Data visualization: situating Korea in the global information revolution:

Beginning this year, I'm planning to add material to this blog that directs readers to big data and data visualization tools that can be helpful in understanding Korea's experience of the information society.  One of these tools is the Global Internet Filtering Map published by the Open Net Initiative (ONI).  The graphic below illustrates one of the four different interactive maps available at the ONI site, this won illustrating patterns in filtering of conflict and security-related information. (click to see a full size version of the graphic.)

The Open Net Initiative is a collaborative partnership of three institutions, including the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard that aims to investigate, expose and analyze Internet filtering and surveillance practices in a credible and non-partisan fashion. For further detail, read the information at this link.
The ONI publishes interactive, online maps that illustrate four different types of internet filtering.

• Political -- Content that expresses views in opposition to those of the current government, or is related to human rights, freedom of expression, minority rights, and religious movements.
• Social -- Content related to sexuality, gambling, and illegal drugs and alcohol, as well as other topics that may be socially sensitive or perceived as offensive.
• Conflict & Security -- Content related to armed conflicts, border disputes, separatist movements, and militant groups.
• Internet Tools -- Web sites that provide e-mail, Internet hosting, search, translation, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephone service, and circumvention methods.

If the above information has piqued your interest, I recommend going to the ONI site and examining their data for individual countries or regions.  For each country, the mapping data is accompanied by a thorough summary of background details.  The web site also contains a link to herdict.org, that allows citizens from anywhere in the world to report web blockages wherever and whenever they occur.

Reactions to proposed "super ministry" for future, creativity and science

As might be expected, there is a public debate taking place in Korea these days over the government reorganization proposals announced earlier this week by the incoming administration of President-elect Park Geun-hye.  Equally unsurprising is that one big topic in the debate centers on the proper approach to ICT policy in this era of the networked information economy.

• Members of the Korea Communications Commission, one in particular, are not happy at what amounts to a demotion of that commission's responsibilities.  As reported by The Korea Times, it will continue to have ICT-sector regulatory responsibilities, but policymaking and strategies for industry growth in the sector will become part of the new "super ministry," yet to receive its official English name, that will be responsible for future creation of science, including ICT.
• Many people at the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE) are no doubt unhappy because the proposed new super ministry would take over several functions currently assigned to the MKE, which will revert to its pre-Lee Myung Bak administration role as Ministry of Industry Trade and Resources (Energy).
• As noted in the previous post (below), people who argued for restoration of the Ministry of Information and Communication are unhappy because  they perceive ICT-policy being handled at the Vice-minister level under the new super ministry.

The national assembly will need to approve the proposed governmental changes, so the current debates and discussions may have some impact on the final shape of the new government.  However, it is highly likely that the new "super ministry" will emerge, as it was one of the central campaign pledges made last Fall by candidate Park Geun-hye.  The graphic below, published by The Hankyoreh,  may help a bit to understand the forthcoming changes (click to see a full-size version).

As to the ultimate shape of the new super ministry and its relationship to ICT policy and regulation, I have several observations.   First, the debates over restructuring need to agree on a common concept or understanding of digital convergence.   In fact, convergence is a much broader, multi-faceted and complex subject than just the convergence of telecommunications and information technology, on the one hand, with broadcasting, on the other.  Some of the public statements being made these days seem to reflect limited conceptions of convergence.  However, the reason for including ICT policy in the purview of the new super ministry is that these new digital computing and communications technologies are what economists call "general purpose technologies" that pervade all industries and segments of the economy.

Second, the inclusion of (창조, the Korean word for "create" or "make") in the new ministry's title is significant in that one of the major challenges for future ICT policy, broadly conceived, is to help Korea move away from its heavy dependence on hardware manufacturing and export and toward greater involvement with software and content-based services. 

Finally, while some have argued that incorporate of ICT policymaking in the new super ministry under the leadership of a vice minister does not give adequate emphasis or prominence to this area of policy, there is another perspective that needs to be considered.   Reportedly, the reason that ICT policy is being included in the proposed new Ministry is that President elect Park Geun-hye feels strongly that ICT should be integrated with and not separated from the nation's overall science and technology policy.   This is in line with the need for a broad understanding and general agreement about what digital convergence and the information revolution is all about.  

More on the "Future, Creative, Science" Ministry 미래창조과학부

There is big news circulating today in Korea after yesterday's announcement by the incoming administration of President-elect Park Geun-hye that it will change the existing government structure of fifteen full and two lower level ministries to seventeen full and three lower level ministries.  The changes, which require approval by the National Assembly, could potentially have a profound effect on the nation's approach to ICT policy.

A powerful new ministry, which has not yet received its official English designation, incorporates the key words future, creation( or create, make), and science in its Korean title (미래창조과학부)  As noted in my previous post, the government should get good advice when it designates the official English name, because a literal translation will simply not do.  So far I've seen it referred to in the local English language press as "Ministry of Creativity and Science," "Ministry on the Future, Creativity and Science," and other variations.  As reported by The Joongang Daily, the new ministry will oversee ICT policies with a Vice Minister to be appointed in this area.

Some are still arguing that the new government should restore something like the former Ministry of Information and Communication.  For example, the Donga Ilbo yesterday wrote that  it was regrettable "  ... that a vice minister for the future, creativity and science ministry will take charge of ICT rather than a separate ministry to be established. ICT is a massive bombshell of future business that will transform the maps of all industries, including shopping, education, medicine and energy, by integrating with the smart revolution. Korea is believed to need a ministry exclusively in charge of ICT affairs that can predict changes, prepare the country for such changes and provide necessary support, and that can give opinions and suggestions based on professional insight and a sense of responsibility to the Cabinet and the National Assembly."

More on this issue as plans for the new government structure are finalized.

A "Future and Creative Science Ministry" (미래창조과학부) for Korea

Korea is in the midst of a process that takes place following every presidential election, which involves the preparation of final plans for the reorganization of government.  This frequently involves the reshuffling of cabinet-level ministries and other agencies, often based on public pledges made during the election campaign.

One of President-elect Park Geun-hye's prominent campaign promises was to establish a new Ministry, called the 미래창조과학부 in Korean, and which has been variously and awkwardly translated into English by local papers.   So far the best translations I've seen is "Ministry of the Future and Creative Science,"  as used in an article in The Korea Times.   I hope that the new government will get good advice before finalizing the official English title of the new ministry, to avoid any awkwardness, as occurred with the naming of the current Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE).

As discussed in a recent editorial in the Joongang Daily, are the subject of much discussion and lobbying these days.  The stakes are high and the outcome relates to the paper I'll be presenting next week at the PTC13 Conference, as noted in an earlier post.  I'll be following the Korean and English papers closely in the coming weeks as the shape of the new government and its implications for national ICT and digital convergence policies becomes clear.

WCIT-12 , perceptions, and the future of internet governance

The December meeting of the World Council on International Telecommunications (WCIT 12) ended in   a state of disarray that was portrayed in mainstream western media as a blow to future international agreement on internet governance.  For example, The Guardian published an article headlined "Dark clouds remain over the future of internet governance."  However, as Professor Milton Mueller of Syracuse university pointed out in a blog post on the Internet Governance site, WCIT 12 may have been derailed more because of what he calls "ITU phobia" than for substantive reasons actually affecting governance and the operation of the internet.

It is well known that China, Russia and certain other countries in the Asia-Pacific region would like to see governments in control of the internet.  The map to the left, published along with the article in The Guardian, shows the breakdown of votes. (click to see a full-size version)  However, it is worth questioning why South Korea voted for the treaty while Japan, India, the Philippines, Australia, and New Zealand did not.  Perceptions are important, and many observers might have expected that the nation with the world's most advanced and extensive broadband networks would have voted the other way, simply to avoid any confusion about whether it favors a free and open internet.