Showing posts with label Kroes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kroes. Show all posts

Monday, December 19, 2011

Commissioner Kroes calling the talented Dr. Googleberg to the "crime scene internet"

Zum Thema Guttenberg/Kroes ist wahrscheinlich schon alles gesagt, aber eben noch nicht von allen. Auch mir war es wichtig, die Ernennung von Guttenberg zum Berater der Kommission für die "No Disconnect"-Strategie nicht unkommentiert zu lassen und ich habe dazu etwas - in englischer Sprache - auf content and carrier geschrieben, was ich ausnahmsweise hier einfach cross-poste:

It could have been the ultimate practical joke of this year.

Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission, appointed Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg "to promote internet freedom globally". According to her press release, this "appointment forms a key element of a new "No Disconnect Strategy" to uphold the EU's commitment to ensure human rights and fundamental freedoms are respected both online and off-line, and that internet and other information and communication technology (ICT) can remain a driver of political freedom, democratic development and economic growth."

But sadly, it is not a joke.

Guttenberg, who was briefly Germany's minister for economics and technology (Feb 2009 until Oct 2009) and then minister of defense (until 1 March 2011), fell from grace when it was revealed that he had plagiarized large chunks of his doctoral thesis. Internet activists set up a wiki and within a few weeks managed to publicly document that 94.4 (!)  percent of the pages in Guttenberg's thesis contained plagiarized text. Of course people made (and make) fun of Guttenberg, calling him "Googleberg" or "Doctor Copy & Paste", or promoting a "Guttenberg"-keyboard (for maximum efficiency, just Ctrl+C+V).Guttenberg, who had denied all allegations when he was first confronted ("absurd allegation"), had to resign, the university stripped him of his degree, and the state prosecutor started investigations. In May 2011, the university's investigation came to the conclusion that Guttenberg "had manifestly and gravely breached the standards of good scientific practice and had cheated with intent" (my translation, more information on the Guttenberg-case - in German - at the university's website). Not even a month ago, the state prosecutor came to the conclusion that Guttenberg had, with intent, committed criminal breaches of copyright in 23 counts, but closed the case after Guttenberg payed 20.000 Euro to a charity (press release of the state prosecutor's office, in German); this is a common way of dealing with petty crimes (misdemeanours) where there is no public interest in further prosecution (section 153a of the German Code of Criminal Procedure act).

Guttenberg is not repentant: just three weeks ago he published a book called "Vorerst gescheitert" ("failed for now"), consisting of a long interview with a German journalist. He again denied any intent to plagiarize; rather he argued that the copying was the "fatal result of a chaotic and unsystematic mode of work", having copied from the internet and then mixed it up due to using at least 80 floppy disks (!) and four different computers (more here, in German). The respected conservative daily FAZ commented: "Guttenberg has not lost his ability to talk nonsense".

Guttenberg has no relevant expertise in internet issues, at least no such expertise seems to be documented, and neither Kroes nor her spokesperson came up with any evidence that Guttenberg ever had any original ideas, did any research or even just was involved with specific internet-related issues. Many German commenters are heavily critical of Guttenberg's support for a German law which should block access to the internet in case of (suspected) child pornography; the relevant act was introduced when Guttenberg was minister of economics (but not by him) under the title "Zugangserschwerungsgesetz", which translates as "Act to make access [to the internet] more difficult"(!). The Act never came into force and is in the process of being formally repealed, after criticism not only by internet activists, but also by many law professors and constitutional scholars. Guttenberg defended the act and implicitely accused the critics of being against blocking of child pornography-websites (see a newspaper report here, in German).

Guttenberg's wife was involved in a TV-series called "Tatort Internet" ("Crime Scene Internet"), which tried to lure potential pedophiles into meeting underage girls and then exposed them on TV. Although the faces of the suspected pedophiles were not shown (or blurred), some of them could be identifed rather easily by TV-viewers. The series came under heavy criticism, for instance by the Minister of Justice who said "There is danger that innocent people are put in the pillory and the rule of law would be in a precarious situation. This is a high risk".

So, first of all, Guttenberg (just recently)
  • has been stripped of his degree because of intellectual dishonesty,
  • was found to have been a multiple copyright-infringer,
  • and admitted only as much as that he was out of his depths when dealing with computers and the internet
In addition, Guttenberg has no relevant expertise or experience in internet issues.

Kroes, who was aware of all this, nevertheless thought it fit to appoint Guttenberg as her adviser. When she announced it, it still sounded like an impressive job (and remember: it is supposed to be a key element of the strategy). In the press release it said that "Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg will liaise with Member States, third countries and NGOs which are committed to work in this area and advise on how to advance the strategy in a co-ordinated and effective manner." Kroes is further quoted with: "I want Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg to champion this cause with governments and NGOs and ensure it gets the attention, focus and support it deserves."

The reasons Kroes gave for this appointment are rather slim; pressed to justify her choice, she wrote:
"As he himself has acknowledged, if anyone understands the power of the internet, and its power to hold authorities to account, it is Karl-Theodor [Guttenberg]. Anyone who has worked with Karl-Theodor – and I myself have done so closely when he was German Economics Minister – would recognise his great political abilities. But what I also admire in him is his fresh and international outlook. [...]
If you are wondering why Karl-Theodor and not someone else, I would say that I am looking for talent, not saints. I am asking him to do an important job; nothing more, nothing less. I live in the future, not the past."
This indeed is rather troubling: Kroes is at once arguing that it is "an important job", and that "talent" - plus a "fresh and international outlook" - is all that Guttenberg is bringing to this job. And she also thinks that Guttenberg gained relevant experience in internet-related issues by having been exposed on a Website as a multiple intentional copyright-infringer who cheated with intent in his thesis (which, by the way, she describes in an interesting euphemism as being "not a saint").

I don't think the regular Commission services would employ anyone just for having "talent" (at least I have not yet seen a single concours of EPSO just checking for talent), and I doubt that an academic cheater who was stripped of his degree could pass the vetting process for any senior position within the Commission services. While I don't take offense with "forgiveness", the logic that Kroes claims is behind Guttenberg's appointment is severely flawed: I doubt that Vice-President of the Commission Reding would consider appointing a convicted criminal as an adviser on Justice affairs and then argue: "if anyone understands the power of law enforcement, it is XY, who served 10 years in jail".
After the initial reactions (I recommend taking look at the comments to Kroes' blog entry [and the German language version] and at the Kosmopolito-blog), the Commissioner retracted: in another blog entry she wrote: "There is no payment, no staff, no special treatment. He will be providing advice and assistance to me in a personal capacity. We will keep costs to a minimum, and I can assure you I’ll squeeze him for every good idea and every piece of feedback he has." Her spokesperson commented that "People need to keep this choice in perspective; it is just one element of the wider no disconnect strategy".

So we are left to wonder: is this an important job, including the task to liaise with governments and NGOs and thus to "champion a cause" - all of which would require a clear mandate, duties and responsibilities - or is it merely a rather vague invitation to a personal friend of the Commissioner to share a few ideas, just having the EU pay for a few trips? Kroes' spokesperson explicitely stated that Guttenberg will not be a special adviser (who are under certain obligations under staff regulations, and who come in a paid and an unpaid variety), so we do not know what kind of relationship this should be, what (if any)  mandate Guttenberg has, which (if any) staff regulations apply, which confidentiality agreements, etc. etc.

Personally, I am also deeply sceptical about unpaid advisers, because they either have to be quite rich to be able to fulfill their tasks or they are in effect paid by someone else who is not necessarily disclosed or lacks transparency (Guttenberg is working for a US-based lobbying organisation / "think-tank", which by the way is not registered in the EU transparency register). I don't buy into conspiracy theories, which also abound in the comments on Kroes's blog entries (ACTA, PNR, NATO, everything is mixed in, all forming part of a supposed greater story), to me all of this looks more like a new chapter to "The March of Folly".

The appointment of Guttenberg as an adviser (or whatever his position/function might turn out to be) not only severely discredits the whole No Disconnect-Strategy, it also shows an incredible lack of judgment by the Commissioner and her staff. Kroes stressed that Guttenberg was her choice and her idea, and she is at least to be commended for not trying to blame her (other) advisers for this abysmal decision.

Kroes could have backed down: she could have apologized for not having thought this through, for having been distracted by more important issues and for not having paid enough attention to who should take this job. And then she could have cancelled the appointment of Guttenberg, to present a true expert as a new special adviser. I even waited a few days before writing this blog entry, because I thought Kroes might find a way out and get rid of Guttenberg. But instead of limiting the damage already done, Kroes chose to widen it and to defend Guttenbergs's choice.

Obviously Kroes thinks that there are only some particularly concerned German internet activists who produce nothing more than a storm in a (German) teacup (at least that is what the comments of her spokesperson on the Kosmopolito-blog said, for instance here).

I do not share this view.

As evidenced - among others - by this blog post, there are people outside of Germany who do not believe in the wisdom of appointing a disgraced former politician to be an adviser in a field where he is not an expert and does not command the trust of the people he should "liaise" with. Critics include not only some hotheaded activists, but also many highly reputable academics, because appointing Guttenberg can only be seen as a deliberate provocation of the academic community and its values. This appointment will come back to haunt Kroes in any future decision she will take: as she showed such lack of judgment in appointing Guttenberg, how can she be trusted to show more judgment and take reasoned decisions in other matters?

To sum it up: The appointment of Guttenberg was wrong, and the decision to stick with him casts a serious doubt on Kroes' overall power of judgment.


PS: Kroes asked that we should judge "Karl-Theodor [Guttenberg] ultimately on the quality of the advice he provides", which calls for that advice to be published in full (because otherwise how could we judge it?). If published, I am sure that there will be a wiki devoted to scrutinising this advice.

Sunday, September 04, 2011

Wiklileaks-"Enthüllungen": Kroes suchte angeblich Hilfe, Erwin Pröll ist mächtig und Ingrid Thurnher einflussreich, ...

Wirklich dramatische Enthüllungen lassen sich den zuletzt veröffentlichten "cables" nicht entnehmen. Dass etwa EU-Kommissarin Neelie Kroes die Hilfe des amerikanischen Botschafters gesucht habe, steht zwar so in der Überschrift einer Depesche, doch deren Inhalt lässt nicht wirklich einen Hilferuf erkennen, sondern eher ein höfliches Bekunden von Interesse auch an amerikanischen Erfahrungen. Und dass Kroes Zweifel an der Unabhängigkeit mancher Chefs der nationalen Regulierungsbehörden hegt, ist ebensowenig überraschend wie dass sie diesen Regulierungsbehörden - stets höflich formulierend - "varying levels of competence" zubilligt.

Andere "Enthüllungen" sind etwa, dass man in Österreich recht einfach eine Telekom-Lizenz bekommt, und dass die in Niederösterreich 2005 vorgeschlagene "Handymastenabgabe" von der Bundesregierung zwar hätte beeinsprucht werden können, dass damit aber aus politischen Überlegungen nicht zu rechnen war; erklärend fügte die Botschaft hinzu "(Note: The Lower Austrian Governor, Erwin Proell, is a powerful figure in Chancellor Schuessel's People's Party. End Note)".

Aus dem Medienbereich hat mich interessiert, ob es nähere Informationen zu den Vorgängen rund um die Bestellung der OSZE-Beauftragten für die Freiheit der Medien gibt. Dabei stößt man auf die - auch bereits bekannte - Information, dass Russland gegen den Widerstand der anderen OSZE-Staaten bis zuletzt auf seinem Kandidaten Mikhail A. Fedotov bestanden hatte. Nicht bekannt war mir bislang, welche weiteren KandidatInnen es gab und wie der frühere Beauftragte Miklos Harazsti über diese dachte:
"Seven nominations were presented by the October 8 deadline to replace Hungarian Miklos Harazsti for this important and highly visible OSCE position in March 2010: Dr. Mikhail A. Fedotov (Russia - also a candidate in 2004); Ms. Aleksandra Joksimovic (Serbia); Ms. Dunja Mijatovic (BiH); Dr. Rubina Mohring (Austria); Mr. Oleg Panfilov (Georgia); Mr. Ognian Vesselinov Zlatev (Bulgaria); and Mr. Stephen Whittle, OBE (UK). Privately, Harazsti told Charge Fuller that four of the seven have the necessary experience and profile - BiH, Georgia, Bulgaria, and the UK - but that the best candidate in his view is the Bosnian. The Mission has gotten very high recommendations for her from other quarters as well, whereas even the UK ambassador has indicated his government may not push their candidate - former head of the BBC who has questioned whether he would even have to move to Vienna or work full-time - too hard." (Quelle)
Dass Stephen Whittle eher an einer Art Nebenjob interessiert war, den er von London aus hätte miterledigen können, war seiner Kandidatur also nicht wirklich zuträglich, auch wenn er beim folgenden Hearing, bei dem nur mehr vier KandidatInnen auf der shortlist standen, nicht schlecht abgeschnitten hat:
"No candidate fell flat in the Q&A sessions, however nothing shook U.S. convictions that the best candidate is Dunja Mijatovic, the ethnic Serb from Bosnia-Herzegovina. Both the UK's Whittle and Russia's Fedotov garnered increased support from strong showings. After twice simply lecturing pS [participating States] on the role of the RFoM [Representative on Freedom of the Media], Austria's Dr. Rubina Mohring's odds seemed to have slipped somewhat from her earlier position." (Quelle)
Wie es ausging, ist bekannt; entscheidend war, dass Kasachstan Russland schließlich überzeugen konnte, seinen Kandidaten zurückzuziehen (Quelle). [Disclosure: da ich Dunja Mijatovic 2003 für ihre erste internationale Funktion - stellvertretende Vorsitzende der EPRA (European platform of regulatory authorities) - vorgeschlagen habe, bin ich nicht ganz unbefangen - aber zu den "other quarters", aus denen der US-Diplomat seine weiteren Empfehlungen erhielt, gehöre ich nicht, zumindest nicht wissentlich. Hätte mich aber jemand gefragt, hätte auch ich Dunja empfohlen].

Zum Abschluss ein eher skurriles Fundstück mit gewissem Medienbezug: in der von der US Botschaft Wien im Februar 2007 zusammengestellten Liste der einflussreichsten Frauen Österreichs kommt nach Ursula Plassnik, Maria Berger, Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek, Gabriele Burgstaller und Brigitte Ederer, und noch vor Claudia Schmied: "Ingrid Thurnher, Anchorwoman, Austrian Television News". Auf Uschi Fellner hat die Botschaft offenbar vergessen.

PS: aus dem Bereich Datenschutz ist noch das bemerkenswerte Eingeständnis des Botschaftspersonals interessant, nicht genügend über die vorgeschlagenen Abkommen und das anwendbare Recht zu wissen, um auf Kritik antworten zu können (anders als die österreichischen Gesprächspartner, die zumeist detaillierte Kenntnisse über die US/EU-Verhandlungen hätten). Von den handelnden Regierungsmitgliedern wird die (damalige) Innenministerin Fekter als "a law-and-order politician with a tendency to launch not fully vetted initiatives" beschrieben.

Monday, February 08, 2010

"Unter der Fuchtel von Frau Kroes" - Doris Pack, MEP, verteidigt die Kultur

Doris Pack ist Vorsitzende des Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung im Europaparlament und Mitglied im Fernsehrat des ZDF (staatsfern wie alle*). Von Neelie Kroes, bisher Wettbewerbskommissarin, demnächst Kommissarin für die digitale Agenda, dürfte sie nicht allzuviel halten, das hat sie bei ihrer Rede anlässlich der Konferenz "Future or Funeral - Dual System at a Crossroads" in Warschau am 23. Jänner 2010 (zu dieser Veranstaltung schon hier) deutlich gemacht. Schon im vorbereiteten Redemanuskript ihres Vortrags "Das duale System im Rundfunk: Was kann/soll Europa tun?" kritisierte sie, dass die Generaldirektion Wettbewerb der Kommission "oft ungeschickt bis arrogant und auch ideologisch argumentiert" habe. In ihren tatsächlichen Ausführungen - es gilt das gesprochene Wort - war sie noch eine Spur schärfer und erzählte voller Stolz, wie sie "Frau Kroes, die in den letzten fünf Jahren den Wettbewerb unter ihrer Fuchtel gehabt hat" im ersten Hearing im Parlament ausgebremst hat: "Meine Fragen und die Fragen der Kollegin Trautmann haben dazu geführt, dass sie noch länger Kandidatin blieb. Als sie [Kroes] dann zum zweiten Mal zu uns kam, hatten wir das Gefühl, sie hat verstanden."

Nun kann man das natürlich als politischen Schlagabtausch zwischen der konservativen Abgeordneten Pack und der liberalen Kommissarin Kroes sehen, aber wenn man das Video des Hearings von Neelie Kroes ansieht, dann muss man einräumen, dass die Kommissarin dabei tatsächlich nicht gut ausgesehen hat. Hier ein möglichst wortgetreues Transkript (Sprachen original) der zwei Fragen von Frau Pack und der Antworten der Kommissarin (im Video ab 18:04:24):
Doris Pack: Liebe Frau Kroes, der Kulturausschuss tritt seit Jahren für das spezifische europäische Regulierungsmodell des dualen Rundfunksystems ein, weil er der Ansicht ist, dass das die beste Garantie für Meinungsvielfalt und Meinungsbildung ist. Zu diesem System gehört ein starker staatsferner und entwicklungsfähiger öffentlich-rechtlicher Rundfunk, der den Bürgern technologieneutral seine Dienste anbietet. Was ist denn ihre Definition eines ausgeglichenen dualen Systems und welche Rolle spielt denn da Ihrer Meinung da drin die Public Service Media?
Herbert Reul (Vorsitzender): Frau Kroes - klare Frage, klare Antwort!
Neelie Kroes: It is a very clear question and we are aware that depending on the public broadcasting services we try to deal with principles all over the place the same, and tailor-made approaches; but in itself we should be quite clear, the definition has to be as clear as crystal, for otherwise we are not getting a real result out of our discussions. And what we did in the past in competition, in competition issues, was, I imagine, quite acceptable also for you, to find a way in which the diversity is still there and that is a big issue, that is one of those issues that we are fond of in Europe and that is still a competitive market in which at the end of the day the consumer is able to pick out what he or she is preferring.
Doris Pack: War nicht sehr befriedigend, aber ich komme noch zu einer zweiten Frage: Ich möchte gerne zur Konvention, der UNO-Konvention, zur UNESCO-Konvention [gemeint ist wohl das Übereinkommen über den Schutz und die Förderung der Vielfalt kultureller Ausdrucksformen] kommen. Ich entsinne mich, dass Sie in dieser Frage eine andere Meinung vertreten haben als die Mehrheit der Barroso-Kommission. Sie waren gegen eine innere Verbindlichkeit dieser Konvention. Haben Sie sich inzwischen bekehrt und glauben Sie nicht auch, dass dieses Instrument etwas ist, womit wir also grade die Kultur- und Medienpolitik in der Europäischen Union unterstützen und vorantreiben können?
Neelie Kroes: I am aware that ... I am not aware that there was such a split, but perhaps we can discuss that later. If you were asking with this portfolio and the culture past in which there is a close connection with the whole issue that is dealt with here, I think it is absolutely a must to keep that bridged for otherwise we are losing opportunities for also in the culture and the media field there are a lot of opportunities with this new digital agenda where we can take advantage of.
Alles klar? Wenn Kroes schon nichts sagen wollte, dann hätte es sie auch eleganter machen können, etwa so wie bei Sir Humphrey aus der legendären BBC-Serie "Yes Minister" (in diesem Video, von ca. 2:40 bis 3:30)

Jim Hacker: "When you give your evidence to the Think Tank, are you going to support my view that the Civil Service is over manned and feather-bedded, or not? Yes or no? Straight answer."
Sir Humphrey: "Well Minister, if you ask me for a straight answer, then I shall say that, as far as we can see, looking at it by and large, taking one thing with another in terms of the average of departments, then in the final analysis it is probably true to say, that at the end of the day, in general terms, you would probably find that, not to put too fine a point on it, there probably wasn't very much in it one way or the other. As far as one can see, at this stage."
Jim Hacker: "Is that Yes or No?"
Sir Humphrey: "Yes and no."
Jim Hacker: "Supposed you weren’t asked for a straight answer?"
Sir Humphrey: "Then I should play for time, Minister." [Textquelle hier]
*) An die Abgeordnete Pack dürfte Kommissarin Reding bei ihrer Rede über die "6 Mythen vom medienpolitischen Stammtisch" im Dezember 2008 ganz besonders gedacht haben, als sie nicht nur das Saarland (aus dem Pack stammt) als Epizentrum des Mythos von der geplanten Abschaffung der Rundfunkräte durch Brüssel ausgemacht, sondern auch darauf hingewiesen hat, dass einige Rundfunkräte "als hauptberufliche Mitglieder des Europäischen Parlaments regelmäßig die als Rundfunkräte erworbenen Kenntnisseaktiv in die europäische medienpolitische Debatte einbringen" (zu meiner "Übersetzung" dieser Rede siehe hier).