Social Forum, for one rainy week at the end of March. APC was present at the 2015 WSF, represented by Mohammad Tarakiyee, Valentina Pellizzer from APC’s Board of Directors, myself, and our new communications associate, Isabelle L’Heritier. The activities of the Forum were held mainly at the University Campus, El Manar. Workshops were held in lecture halls and classrooms, while the tents of NGOs, social movements and some governments populated the outdoor space. The Forum was punctuated by violent clashes between groups, and protests against unfair treatment of volunteers.
Towards an Internet Social Forum?
In January 2015, a group of civil society organisations calling themselves the “JustNet Coalition” (JNC) announced the Internet Social Forum (ISF), within the framing of the World Social Forum. The press release described the ISF as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative, and announced that a workshop “Towards an Internet Social Forum” would be held on 26 March as part of the 2015 World Social Forum.
Before the workshop, the organisers of the Internet Social Forum made some effort to reach out to activists working on communications rights within the World Social Forum. However, the ISF organisers missed the opportunity to create convergences with the World Forum for Free Media (WFFM), which has historically worked on communications rights within the WSF. The organisers of the Internet Social Forum attended few WFFM activities, and were focused primarily on promoting their workshop.
Nine speakers were asked to open the ISF workshop with their reflections on the need to organise an Internet Social Forum. Only two women were asked to speak, both Western – a surprise given that prior concerns were raised on the mailing list of the ISF. When a male speaker asked me to replace him among the lineup I reflected that the gender and regional imbalance was also reflected in the participants of the workshop. I wondered how an Internet Social Forum could offer real solidarity to grassroots movements, women and queer activists from the global South, when they were not even in the room.
Unlike the original press release, the Internet Social Forum was framed at this workshop as a space where internet civil society could organise and find common agendas, away from government and corporations. According to the organisers, the Internet Social Forum would adopt the WSF principles of anti-imperialism and anti-neoliberalism, to create an enabling space for social movements to build awareness and shared advocacy.
Many participants were in support of an organising space for civil society but were confused by this divergence from the initial description of the Internet Social Forum as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative, which they described as being led by the World Economic Forum (WEF). Subsequent discussions with ISF organisers revealed that framing the ISF in opposition to the NMI and the NMI as led by the WEF was used as a tactic to galvanize support.
Do we need Yet Another Forum (YAF)?
Following the official workshop, the ISF organisers held a small meeting for those interested to discuss next steps in the development of an Internet Social Forum. When asked if there was disagreement over the need to hold an Internet Social Forum, the group was silent. This could be read as implicit agreement, or as uncertainty about what yet another forum would contribute to more effective struggle for solidarity and collective action.
As participants reflected on the need for an Internet Social Forum, common concerns surfaced around duplication of efforts, relevance to social movements, and the diversity of organisers. Jay Naidoo, a South African labour movement activist, and past communications minister in Mandela’s government, warned not to be prescriptive when engaging with social movements. He suggested that rather than placing additional burdens, an Internet Social Forum should focus on activities that are relevant to social movements and empower them to share their stories and their struggles.
The Internet Social Forum can be more than a discussion space, more than cyclical conversation among internet activists that oppose corporate dominance. To do this the ISF must start by following the leadership of the communications rights movement, which has struggled constantly to amplify the voices of marginalised communities and social movements. The ISF, if it is to be inclusive and responsive to these movements, must seek out their stories, and share them. When we talk of common agendas, these stories must be at the forefront of our minds; guiding our activism, so that we don’t fall into the trap of demanding an internet only for a privileged and vocal few. I fear that if an Internet Social Forum is organised without really engaging people, all people, then we will fall back into the same conflict that have plagued the Internet Governance Caucus and Best Bits.
The 2015 World Social Forum demonstrated the clear desire among civil society to work in greater solidarity. More than a forum, communications and internet rights activists are looking for ways to support each other and broader movements, to find common projects for social justice.
Tunis was a place to discuss shared problems among a small group of interested internet activists. If the Internet Social Forum is to go further, then we must be more than yet another forum.