 So, let me just introduce you the context and also introduce you to the Internet Assessment Framework, which is called Internet Legal Society Indicators. So, and also the relevance of applying that in the context of Asia Pacific but also Southeast Asia. So, this is based on the finding of the UNESCO's World Chain Report on Freedom of Expression and Media Development. UNESCO released every two years a World Chain Report on Freedom of Expression and Media Development. And now we also release a regional chapter by five regions under the United Nations. And so Asia Pacific is one of them. And the World Chain Report really provides some interesting trends according to four perspectives. One is the media freedom. The second one is the media pluralism. The third one is media independence and the safety of journalists. We provide those, these overview in order to, you know, to monitor the situation of freedom of expression and media development in the United States. And because UNESCO is the UN agency that was mandated in this area. So, let me just give you some of, some of the key trends in terms of freedom of expression and media development in the regions. But this is also, this is specific to the region. You will see that some of the finding also apply also to the case of Thailand. So, in terms of media freedom, you know, we have seen an increase in the right to access to information. You know, four days ago on the 28th of September UNESCO celebrated the International Day for Universe and Access to Information. And we see that more than half of the member states have now enacted a law to provide access to information, to public information to the citizens. But this is, this is a good improvement and progress in terms of the right to seek and receive information. But we also see, unfortunately, more and more restriction in the other, in the other part of the right of freedom of expression, which is the right to impart the information. And this is based on basically on the, you know, restrictive laws such as, you know, there's majesty, defanation, cyber security, Brazilian law or computer crime art. Which is, which leads to the same censorship and more and more restrictions in terms of freedom of expression, especially online. When we look at the second perspective in terms of media purism, we see that there is an increase in terms of availability of digital platform, but also in terms of content, you know, we have more and more content generated by the users themselves, which is positive in terms of purism and availability of information that people can access. But on the other side, we also have this trend of information disorder, which is, you know, which is, which is a global trend, but also very specific in our region such as, you know, fake news. And we know that in Asia is a fake news is a mainly propaganda for political reason rather than for economical or anti-scientific reasons. And we also read to some more restrictive regulations of the online content such as, you know, internet shutdown, internet filtering, online surveillance, etc. In terms of media independence, media independence has been sweetened through the exercise of political control, especially, you know, at the time of elections. We have seen that in some countries in Southeast Asia and more and more content is being controlled and regulated by the government in terms of licensing, you know, content regulation, ownership of some media, which we have seen, for example, a lot in Cambodia. And in terms of, finally, this is the force under the, in terms of the safety of journalists, the safety of journalists is more and more written online, especially, you know, there are a lot of journalists, online journalists and bloggers who are targeted and who are killed. In prison, based on the legislation such as, you know, cyber security to regulate online content, internet surveillance, etc. And again, you know, it's not the traditional journalists who operate in the media who are the target of those respective law but it's mainly citizen journalists or bloggers. There is a very interesting case, for example, in Vietnam, where, you know, the Vietnamese law protects journalists working in traditional media, but online journalists are not protected. So they are the main target and victims of online harassment, restriction, imprisonment, etc. So these are the key trends that UNESCO monitor worldwide. And based on that, in 2015, UNESCO's member state agreed on an internet ecosystem that is required for an internet, for a healthy internet ecosystem, for an internet that works for everybody, not only for those who are in power such as who are in the, you know, authorities, big private sectors, but for an internet that provides opportunities for anyone to find a benefit to access to the information that they need and to also grow their own businesses. So it's called internet universality and it is based on basically on four key principles for an internet, which is an internet which is based on human rights, which is open, which is accessible and which is multistakeholder driven. So multistakeholder driven means that any decision relating to the regulation of internet has to be taken in consultation with all the stakeholders like these groups coming from different backgrounds in order to meet the needs of everyone. And so, based on the four principles UNESCO has started to develop a framework for accessing the internet and we have conducted an important number of consultations with experts, with the government, online consultation, physical consultation, etc. in different parts of the world over the past three years, and we came out from, we came out of this consultation, we produce what we call the internet universality indicators, which is actually the set of over, so exactly 303 indicators, which document with each of those wrong X principles. I forgot to mention that X is about the crosscutting indicators, which is about some indicators which is common to the all four principles. And all these indicators are divided into six categories, 25 teams, 124 questions. And as you can see, there are some booklet of internet universality indicators, which are available in these rooms. And so the objective of these indicators, they serve as an international standard to access the internet development in a country. So it's helped to develop a clear and substantive understanding of the national internet landscape and policies. It can be used also to assess the gap between those international very high level standards of the internet and the national internet policy and in which areas we can make an improvement and formulate some policy recommendations and practical initiative to improve the internet ecosystem. So these are the basic key thematic areas. I know that Simon is going to introduce each of the categories, so I will not describe that in the details, but actually we have six categories. So right, off next accessibility with the stakeholder participation. And in addition to that, we have some contextual indicators and some crosscutting indicators. And yes, I apologize for the visibility of the slide. We still use the opportunity at UNESCO, Microsoft Technologies, when we put this on the open office, there is a change of the format. But actually this is how we UNESCO used to conduct the assessment. We first established what we call the emergency stakeholder advisory board, which comprises different segments of the internet actors in a country. So I see, you know, this group has a starting point for such an emergency stakeholder advisory board. Then we create a research team. We develop the research actual plan, data, data and data analysis and report writing recommendations that has to go through the national validation process. So yeah, this is a different event where we, you know, we introduced that framework and presented the internet assessment. So today the discussion here is about the national assessment of raw mix indicators in Thailand. Last year, when UNESCO finalized a set of indicators, we asked Art and Dr. Piro Muro from the Juvalongkorn University to do a pilot assessment and using those indicators in the case of Thailand and to see how we should improve the UNESCO's framework. So now that the framework is adopted, we are thinking about really applying those indicators in the case of Thailand. And of course, we are launching a call for interest for those stakeholders who wants to be, who would be interested to be part of the Meretic Stakeholder Advisory Committee and also who can also help us to fill the gaps in Thailand's data because we have the finding of the pilot report which are available and which will be presented later by Simon and Art. We still need to fill some data gaps and improve the analysis and format recommendations. So thank you very much for your attention. I stop here in terms of introducing the assessment framework and yes, I would like to hand over to you if you have any questions regarding the project that UNESCO is launching. Thank you. Yes, I'm sure that Thailand will have an opportunity to answer any of the questions you need to follow. So actually, Thailand is one of the three countries in which UNESCO did this pilot assessment. So Thailand, Brazil, Senegal, yes, completely different countries, different regions. Conducting the assessment, I mean a pilot project from that and then to get the result and then there are some recommendations to that sector of indicators. Has it been adopted and has it been applied to the next sector of indicators? Yes, so the pilot assessment was basically used to improve this international framework. It's made to have really practical view from the researchers about the applicability of some of the indicators which were now incorporated into the international framework. So now we are kind of doing a reverse exercise where we have this framework approved and we try to apply that completely to the case of Thailand. Like as well, this is not a kind of on-size, it's small countries kind of approach either. Because there are over 300 indicators, as you'll see it's selective. But also because there are so many in head of the ideas that will help bring out the character of the internet in Thailand which may be different from the character of the internet in other countries. And I'll say something about that. I think that some of the indicators is common. So whether we put that some groups of core indicators which can apply over the country and the others like the additional one which is customized for the sexist specific characters for this country. Would that be the greater? The indicator is 303 indicators in these two groups that might be applicable for all the countries. So we have some part that we can compare for this country and the other part is basically correct just for this country. Actually we are aiming to have, we have already have selected 100 core indicators which are UNESCO believe as a core to assess the internet in the countries. And so we are focusing on those key indicators to conduct the assessment. How often do we have to read this expertly, what are these indicators like in the years or what are the things that we plan to read specifically? So we are just starting this process for, but actually you know it's not so simple to apply the indicators. If you look at the question, the question is very specific and it's really a research project. So for the case we used to do some analysis based on media development indicators. This is something that is kind of follow up every two years. And in this way we can also I mean feed the world report of UNESCO on you know media and freedom of expressions. But depending on the country situations again you know in the country in transitions for example such as the case of Myanmar when you finish the assessment actually there are so many new laws coming in that you know we have to release the report very quickly and otherwise it's become quickly observed. So it really depends on the country situations but I think every two years is a good way for monitoring the situations. Yeah let me just add that I think the type of work we need to do in research like this is methodology driven also right. So actually in Thailand I'm speaking for Thailand and they have other agency that you know like that far and I the statistics office who are working a lot of indicators on these type of issues. So I think it's a good thing that we are here so that we understand you know how UNESCO international organizations are you know putting their focus on. And they're calling me to help us in order to identify ourselves and maybe do comparisons. But I understand this is the first time for UNESCO to put focus on this right on this process. So we can also give input on our landscape of digital literacy in Thailand as well right. And Simon would talk about that. So I think copyright is at 10.30. 10.15 but already raising them. Oh OK so yes so we can break until 10.30. And come back here at 10.30 so that we can present you the first finding of the assessment report in Thailand. Thank you very much.