Media,http://mcs.sagepub.

com/ Culture & Society

UNESCO, ICT corporations and the passion of ICT for development: modernization resurrected
Veva Leye Media Culture Society 2007 29: 972 DOI: 10.1177/0163443707081711 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/972

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Media, Culture & Society can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mcs.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/972.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Nov 7, 2007 What is This?

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

UNESCO, ICT corporations and the passion of ICT for development: modernization resurrected
Veva Leye
GHENT UNIVERSITY, BELGIUM RESEARCH FOUNDATION-FLANDERS (FWO)

Critically examining United Nations (UN) partnerships with the private sector is not about unveiling a conspiracy (McLaughlin, 2005: 58). But, especially since the debate on the role of ICT (information and communication technology) corporations in development efforts at the UN is a new one and has hitherto been mainly discussed in terms of best practices only (Lovink and Zehle, 2005: 4, 7), it is important to take a closer look at the context and underlying assumptions which frame these partnerships, the various interests of the different partners and the consequences these cooperative projects can have. As there is hardly any independent monitoring or evaluation of these initiatives, it is hard to find data about outcomes. In our opinion, this absence of information exemplifies the pervasiveness of the discourse on ICT for development (ICT4D): the idea that ICT per se will lead to development is omnipresent and, as such, it is simply unnecessary to produce data to substantiate this view. This article places the ICT for development discourse, which is the conceptual linchpin of these partnerships, within the broader information society discourse. This paradigm focuses on the transition Western societies are said to have made from the industrial age to the post-industrial or information age. Information and knowledge, instead of the manufacturing of goods, have become the (intangible) drivers of the economy. While the early visions of the information society in the 1970s stressed the fact that the telecommunications infrastructure should be treated as a public service, the Reagan- and Thatcherinduced shifts in the political climate in the 1980s led to a market-based and private sector driven approach ( Siochr, 2004: 2046). This particular vision was pursued at the international level in the 1990s with Al Gores call

Media, Culture & Society 2007 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore), Vol. 29(6): 972993 [ISSN: 0163-4437 DOI: 10.1177/0163443707081711]

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

973

for a Global Information Infrastructure (GII) and the 1995 G7 Ministerial Conference on the information society, and it is still the dominant approach today (Van Audenhove and Nulens, 2003: 24851). The bigger part of this information society discourse enunciates a technodeterministic, utopian promise of social, economic and political benefits in a radically different societal context. We think it more appropriate, though, to interpret these ICTbased developments as just another phase in the development of capitalism (Preston, 2001: 1619), benefiting transnational corporations disproportionately (Schiller, 1999: xiv). Despite all the rhetoric, informational capitalism has, while generating ever increasing returns for a minority in the weightless economy, brought about deepening wealth and income inequalities in both developed and developing countries (Parayil, 2005: 48). Elaborating on Mattelarts observation that the information society programme arose at the same time as the end of ideology paradigm (2003: 2), it is our opinion that these entwined discourses lead us in a very specific direction, namely that of a neoliberal world order which in the process is legitimized as the common sense, natural state of affairs. In this new world order all international actors or stakeholders are collaboratively contributing to the same project, in a manner reminiscent of corporatism and leaving few options for alternative development visions. This article argues that, despite the liberal, counterbalancing aura which is (still) ascribed to UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), the agencys ethical approach to the information society and its partnerships with ICT corporations basically endorse this world-view and ignore structural political, economic and political economic inequalities.

Private sector cooperation in the United Nations system For quite some time now, private sector participation in the multilateral system has been increasing. These mostly new forms of cooperation, which range from global initiatives including several stakeholders to operational partnerships in individual communities, have grown both in scale and impact. The appearance of these partnerships has been described as an almost inevitable evolution, since member states have been unwilling or unable to provide financing for development through the UN system, which has led to the severe financial crisis the UN is still witnessing. To fill this gap, cooperation with private corporations has been welcomed as substitute money. Other factors that have contributed to this trend are the ideological shift whereby neoliberalism and its privatization and private sector involvement rationale became eventually influential in the UN, and the alignment of UN leadership with this hegemonic neoliberal discourse (Bull et al., 2004: 4815; McLaughlin, 2005: 50). Some argue that this evolution constitutes the corporatization of development, brought about by the widespread belief that there are no longer alternatives to

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

974

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

the neoliberal imperative and that development will come about through the forces of the marketplace. While proponents argue that this private sector involvement will lead to greater flexibility of the UN system, critics argue that it may lead to fragmentation of development efforts. Moreover, it is feared that it leads to ad hoc funding, with resources used for projects which the private sector prefers and leaving areas with few investment prospects out of the picture (Bull et al., 2004: 4868). The UN business programme with the highest profile is the Global Compact, which is composed of 10 shared values and principles in the fields of human rights, labour rights, environmental protection and anti-corruption. It is a voluntary initiative that seeks to mainstream the 10 principles in business activities throughout the world while catalysing actions in support of UN goals. The Global Compact is contested because it offers corporations the opportunity to influence policy-making at the UN and country level, to promote their own products and reach for new markets, to keep their issues at the top of the UN agenda and to promote their public image through the association of the brands name with the UNs good reputation (Paine, 2000). The agreement furthermore contains no enforceable rules, but mere values and principles, the respecting of which is not monitored or evaluated (Global Policy Forum, 2005). The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the two-phase summit that took place in Geneva (Switzerland) in December 2003 and in Tunis (Tunisia) in November 2005, has been another process facilitating public private ICT partnerships at the multilateral level. The organization of the summit recognized different stakeholders: member states, the private sector, civil society and UN organizations. However, multiple opportunities were given to the private sector to defend its stakes: through individual accreditations, through the older collective representation organizations like the Coordinating Committee of Business Interlocutors (CCBI) and through government delegations, which are very receptive to the interests of their businesses and sometimes almost act as their spokespersons (Raboy and Landry, 2004: 39, 43, 75, 84). So, instead of focusing on the WSIS official output documents, it may be more interesting to examine those other WSIS outcomes, namely the numerous publicprivate partnerships that have been forged among UN agencies, governments, corporations and some civil society organizations during the WSIS process (McLaughlin, 2006). The partnerships of UNESCO with the private sector take place within the framework of the UN Global Compact. The primary purpose is stated to be the promotion of linkages and dialogue through which private and corporate entities can contribute to peace, development and other UNESCO goals (UNESCO, n.d.e). Sustainable development and the creation of wealth through commercial activity are thought to be closely linked (UNESCO, n.d.g). One of the functions of cooperation with the private sector is to harness markets for development: while providing access to markets and helping to bridge or deepen markets by providing incentives for business to invest, these partnerships will contribute to the development of sustainable markets

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

975

(UNESCO, n.d.f). The market solution to development approach is pursued in UNESCOs cultural sector with the Global Alliance for Cultural Diversity, which focuses on local communities and developing countries and which, in order to leverage the dormant capital of cultural activities [] matches the organizations that have something to offer skills, know-how, technical advice or financial support with practitioners in the cultural industries who need help to flourish and succeed in business (UNESCO, 2003). The framing of this initiative is awkward, to say the least, since the organization, through the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity and the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, is thought by many to be (symbolically) counterbalancing the World Trade Organizations (WTO) perspective on culture. This overt market approach comes as no surprise though, at a time when even the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), whose Human Development Reports were originally conceived as an alternative to economic growth analyses (Paine, 2000), is promoting selling to the bottom of the pyramid strategies and looking for a viable business model for poor communities around the globe (Microsoft and UNDP, 2004). UNESCO and Microsoft On 17 November 2004, UNESCO and Microsoft Corporation signed an agreement, announced as a Cooperation Agreement to Help Bridge the Digital Divide in UNESCOs press release (2004b). Microsoft thereby joined the coalition of major private sector partners supporting UNESCOs global strategy to draw on information and communication technologies to improve education, social and economic development worldwide (UNESCO, 2004b). It is a strategic partnership, which means that it is based on the exchange of knowledge and experience rather than on funding. Nevertheless, the agreement opens up the possibility of more private sector participation, as the projects that will be a part of the agreement will draw on the cooperation with a variety of partners: the private sector, government, intergovernmental organizations and civil society actors. The relationship between the two partners is not exclusive; UNESCO, in line with paragraph 27 of the 2003 WSIS Declaration of Principles, continues to support different software models, including proprietary, open source and free software. The partnership is implicitly presented as a win-win situation. UNESCOs Director-General Kochiro Matsuura believes that the partnership can help to put into practice the international strategic partnership envisioned by the United Nations to bridge the digital divide:
We have a greater chance of accelerating social and economic development if we work collectively than if each organization works in isolation.[] The effective use of information and communication technologies can play a major role in building human capacities for sustainable livelihoods. (UNESCO, 2004b)

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

976

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

Bill Gates, Microsofts Chairman and Chief Software Architect, says the company is honoured to partner with UNESCO, as [t]echnology is a crucial resource in todays world, but remains beyond the reach of millions of people. We hope to play a part in changing that (UNESCO, 2004b). The Cooperation Agreement, which normally will remain in effect for five years, states that UNESCO and Microsoft have identified eight areas where they plan to cooperate to the benefit of society and communities, especially in developing countries. These are: Education and learning Community access and development Cultural and linguistic diversity and preservation Digital inclusion and capacity-building Exchange and promotion of best practices on the use of ICT for socioeconomic development programmes Fostering web-based communities of practice, including content development, knowledge-sharing and empowerment through participation Facilitating exchange of information and of software applications Sharing expertise and strategies Practically, both partners will begin their cooperation with nine projects in four fields:
Education and learning:

1. Development of a syllabus for teacher training on integrating ICT into teaching 2. Building of UNESCO Knowledge Communities (web communities of practice) 3. Exploration of how Microsofts Innovative Teachers Network (ITN) could further UNESCOs educational aims 4. Cooperation in Microsofts Partners in Learning programme through four distinct mechanisms
Community access and development:

1. Establishment of a North African resource facility to support youth information and ICT centres 2. Exploration of the potential cooperative development of projects under Microsofts Unlimited Potential programme 3. Cooperation with Microsoft and the Canadian International Development Research Centre (IDRC) in their Global Support Network
Access and learning:

1. Project on computer refurbishment and Microsofts Digital Pipeline Pilot Project

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

Access and cultural diversity

977

1. Three joint initiatives on local language development The first two fields (seven projects) are clearly the most important. Apart from these initial cooperative projects, the agreement states that the partners will collaborate to identify further possible areas and projects for cooperation (UNESCO and Microsoft, 2004). We have situated this partnership as regards UNESCO within the broader UN context, but Microsofts motives also deserve critical scrutiny. Evidently, there is the promotion of the public image of the company, which in the preamble of the cooperation agreement is framed as an international corporate citizen of conscience. Furthermore, Microsoft is described as a company whose mission is to enable people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential through the use of innovative information technology. Considering that Microsoft is also a business whose mission is ultimately profit-making (a commitment to its shareholders), it is at least remarkable that the partnership coincides with the growing challenges posed to the worlds largest software providers operating system Windows by Linux and other open source alternatives (Cisler, 2003) challenges illustrated, for example, by an increasing tendency on the part of the public sector to switch to Linux-based software (AP, 2004; Marson, 2006), for example at the municipal level in Munich and Paris, and in some areas of central government in China, Japan, South Korea and Brazil. Microsoft allegedly backs a lobbying organization called Software Choice, which tries to persuade legislators to avoid the choice for the use of open source products only. This recommendation and other principles Software Choice propagates could in effect lock out the use of open source and free software in public institutions (Cisler, 2003; Perens, 2002). And, although Microsoft recently adopted a seemingly more open-source-tolerant stance on some issues (LaMonica, 2006), analysts expect that the next major wave of M&A (mergers and acquisitions) activity will involve software giants loading up on open source software makers, which presumably will lead to shutting down the technology model rather than embracing it (Higginbotham, 2006). It is not far fetched then, to examine the MicrosoftUNESCO cooperation in the light of Microsofts strategies to battle the open source model for software development and support (Cisler, 2003; LaMonica, 2006). Indeed, we consider Microsofts cooperation with UNESCO to be only one of many mechanisms the software giant deploys to secure its grip on the software market. Under the guise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) Microsoft develops a great many activities which, at different levels, tie people, businesses and countries to its software. To paint a complete picture it must be recognized that UNESCOs continued support for the diversity of software models is not a hollow phrase. In addition to its FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) portal, which acts as

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

978

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

a gateway to resources related to the FOSS movement, the organization also offers continuously updated and free-of-charge software tools for the processing of information (like CDS/ISIS, Greenstone and IDAMS) and proclaimed a Software Freedom Day (10 September). This contradiction in partnering with Microsoft while supporting the FOSS movement corroborates the vision that international organizations should not be regarded as monolithic entities with invariably clear-cut positions. ICT4D: conceptual linchpin To explore the conceptual framework of the cooperation it is revealing to take a closer look at Microsofts corporate citizenship programmes, an overview of which is also provided in the appendix to the MicrosoftUNESCO Agreement. Microsofts Global Citizenship Initiative is fuelled by the perception that a successful global corporation has the responsibility to use its resources and influence to make a positive impact on the world and its people (Microsoft, 2005a). A core pillar of this CSR programme consists of advancing the knowledge economy. This objective is pursued mainly through the corporations flagship digital inclusion programmes, Partners in Learning (PiL) and Unlimited Potential (UP), programmes through which UNESCO cooperates with Microsoft. Digital inclusion is defined as increasing the availability and accessibility of software, promoting digital literacy and creating economic opportunity through Microsoft products and services (Microsoft, 2005b). The chain of reasoning is that, through the provision of technology access and training to all types of learners, no matter where they happen to be on the continuum of ICT skills [] these digital inclusion programs lay the groundwork for increased economic opportunity and social improvements (Microsoft, 2006a). This is clearly a statement in support of the so-called ICT4D, or Information and Communication Technology for Development, paradigm which very roughly stated presupposes that access to and availability of ICT will lead to development. We would characterize this development paradigm, which is prominently present at the international level, especially and even more forcefully since the WSIS, as follows. First, the digital divide is seen as a major unequalizing force in the world economy today (Wade, 2002: 460). This not only obscures the fact that the digital divide may more accurately be just a reflection of the socio-economic or development divide between developed and developing countries (Nulens, 2003: 2646). It also suggests that when the developing world finally is adequately and sufficiently connected, it will become fully integrated into the global economy and hence become an equal partner of the rich countries. This disguises the fact that LDCs (Least Developed Countries) are already more than fully integrated into the global marketplace through WTO agreements, albeit on unfavourable terms (Cline-Cole and Powell, 2004: 7; Yau, 2004: 12). ICT is seen as inevitably leading to economic

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

979

development (Nulens, 2003: 264), institutional and infrastructural obstacles are usually not taken into account. The fact that there is scarcely any evidence of the benefits of investments in ICT for development as compared to nonICT investments like education or health is largely ignored. And when there is evidence of high failure rates in ICT projects, this is thought to reveal the need for more training, or the need to adapt technology to specific cultural contexts, while the necessity of investment in ICT is usually not questioned (Wade, 2002: 460). Shade calls the mere equation of technology with development, which can be found in the rhetoric surrounding the G8s Digital Opportunity Task Force (DOT Force), an initiative to bridge the digital divide, Modernization 2.0 (2003: 11415). Indeed, we can hear the post-Second World War modernization paradigm resonating through the broader ICT4D discourse. Escobar typifies the Western development conception of the time: technology, which was regarded as neutral and entirely beneficial, would bring the underdeveloped areas material progress, innovation and results. The transfer of technology became an important element in the elaboration of development projects (1995a: 36). In fact, this renewed modernization thinking is presented even more forcefully than it used to be, as it promises that ICTs will open up the opportunity for LDCs to leapfrog several stages of development (Nulens, 2003: 263). The ignorance of critiques of prior modernization/development theories within the bulk of ICT4D thinking is criticized by Lovink and Zehle, who accuse the elite of a few influential non-governmental organization (NGO) networks like APC, OneWorld or Panos, and a small number of states and influential donor organizations of uncritically reproducing the terms of the ICT4D discourse. By doing so these actors are contributing to the hegemony of an a-historical technological determinism. This leads the authors to question if development scepticism and the proliferation of alternative visions it has spawned have quite simply been forgotten:
Or have they been actively muted to disconnect current struggles in the area of communication and information from this history, adding legitimacy to new strategies of pre-emptive development that are based on an ever-closer alliance between the politics of aid, development and security? (Lovink and Zehle, 2005: 6)

From a post-development perspective, one could state that this a-historical ICT4D discourse once more proves that development thinking remains ignorant of the mistakes and ills of the past in order to sustain itself in the present day and into the future (Crush, 1995: 9, 16). The international efforts to bridge, narrow or reduce the digital divide have thus become a new moral authority, which legitimates intervention in the affairs of places which are deemed to be on the wrong side of the divide (Cline-Cole and Powell, 2004: 6). We surely could add ICT4D to Escobars enumeration of attempts to salvage development through fashionable notions such as sustainable development, grassroots

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

980

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

development, women and development, market-friendly development (1995b: 215). The fact that the UNESCOMicrosoft Agreement is taking place within the context of the WSIS which can be seen as paying tribute to this re-editing of the modernization paradigm (Moll and Shade, 2004) and the fact that the agreement explicitly mentions the exchange and promotion of best practice, expertise and strategies on ICT4D programmes as areas of cooperation between the partners, does not mean, however, that UNESCO uncritically embraces hard-line technodeterministic ICT4D discourse and practice. Besides, it is certainly not the case that Microsoft and UNESCO have entirely compatible views concerning the use of ICT for development. UNESCO, for example, does not share Microsofts narrow focus on the knowledge economy, as the organization claims to be fully aware of the risks of exclusion when knowledge societies are reduced to the promotion of a knowledge economy or information society (UNESCO, 2005a: 26). Indeed, with the very concept of knowledge societies UNESCO seeks to overcome the narrow technological focus of the concept of the information society by stressing broader social, ethical and political dimensions. The plural form designates the encompassing of cultural and linguistic diversity, and the acknowledgement that the information and communication revolution does not need to result in one specific form of society (2005a: 17). But UNESCOs position regarding ICT4D is ambivalent. On the one hand the organization asserts that technology and connectivity are crucial but should not be thought of as ends in themselves (2005a: 27). On the other hand it is still upheld that the diffusion of information and communication technologies inevitably, and more than ever, creates new opportunities for development (2005a: 18). The ICT-based promise of development can only be achieved, however, through a combination of freedom of expression, knowledge, democratic principles and the concept of justice, in other words through an ethical approach (2005a: 29, 26).

Structural political economic inequalities off UNESCOs radar The trust in an ethical approach to the information society/knowledge societies is also evident in UNESCOs labelling of private sector partnerships with the ICT industry as joint ventures between an ethically-based approach and high-level technical know-how (UNESCO, n.d.g). This suggests that such an approach to technology is enough to manage its deployment. In our opinion, however, the operation of technology is determined by economic, political, institutional and social factors, and this context has to be taken into account. Moreover, UNESCOs ethical vision can be criticized for turning a blind eye to structural political economic inequalities in the ICT domain.

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

981

It can be argued that a new form of international (digital) dependence has arisen, which would call for a new form of the 1970s dependency theory. This development paradigm blamed the capitalist world system for producing underdevelopment. Concerning media and communication its proponents investigated imbalances in ownership, production and distribution, and the functioning of what was called media and cultural imperialism. With Shades (2003) Modernization 2.0 in mind, we could consider introducing Dependency 2.0 too. Wade discerns several ways in which developing country users are being tied more tightly into hardware and software escalation with ramifications difficult to escape (2002: 452). The ICT companies, which are still overwhelmingly based in the industrialized countries (Cisler, 2005: 1523), are engaged in a softwarehardware arms race: software and hardware are almost dialectically being developed to use more memory and speed, which makes older software and hardware outmoded very quickly. To be able to communicate with customers, suppliers and donors in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, developing countries firms and governments are forced to use scarce foreign exchange in order to replace their old technological devices (Wade, 2002: 452). Morales-Gomez and Melesse warn of the very real possibility that these investments can, in effect, not only draw essential capital away from being allocated to basic needs, but can also result in increasing the external debt or transforming developing countries into new profitable markets for transnational corporations, with benefits on the local level only flowing to the elites (1998: 6). It is clear that, from this point of view, one can question the effectiveness in the long run of the flourishing computer refurbishment initiatives (like Microsofts Digital Pipeline Initiative, linked to its Microsoft Authorized Refurbishers programme). In UNESCOs view these projects are seen as a mechanism of redistribution of equipment, because, the acknowledged inequality in high-speed internet connections notwithstanding, it is better to have a computer, even an old and less efficient one, than no computer at all (2005a: 34). Moreover:
[] [s]uch a redistribution arrangement, based on voluntary decisions by individuals, companies, organizations and governments in the industrialized countries, and on a principle of sharing, would attest to a spirit of digital solidarity that could help to mitigate the economic inequalities that foster the digital divide. (UNESCO, 2005a: 34)

This is another example of UNESCOs ethical approach that is worth remarking on. First, because even if those initiatives amount to a spirit of digital solidarity (taking into account that the maintenance cost for older hardware is often higher than the cost of new hardware in the industrialized countries: what options are there to get rid of the redundant Western computer arsenal?), UNESCO is assuming that charitable action could solve structural economic inequalities (which it never even begins to explore in the first place). Second,

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

982

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

this conception skips the fact that other costs for training, integration and support can exceed the cost of hardware and software (Cisler, 2003). And this brings us to the matter of the sustainability of projects. Cisler points to the fact that donor/lender agencies expect that community or project leaders who usually have never written a business plan will be creative enough to raise funds or will acquire skills to find new investors for support once the seed money is used up, which in reality succeeds only exceptionally (2005: 155; Yau, 2004: 23). Another form of digital dependence that remains unaddressed by UNESCO is in the domain of the setting of ICT standards and rules. This domain is not part of UNESCOs constitutional mandate, but the power relations in this field clearly influence the situation concerning ICT worldwide with which UNESCO is concerned. Developing countries lack meaningful formal representation and informal influence in major standard-setting bodies, like the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), this situation being even worse in the private consortia-only dominated arenas which have sprung up in recent years (Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization and Panos London, 2002: 34). And there is a lot at stake in the settling of ICT regimes and standards. It is no secret that during the negotiations several tactics are used, like slowing down the process until a company or countrys own approach is the de facto standard. Then:
ICT standard-setting bodies are only rarely neutral coordinating bodies, because ICT standards are only rarely purely public goods.[] This is why firms, industry associations and states are willing to meet the substantial expenses of their representatives on the legions of standard-making bodies.[] They are willing to pay because they see privatizable gains at stake. (Wade, 2002: 4589)

The lack of influence of developing countries at the standard-setting level not only means that they cannot meaningfully participate in the process of standard-setting itself, it also results in a situation in which they become more integrated into the existing international ICT system. The big Western ICT firms benefit disproportionately from this integration. A case in point is the Western governments and World Bank initiated call for good governance as a condition for aid. The concept has found its way into the broader UN family discourse, with former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan designating it as perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development (quoted in UNESCO, n.d.b). Good governance in aid agreements is operationalized as being transparent, accountable and more effective. This can be achieved through the creation of unified ICT infrastructures in the public sector (e-governance). The contracts for the provision of those obviously go to Western ICT firms. As such, developing country governments introduce ICTs in the context of e-governance because that is a lever for aid (Cline-Cole and Powell, 2004: 8). In the process, they are tying themselves to the standards of the ICT firms chosen by their donors. This, moreover, has the perverse effect that the allocation of

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

983

parts of their budget to Western hardware, software and services actually can be described as a tax on aid budgets, whereby in the African context, as argued by Cline-Cole and Powell, the North is to be paid to smooth Africas insertion into a globalized world order, from which the North will then profit (2004: 67). UNESCO also has its e-governance capacity-building projects. Here too, ICT is valued as more than a tool as E-governance involves new styles of leadership, new ways of debating and deciding policy and investment, new ways of accessing education, new ways of listening to citizens and new ways of organising and delivering information and services (UNESCO, n.d.c). The projects are focused on local decision-makers in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. The municipal level is chosen because it is at the local level that the impact of ICTs on the relationship between governments and citizens is expected to be most effective (UNESCO, n.d.b). Again, some reservations come to mind. UNESCO promotes e-governance to encourage citizen participation in the decision-making process. But it is a well known fact that governments, let alone local governments, in LDCs cannot autonomously decide what public service, education or health policy they want, tied as they are to the World Banks and IMFs (International Monetary Fund) Poverty Reduction and Growth Facilities (PRGF), the successors of the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facilities (ESAF), notorious for their harsh effects on the population of LDCs (Mestrum, 2005: 52, 60). This means that governments are accountable to the World Bank and IMF rather than to their own constituencies. It seems extremely unlikely, then, that citizens of LDCs will be able to participate in the decision-making process through e-governance facilities (or indeed by any other means). It is obvious that ICT suppliers through e-governance projects are reaching for new markets. It is a strategy that Microsoft is also pursuing through the organization of its various, regional Government Leaders Forums (GLF) where the development of information technology in the public sector is promoted. Examples of initiatives taking place in this e-governance solutions context are those between Microsoft and the OAS (Organization of American States) and between Microsoft and the APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) group. Both joint efforts were accompanied by considerable donations by Microsoft (US $594,638 and US $500,000 respectively) (Microsoft, 2005c; Microsoft, 2005d). The corporation thinks this will lead to significantly enhanced services for citizens and will be useful as a powerful tool for social and economic development. Even more is promised, as according to Enrique Barkey of Hewlett Packard (HP), a joint MicrosoftHP initiative to achieve greater interoperability will transform the way governments interact with their citizens and citizens with their governments (Microsoft, 2005c). This is clearly another example of how technology in itself is touted as bringing about profound societal, economic or political changes. But, as Hamelink correctly argues, ICTs by themselves will not lead to changing

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

984

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

institutional settings or more democratic social development as long as there are no changes in political decision-making processes (1997: 32).

ICT and education Yet another market to be seized by ICT companies in developing countries (as well as in the industrialized countries) is that of education and training. We can discern activities on three levels in this domain, namely ICT in education, ICT education and ICT for community purposes. The first, ICT in education, is of special importance in the context of the agreement between UNESCO and Microsoft, which involves a great deal of cooperation in the field of education and learning, mainly through the elaboration of a syllabus for teacher training on the integration of ICT into teaching and through UNESCOs cooperation in Microsofts Innovative Teachers Network and Partners in Learning initiatives. The Innovative Teachers Network is a web-based platform that provides teachers with content, tools and services. The aim is to enable them to efficiently perform their daily classroom tasks, collaborate and communicate with peers, students and parents in a community environment, and enhance their professional skills by learning and sharing best practices (UNESCO and Microsoft, 2004). Partners in Learning aims to increase access to and build capacity for the use of ICTs by educators and students through grants for skills training, software grants and licenses at lower-than-usual prices, the focus being on primary and secondary schools (Microsoft, 2005b). UNESCO also collaborates with Intel, the worlds largest chip-making corporation, to develop a syllabus to improve the use of ICT in classrooms (UNESCO, 2004d). UNESCO does not simply state that the use and availability of ICT per se will achieve more or better education, but the organizations position is ambivalent again. On the one hand the organization stresses the fact that ICTs are only part of a variety of technologies that can be used in education and must be considered as tools which have to be adapted to educational goals. Moreover, it is recognized that many ethical and legal issues intervene in the use of ICTs in education (UNESCO, n.d.h). On the other hand it is claimed that ICTs, through delivery of education and training of teachers, can contribute to achieving worldwide universal education (UNESCO, 2005c). The interests of major ICT corporations in the educational market need to be recognized, though. Technology companies have been promoting their products in schools for a long time, an early example being the Keystone View Company, which, in the first decades of the twentieth century, convinced American schools that integrating its technology (stereographic images which could be viewed with hand-held devices and projectors) would greatly improve learning. Since those days various companies have repeated this promise of technology improving learning. Through various mechanisms

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

985

(in-kind donations, grants, awards, special funds, reduced pricing), ICT companies today are still seeking to increase their market share, promote brand loyalty, influence public opinion or even create dependence on a product line (Cisler, 2003). Besides these motives of the industry, it is also useful to question the all too often implicitly assumed effectiveness of the use of ICTs in education. The exciting language which Microsoft, Intel and their like use to promote their education programmes, and which is found in UNESCOs vision on ICTs and education too, totally ignores the failed modernization programmes concerning media and education of the past (Lindo-Fuentes, 2005). Larry Cuban has done extensive research on the topic of ICT in education in the United States, where the reasoning of policy-making in educational technology can be summarized as follows. Increased availability of new technologies in the classroom will lead to increased use, which will lead to efficient teaching and better learning. This in turn will lead to able graduates equipped with the most up-to-date skills to compete in the workplace (2001: 18). Cuban concludes that the use of ICT in the classroom has not proven to have contributed to computer literacy and competitiveness in the workplace, and has not led to enhanced efficiency in learning and teaching in the vast majority of the American classrooms (2001: 178). He then goes on to question the United States 1990s ICT in education multibillion-dollar investment, because, by allocating substantial funds for sustaining technology in a given district, administrators often run out of resources to meet other pressing needs (2001: 7, 193). This concern obviously applies more broadly to ICT4D investments in developing countries too. As regards education in developing countries, we also must mention the paradoxical situation whereby the IMF and World Bank on the one hand are pursuing reform policies which oblige states to cut in their public spending, which seriously affects education, while on the other hand promoting ICT4D projects which cost a lot of money. Arguably, education is more important to development than digital access (Nederveen Pieterse, 2005: 16). Of course, these huge ICT investments in education in the United States did not come out of the blue. They can be traced back to the 1970s economic crisis and the US fear of being challenged in the global economy. Cuban (2001: 4, 7) cites the important 1983 Nation at Risk report by the National Commission on Excellence in Education. To achieve the preparation of high-performing graduates for the fast-changing workplace of the information age and to keep on the slim competitive edge the US risked losing in the world market, more advanced technology in the classroom was seen to be of the utmost importance. Of course this discourse coincided with that of the ICT industries. And it still does today, as witnessed in Microsofts recent call to the US government to invest much more in ICT access and training and the corporations cooperation project with the Department of Labor because:

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

986

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

[] [i]ts no secret that the United States is falling behind in efforts to equip its workers with the basic technology and computing skills necessary for them to compete in the global economy [] as the workplace moves from a manufacturing to information based economy. (Microsoft, 2006b; see also Microsoft, 2006c)

The huge investments in ICT in the education environment which occurred in the United States in the 1990s were not driven by business interests only. Since the 1980s a powerful ad hoc coalition came into being which was and is comprised of groups (public officials, corporate executives, policy-makers, parents groups) which, with different objectives though united through some common goals, came to push this ICT drive (Cuban, 2001: 1215). This can also be observed regarding the ICT4D movement, which gained momentum because of the various interests of all stakeholders involved converging on the same paradigm: corporations, but also governments, intergovernmental and development organizations, civil society organizations and non-governmental organizations. Besides this promotion of ICT in education, there is also the issue of ICT education as such. In this domain, UNESCO is working with Cisco Systems, the worlds biggest network equipment provider. Together these partners founded the Regional Academy for Advanced Network Administration and Design (RAANAD), in Kiev, Ukraine in 2001 and the Regional Academy for Online Network Governance and System Applications (RAONGSA) in Baku, Azerbaijan in 2002. Both are promoted as model training hubs, servicing for [sic] Eastern Europe and Central Asia in network capacity building (UNESCO, n.d.a). Since its launch, RAONGSA has been growing and integrating several centre facilities, such as Cisco Regional Networking Academy and Microsoft Office Specialist Authorized Testing Centre. The academy has produced a number of Cisco Certified Network Associates (CCNA), certified professionals who can select, connect, configure and troubleshoot the various Cisco networking devices. The Cisco certifications are valued highly because they are a precondition for opening up quality network services (UNESCO, 2004a). McLaughlin, in an analysis of similar Cisco/UN initiatives like the Cisco Systems Gender Initiative and the Least Developed Countries Initiative, criticizes the fact that there have been few efforts to monitor or assess these cooperative efforts (2005: 557). She warns of the extraordinary limited approach these initiatives have, as, under the banner of development aid, the provision of ICT education in fact amounts to the mere creation of a workforce which is integrated into the functioning of the global economy. This in fact may be indicative of another NorthSouth divide, with the global North taking care of the lions share of research and development while the global South provides low- and semi-skilled labourers (McLaughlin, 2005: 59), and with arrangements like the TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) ensuring this division of labour (Yau, 2004: 18, 21). Indeed, we can ask what empowerment is envisioned when UNESCO promotes the establishment of a UNESCO/Cisco local Academy in South Africa which provides

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

987

specialised IT training thus considerably empowering youth when facing the new requirements of the labour market (UNESCO, 2002). It seems to be the case that empowerment is understood extremely restrictively here. Poor people in disadvantaged regions should be happy because ICTs are offering them job opportunities. The fact that most teleworkers, predominantly women, are paid very low wages, working long hours in sweatshop conditions (De Alcantera, quoted in Yau, 2004: 21; Parayil, 2005: 49) is ignored. What is more, transnational corporations which offshore ICT jobs and services also often leave quickly for other places which offer more favourable investment conditions, leaving local stakeholders at a loss as to whether or not scarce public subsidies should even be used to attract and retain industries likely to move on anyway (Lovink and Zehle, 2005: 5). So the job opportunities offered by ICT certainly deserve a more critical examination. The third approach we classify within the domain of ICT and education refers more broadly to ICT training for communities. On this level too, the focus is mainly on the economic opportunities ICT can bring. The description of the purpose of the UNESCO/Microsoft community technology centre in Tunisia as helping youth to participate in the knowledge economy (UNESCO, 2005b) brings to mind the remarks on the risk of the creation of a semi-skilled workforce in developing countries which comes in handy for transnational corporations. In addition, the reasoning behind the information literacy concept which underlies, for example, the UNESCO/Microsoft community technology learning centre in Lebanon (UNESCO, 2006) is not unproblematic. Information literacy is supposed to lead to empowerment (again), because it enhances the pursuit of knowledge by equipping individuals with the skills and abilities for critical reception, assessment and use of information in their professional and personal lives (UNESCO, n.d.d). This view of information technologies as a means of transmitting rather than creating information is symptomatic of a modernization approach to communications and development. This approach conceives people as passive retrievers of existing information only, and in the process usually leaves no room for communitybuilding or other transformative activities (Wilkins and Waters, 2000: 57, 59). Strover et al. moreover have argued that poor and minority populations were not reached and power structures tended to be largely replicated in community ICT projects in the United States with a main focus on improving access (2005: 28). Besides community technology centres, UNESCO also funds Community Multimedia Centres (CMC), which combine community radio with telecentre facilities. These in fact do promote local content production. Yet, it is still upheld that the aim is to reach a critical mass that enables ICT to change whole societies at the grass roots (UNESCO, 2004c: 231). Whats more, the combination of the view that information, communication and knowledge become the basic tools of the poor in improving their own lives in the case of CMCs (UNESCO, 2004c: 231) with the vision that everyone should have

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

988

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

the necessary skills to benefit fully from the Information Society (UNESCO, 2005c) may have alarming consequences. The inference is that if the poor in developing countries are offered the opportunities for lifting themselves out of poverty and they do not succeed, they are themselves to blame. This idea of a level playing field, which seemingly is about giving people in developing countries equal opportunities, ignores developing countries conditions in the global economy. Even if poor people can get ICT training or know how to search the web for relevant information, it remains extremely unlikely that the national economy will be changed. Similarly, UNESCOs ICT approaches for women can be charged with perpetuating inequalities, as they are focused mainly on training and women can be trained until they are blue in their faces but this would change womens status very little because gender inequality is inherently historical and structural (Lee, 2004: 548).

Conclusion In answering the question of why UNESCO is ignoring structural inequalities in the global economy, attention must first be paid to the huge commercial interests of the ICT corporations (Wade, 2002: 463) and to the fact that ICT corporations have an essential function in the global trade regime by providing the structures for market transactions (Hamelink, 1999: 21). Second, one has to take into account the organizations chequered past regarding the questioning of communication, information and media imbalances. In the 1970s the famous NWICO (New World Information and Communication Order) debate caused major upheaval within the organization. It paralleled the NonAligned Movements call for a NIEO (New International Economic Order), denounced imbalances in ownership, production and distribution of communication and media, and advocated a more balanced flow of information. The NWICO call caused a severe division between the Third World and the Western world and eventually led to the creation of the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems (MacBride Commission), which produced the Many Voices One World report but did not manage to find a consensus. Although UNESCO never meant to curb press freedom, North American private media and communication industry lobbies fuelled a vehement attack on the organization, accusing it of supporting government censorship and obstructing the free flow of information. This was also the United States government stance and culminated in the withdrawal of the United States from UNESCO in 1984, followed by that of the United Kingdom and Singapore in 1985, and leading to a major financial crisis and the diminished importance of the organization. In 1989 UNESCOs New Communication Strategy reinstated the free flow of information doctrine, an action described as a return to its constitutional mandate. It is not surprising, then, that UNESCO does not engage in critically questioning serious

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

989

imbalances concerning ICTs, since in the past this has almost meant the end of the organization. The narrow constitutional approach adopted as a solution to those controversies is pursued in the organizations present-day ethical conception of the information society/knowledge societies and in its partnerships with ICT corporations. Also, as compared to the 1970s NWICO upheaval which originated from the Non-Aligned Movement, today there is scarcely any resistance to what we have called digital dependence. Instead, most stakeholders are united through efforts which are framed within a pervasive ICT4D discourse. And, third, as has been said, this UNESCO policy has to be situated in a broader shift of the United Nations systems towards the neoliberal hegemonic project. To conclude on a more positive note, it must be stressed that UNESCO also supports community media initiatives with a more participatory focus. Considering that the digital divide focus downplays the fact that there are still huge inequities concerning the old media, which are more important to overcome from a development perspective (Raboy and Landry, 2004: 11; Nederveen Pieterse, 2005: 23), these community media initiatives have to be encouraged. But then again a simple comparison of budgets puts our feet back on the ground. Whereas Microsoft, since the launching of Unlimited Potential in 2003, has spent a total of US $152 million in grants (Microsoft, 2006d), UNESCOs International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC) due to lack of funding by member states, which arguably has led to the pragmatic acceptance of corporate funds described above has since 1981 only been able to spend a meagre US $90 million (UNESCO, n.d.i).

References
AP (2004) Microsoft-UNESCO Deal for Computer Literacy to Provide Technology Training in Developing Countries, 17 November, URL (consulted February 2006): http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6510866/ Bull, B., M. Bs and D. McNeill (2004) Private Sector Influence in the Multilateral System: A Changing Structure of World Governance?, Global Governance 10(4): 48198. Cisler, S. (2003) Product Placements in Learning Environments: From KeystoneMast to Microsoft, URL (consulted February 2006): http://www.eduaction.net/ productplacement.html Cisler, S. (2005) Whats the Matter with ICTs? pp. 14658 in G. Lovink and S. Zehle (eds) Incommunicado Reader: Information Technology for Everybody Else. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures. Cline-Cole, R. and M. Powell (2004) ICTs, Virtual Colonisation and Political Economy, Review of African Political Economy 99: 59. Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation and Panos London (2002) Louder Voices: Strengthening Developing Country Participation in International ICT Decision-making. London: Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation and Panos London. Crush, J. (1995) Imagining Development, pp.123 in J. Crush (ed.) Power of Development. London: Routledge.

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

990

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

Cuban, L. (2001) Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Escobar, A. (1995a) Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Escobar, A. (1995b) Imagining a Post-development Era, pp. 21127 in J. Crush (ed.) Power of Development. London: Routledge. Global Policy Forum (2005) Global Compact Governance Framework, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.globalpolicy.org/reform/indxbiz.htm Hamelink, C.J. (1997) New Information and Communication Technologies, Social Development and Cultural Change. UNRISD Discussion Paper 86. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Hamelink, C.J. (1999) ICTs and Social Development: The Global Policy Context. UNRISD Discussion Paper 116. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Higginbotham, S. (2006) Open Source Challenges Acquirers, The Deal.com 1 March, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.thedeal.com/servlet/Satellite? pagename=PENews&c=TDDArticle&cid=1140817052238 LaMonica, M. (2006) Is Microsoft Playing Well with Others?, CNet News.com 7 April, URL (consulted April 2006): http://news.com.com/Is+Microsoft+playing+well+with+others/2100-7344_3-6058667.html Lee, M. (2004) UNESCOs Conceptualization of Women and Telecommunications 19702000, Gazette: The International Journal for Communication Studies 66(6): 53352. Lindo-Fuentes, H. (2005) Educational Television in El Salvador: UNESCO and Modernization Theory in Action, paper presented at the symposium 60 Years of UNESCO, 17 November, Paris. Lovink, G. and S. Zehle (2005) Incommunicado Glossary, pp. 311 in G. Lovink and S. Zehle (eds) Incommunicado Reader: Information Technology for Everybody Else. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures. Marson, I. (2006, April 12) The Business of Linux in China, CNet News.com 12 April, URL (consulted April 2006): http://news.com.com/ The+ business+ of+Linux +in+China+-+page+3/2008-7344_3-6060122-3.html?tag=st.num Mattelart, A. (2003) The Information Society: An Introduction. London: Sage. McLaughlin, L. (2005) Cisco Systems, the United Nations, and the Corporatisation of Development, pp. 5063 in G. Lovink and S. Zehle (eds.) Incommunicado Reader. Information Technology for everybody else. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures. McLaughlin, L. (2006) The Gendered Ties That Bind the New Global Governance to the New Information Economy Abstract, URL (consulted February 2006): http://www.cccs.uq.edu.au/index.html?page=42734&pid=4273 Mestrum, F. (2005) De rattenvanger van Hameln. De Wereldbank, armoede en ontwikkeling. Berchem: EPO. Microsoft (2005a) Global Citizenship at Microsoft, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/citizenship/default.mspx Microsoft (2005b) Partners in Learning, 17 October, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/citizenship/knowledge/partners_inlearning.mspx Microsoft (2005c) Bill Gates Announces Expanded Efforts for Public and Private Sector Collaboration on Government Services and Digital Inclusion Initiatives, 27 April, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ press/ 2005/apr05/04-27PublicPrivateCollaborationPR.mspx Microsoft (2005d) Microsoft Government Leaders Forum Builds PublicPrivate Partnerships, Economic Opportunity, 6 December, URL (consulted March 2006):

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

991

h t t p : / / w w w. m i c r o s o f t . c o m / p r e s s p a s s / p r e s s / 2 0 0 5 / d e c 0 5 / 1 2 05GLFOverviewPR.mspx Microsoft (2006a) Knowledge Economy, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/citizenship/knowledge/default.mspx Microsoft (2006b) Microsoft Aims to Help Make U.S. Workforce More Competitive, 27 February, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft. com/presspass/features/2006/feb06/02-27Workforce.mspx Microsoft (2006c) Microsoft, Department of Labor Team Up to Train Technology Workers, 28 February, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/ presspass/press/2006/feb06/02-28MSDOLPR.mspx Microsoft (2006d) Helping People Realize Their Potential, One Partnership at a Time, 1 February, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/press pass/features/2006/feb06/02-01PolandUP.mspx Microsoft and UNDP (2004) Transcript, Microsoft and UNDP Press Conference, 23 January, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ exec/ billg/speeches/2004/01-23undp.aspx Moll, M. and L.R. Shade (2004) Vision Impossible? The World Summit on the Information Society, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www3.fis.utoronto.ca/ iprp/cracin/publications/pdfs/final/convergence_vision_impossible.pdf Morales-Gomez, D. and M. Melesse (1998) Utilising Information and Communication Technologies for Development: The Social Dimensions, Information Technology for Development 8(1): 313. Nederveen Pieterse, J. (2005) Digital Capitalism and Development: The Unbearable Lightness of ICT4D, pp. 1129 in G. Lovink and S. Zehle (eds) Incommunicado Reader: Information Technology for Everybody Else. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures. Nulens, G. (2003) The Digital Divide and Development Communication Theory, pp. 255277 in B. Cammaerts, L. Van Audenhove, G. Nulens and C. Pauwels (eds) Beyond the Digital Divide: Reducing Exclusion, Fostering Inclusion. Brussels: VUB Brussels University Press. Siochr, S. (2004) Will the Real WSIS Please Stand Up? The Historic Encounter of the Information Society and the Communication Society , Gazette: The International Journal for Communication Studies 66(34): 20324. Paine, E. (2000) The Road to the Global Compact: Corporate Power and the Battle over Global Public Policy at the United Nations, October, URL (consulted 30 March 2006): http://www.globalpolicy.org/reform/papers/2000/road.htm Parayil, G. (2005) The Digital Divide and Increasing Returns: Contradictions of Informational Capitalism, The Information Society 21(1): 4151. Perens, B. (2002) MS Software Choice Scheme a Clever Fraud, The Register 9 August, URL (consulted 30 March 2006): http://www.theregister.co.uk/ 2002/08/ 09/ms_software_choice_scheme/ Preston, P. (2001) Reshaping Communications. London: Sage. Raboy, M. and N. Landry (2004) La Communication au coeur de la gouvernance globale. Enjeux et perspectives de la socit civile au Sommet mondial sur la socit de linformation. Montral: Dpartement de communication, Universit de Montral, URL (consulted April 2006): http://www.lrpc.umontreal.ca/smsirapport.pdf Schiller, D. (1999) Digital Capitalism: Networking the Global Market System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Shade, L.R. (2003) Here Comes the DOT Force! The New Cavalry for Equity?, Gazette: The International Journal for Communication Studies 65(2): 10720. Strover, S. with G. Chapman, J. Waters, J. Gustafson, N. Inagaki and C. Cunningham (2005). Assessing Community Efforts to Reduce the Digital Divide, paper presented

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

992

Media, Culture & Society 29(6)

at the Oxford Internet Institute Seminar on the Digital Divide, 4 March, URL (consulted 12 April 2006): http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/collaboration/seminars/20050304_ Strover_OII%20paper.pdf UNESCO (2002) Infoyouth Networks: Recent Achievements, 27 September, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=5206& URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2003) Global Alliance for Cultural Diversity, URL (consulted April 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15720&URL_DO=DO_ TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2004a) UNESCOs Regional Academy Marks Record Success in ICT Quality Training, 1 September, URL (consulted February 2006): http://portal. unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17068&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2004b) UNESCO and Microsoft Sign Cooperation Agreement to Help Bridge the Digital Divide, 17 November, URL (consulted February 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17504& URL_DO=DO_TOPIC& URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2004c) 32 C/5 Approved Programme and Budget 20042005. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO (2004d) Intel, UNESCO to Develop Guidelines for Worldwide Teacher Technology Training, 9 November, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal. unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17482&URL_DO=DO_ TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2005a) Towards Knowledge Societies: UNESCO World Report. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO (2005b) New Regional Centre in Tunisia to Help Youth Participate in the Knowledge Economy, 17 November, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=20667 &URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html UNESCO (2005c) UNESCO Observatory on the Information Society: Capacity Building, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.unesco.org/webworld/portal_observatory/pages/Capacity_Building/index.shtml UNESCO (2006) UNESCO and Microsoft Inaugurate Community Technology Learning Centre in Lebanon, 30 March, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID = 21691&URL_DO = DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.a) UNESCO Partnership with Cisco, URL (consulted March 2006): http://www.portal.unesco.org/ci/wsis/tunis/stand/index.php?Action=showPartners PrivateDetail&id=1 UNESCO (n.d.b) E-governance Capacity Building, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID = 2179&URL_DO = DO_TOPIC &URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.c) Defining E-Governance, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=4404&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.d) Information Literacy, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID = 15886&URL_DO = DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.e) Private Sector Policy, URL (consulted April 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=11897&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013

Leye, UNESCO and ICT corporations

993

UNESCO (n.d.f). Opportunities for Cooperation, URL (consulted April 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=11508&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC& URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.g) About the CI Sector: Private Sector Partnerships, URL (consulted April 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=17587&URL_DO =DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.h) Education and ICT, URL (consulted March 2006): http://portal. unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=2929&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC &URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO (n.d.i) About International Programme for the Development of Communication, URL (consulted April 2006): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev. php-URL_ID=18654&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO and Microsoft (2004) Cooperation Agreement between the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and Microsoft Corporation, URL (consulted July 2007): http://portal.unesco.org/ci/fr/ev.php-URL_ID=17589 &URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Van Audenhove, L. and G. Nulens (2003) The International Digital Divide: An Analysis in the Light of the Policy Discourse on the Information Society, pp. 22953 in B. Cammaerts, L. Van Audenhove, G. Nulens and C. Pauwels (eds) Beyond the Digital Divide: Reducing Exclusion, Fostering Inclusion. Brussels: VUB Brussels University Press. Wade, R.H. (2002) Bridging the Digital Divide: New Route to Development or New Form of Dependency, Global Governance 8(4): 44366. Wilkins, J. and J. Waters (2000) Current Discourse on New Technologies in Development Communication, Media Development 1: 5760. Yau, Y.Z. (2004) The New Imperialism and Africa in the Global Electronic Village, Review of African Political Economy 31(99): 1129.

Veva Leye is a research assistant of the Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) and a member of the Working Group Film and Television Studies at the Department of Communication Studies, Ghent University, Belgium. She is preparing a PhD on UNESCOs policies on international communication from 1975 until 2005. Address: Department of Communication Studies, Korte Meer 7-9-11, 9000 Gent, Belgium. [email: veva.leye@ugent.be]

Downloaded from mcs.sagepub.com at CHRIST COLG on January 9, 2013