Letters to the Editor
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

‘Sandra Feldman’
The New York Sun’s obituary and editorial on Sandra Feldman’s passing gave a full and admiring portrait. Her support for real educational reforms and strong stand against tyranny were well noted [Stephen Miller, “Sandra Feldman,” September 20, 2005].
One addendum should be included. Feldman was a “nuts and bolts” person as a union leader. Those of us on the front lines saw her immediate response to daily school problems. She was genuinely angered by unilateral and unfair administrative grade alteration, lack of basic supplies in bathrooms, repairs that were indefinitely delayed in classrooms, and chapters not permitted to exercise contractual provisions.
Feldman took such details to heart and acted swiftly when informed. Her concern for students and teachers was manifest. We will remember her!
HERB JURIST
Freeport, N.Y.
Mr. Jurist is a retired chapter leader of the United Federation of Teachers.
‘Trouble Ahead’
Richard Lessner’s “Trouble Ahead” misrepresents the United Nations’ work on the Internet [Opinion, September 26, 2005].
First, the Working Group on Internet Governance was established following an agreement by all member states, including the United States, to ask a group of independent experts to identify the issues regarding Internet governance and propose possible actions.
Thus, the group’s report is not the work of “UN bureaucrats” but rather of independent experts from business, governments, and academia, including from the USA, and from the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (or ICANN), which, by the way, does not “manage” the Internet, but only one aspect of it, domain names.
The working group’s findings reflect the views of its 40 members, not those of the United Nations.
Second, the group’s report did not recommend anything like a “tax scheme to fund Internet governance,” a treaty or convention on Internet governance, or relegate the private sector to “mere onlooker status.”
In fact, the report emphasizes the importance of the so-called “multi-stakeholder approach,” based on cooperation among governments, the private sector, civil society, and the academic and technical communities.
The report argues that it is very difficult for one stakeholder alone to address global issues like Internet stability, cyber-crime, spam, or freedom of expression.
International cooperation is needed to develop a response and to help the 5 billion people who are currently not connected to benefit from the Internet and information technologies.
The purpose of the report is to facilitate negotiations for the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society in November.
It was an effort to get stakeholders from around the globe thinking and talking about how we can best benefit from this vital and invaluable media, not some sinister UN plot to “take over” the Internet.
No decision on the subjects raised in the report can be taken without the United States.
SHASHI THAROOR
Under-Secretary-General For Communications And Public Information
United Nations
Manhattan
Richard Lessner Replies:
I would merely invite anyone to read the Working Group on Internet Governance report for himself at www.wgig.com and judge whether my characterizations are accurate.
Three of the four proposed models of global Internet governance envision various levels of multi-national government control. Moreover, it is a difference without a distinction to suggest this is not a UN initiative.
The World Summit on the Information Society and the WGIG operate under UN auspices. To quote directly from the report, “WGIG was set up by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.”
The issue of taxation is implicit throughout the report in regard to management and connectivity costs, subsidization of the developing countries access to the Internet, international regulation of commerce, etc.
Yet Section 78 of the WGIG report is entirely devoted to “Interconnection Costs” including “financing mechanisms … to provide funding for initiatives that advance connectivity, Internet exchange points (IXPs) and local content for developing countries.”
When a bureaucrat talks about “financing mechanisms,” you can be assured he’s talking about taxes.
Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.