16 Nov 2025 Independent media, the WSIS+20 review process, and Public Digital Infrastructure

Anna Oosterlinck

Independent journalism is under attack. The Committee to Protect Journalists reports that 2024 has been the deadliest year for journalists in the past three decades. ARTICLE 19 reports that 27 countries experienced decline in media freedom in the past year alone; over the past decade, 6.2 billion people living in 99 countries experienced declining media freedoms. Around the world, democracy is under siege with 72% of the world population living in autocracies as of March 2025.

These are stark numbers at a time when the world needs independent public interest media more than ever. Independent journalists investigate and share information on issues of public interest, so that the public is informed and able to effectively participate in political, economic, and cultural life so that democracy thrives. Accurate, reliable and relevant information is key to addressing polarisation in society, holding governments to account, countering dis- and misinformation, and ensuring transparent, safe, and inclusive public debate.

Today, most of us get our news online, often from social media platforms, traditional media companies, and others. Combined with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, this digital ecosystem is rapidly and constantly evolving, increasingly flooding us with disinformation, fake news and manipulated content. It has become very difficult to know what’s true and accurate, and what is manifestly false or fabricated. Prominent journalist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Ressa said we live in “an information Armageddon”. She stated “[W]ithout facts, you can’t have truth; without truth, you can’t have trust. Without these three, you can have no shared reality.” This goes right to the heart of the challenges we face across the globe when navigating our information ecosystem. How can we resolve any problems, let alone see eye to eye, when we don’t share the same reality?

Facing up to the challenges

You might wonder how we can face those challenges head on. First, we need to acknowledge there is a web of myriad complex, multi-layered, and intersecting forces shaping the information ecosystem. Independent journalism alone cannot resolve all those. Second, media actors are themselves under threat of surveillance capitalism, opaque algorithmic governance systems, declining advertising revenues, market concentration, censorship, and erosion of trust. In other words, there is not one easy or single solution. But part of the answer may very well lie with a UN agenda called the World Summit on Information Society.

Let’s go back in time. Twenty years ago, UN Member States came together and decided they wanted to build a people-centric, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society where everyone can create, access, utilise and share information. This unique UN Summit, commonly referred to as the World Summit on Information Society, or WSIS, has resulted in a set of technology neutral commitments, including championing media pluralism, diversity, and independence, and access to trustworthy information.

Twenty years on, UN Member States are currently undertaking a review of all WSIS commitments. In 2025, the WSIS+20 review, is happening against the backdrop of a very different world. It is an incredibly vast and wide-ranging review process: it touches on how technologies intersect with sustainable development; and what norms and structures are needed for global Internet and digital technology governance.

The review process is likely to consider newer challenges such as governance of AI technologies; as well as how human rights – including the rights to freedom of expression and opinion, data protection and privacy – may be mainstreamed throughout the WSIS commitments, and in what ways multistakeholder governance of the Internet and digital technologies could be reinforced. These are stunningly consequential questions which need to be addressed in the next few months as the review process concludes by the end of this year.

Simply put, the future of the Internet is on the line. Will we have a free, open, global, inclusive, safe, accessible, and interoperable Internet at the end of it? Or are we staring down the barrel of an increasingly government-controlled Internet, fragmented across regions and countries, which could lead to exclusion of whole groups and communities, reinforcing of existing inequalities, censorship of lawful speech online, and disregard of privacy and data protection? To say the stakes are high, is an understatement.

ARTICLE 19 has been advocating extensively to promote a WSIS anchored in universal human rights, to advance the multistakeholder approach to Internet and digital governance, and to strengthen the original WSIS vision and its institutions including the Internet Governance Forum.

The WSIS+20 review clearly matters to public interest media and journalists. The original WSIS aimed to foster diverse, independent and resilient media ecosystems, and to strengthen independent journalism and public interest media to provide access to relevant, timely, local, multilingual, and fact-based information. These original commitments need to be strengthened.

In addition, we need to think outside of the box. At the WSIS High Level Event in July 2025, Mira Milosevic, Executive Director of the Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD), and I did exactly that. During a session entitled “Between Free Market and Public Digital Infrastructure: Intersections of Media Viability and Public Interest Journalism”, we sought to connect distinct conversations and concepts to figure out how to reclaim the digital space for journalism, and reassert its role as a public good in the digital age.

Two reflections are needed in advance before delving deeper. First, it’s important to note that the world has not yet agreed on one comprehensive definition of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI).  There is currently an ongoing lively discussion as to what it means and how and for what aims it should be utilised. This will also look differently depending on the region or community you live in – and I’m not seeking to resolve those issues here.

Second, the term ‘public’ in Digital Public Infrastructure, in my interpretation, does not necessarily mean the infrastructure is wholly state or government owned or run, but rather that the infrastructure is built in the public interest, with public oversight and to advance shared public values. One could talk about Public Digital Infrastructure, stressing the ‘public’ first – where all stakeholders co-design its systems and governance so they are equitable, respect the needs and rights of all persons, and embrace diverse voices including from vulnerable and overlooked groups.

If we (re-)imagine Public Digital Infrastructure (PDI) in this way, we need to be clear on its goals. We need human rights respecting, resilient, safe, inclusive and interoperable PDI to promote inclusive connectivity and civic participation. This PDI needs to mitigate potential risks, such as multiple and intersecting challenges related to exclusion, discrimination, surveillance and privacy, and it needs to adapt to the contextual realities on the ground. We need human-centred digital solutions catering to people’s needs, in consultation with those affected. There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution: any PDI needs to be carefully tailored to different digital markets and business models, and across different regions, countries and communities. We also need independent, democratic, transparent and public oversight.

Respect for human rights, equality, the rule of law and accountability

Finally, we will need to move away from the prevailing economic model based on value extraction through surveillance capitalism and monetisation of people’s data, that is based on centralised monopoly power, where a handful of Big Tech control key layers and markets of the current digital infrastructure. Ultimately, we need to achieve a model where respect for human rights, equality, the rule of law and accountability comes first. We need to repurpose and design data and digital infrastructure to serve the public interest – a ‘people-first digital ecosystem’. This version of PDI would reframe public interest journalism as civic infrastructure, going beyond just content, and strengthening its essential role in democratic processes.

This is a tall order and not something that can happen overnight. Experts all over the world are thinking and talking about how to make this a reality in the longer term. The WSIS does not at present contain specific guidance on the concept of DPI or PDI. More recently, in 2024, the Global Digital Compact (GDC), adopted by all UN Member States by consensus, stated that “resilient, safe, inclusive and interoperable digital public infrastructure has the potential to deliver services at scale and increase social and economic opportunities for all”. It also recognised “there are multiple models of DPI, and that each society will develop and use shared digital systems according to its specific priorities and needs… with the participation of all stakeholders”. It is likely that, at this point in time, the WSIS+20 review will not go much further, if at all, then the GDC commitments, considering the extremely challenging geopolitical dynamics permeating the review process. One important step forward was recently taken by the Freedom Online Coalition. They launched the Rights-Respecting Digital Public Infrastructure Principles at the Tallinn Digital Summit in October 2025. These principles aim to advance human rights-respecting, resilient, safe, inclusive and interoperable DPI to promote inclusive connectivity and civic participation.

That said, the WSIS+20 review calls for your urgent attention today. The review process is now in its final stages. There are still various ways to engage: talk to your government so they can represent your perspectives in their national positions during the negotiations of the final Outcome Document, participate in the stakeholder consultations on 14 November to share your views on the zero draft of the Outcome Document, and join coalitions of civil society, technical community, academia, and private sector (for example, the Global Digital Rights Coalition for WSIS). You can always verify on this website what the options for engagement are and these include consultations with stakeholders and sending in written inputs.

As a starting point, consider the following minimum suggestions:

• Recommend the WSIS is anchored in international human rights law and explicitly reaffirms all fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression and opinion, rights to data protection and privacy, rights to equality and non-discrimination, and gender equality.
• Advocate for fortifying and expanding an inclusive, human rights-based and human-centric multi-stakeholder governance model of Internet and broader digital governance.
• Push for genuine inclusion and participation of all stakeholders throughout the WSIS architecture: underrepresented regions, vulnerable and overlooked groups and communities, under siege civil society activists, and journalists and media workers.
• Emphasise the important role of independent, diverse and pluralistic media for a healthy information ecosystem.
• Above all, take a moment to pause today. Consider recent geo-political shifts. Talk to your family, friends, colleagues, and communities. Think of Maria Ressa’s words: we need facts, truth and trust, to have a shared reality. If we don’t have that shared reality, we cannot solve existential problems such as climate change, gender inequality, systemic discrimination, mass migration, or economic disparities. We cannot have democracy or rule of law. So, stand up today and make your voice heard.

Anna Oosterlinck is currently Senior Advisor on Global Advocacy with ARTICLE 19, leading on multilateral and multistakeholder advocacy engagement at the global level. Before that, she worked as Head of UN, leading ARTICLE 19’s advocacy with the UN on freedom of expression and related rights, online and offline. She served twice at the Permanent Mission of Belgium to the UN in NY during Belgium’s membership of the Security Council: as Senior Political Advisor leading on the Horn of Africa in 2019-20, and as Sanctions Expert in 2007-2008.  She was appointed by the UN Secretary General as the Human Rights Expert on the UN Security Council mandated Panel of Experts for South Sudan (2015-2018). She has worked on peacekeeping finance at the UN Secretariat, on sustainable development and humanitarian response at Save the Children UK, and on international trade for the Flemish government. She holds a Master of Laws and M.A in International Relations. She has worked in South Sudan, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania, DRC, Niger, Haiti, Peru, USA, and UK. LinkedIn profile.