Who sets the rules of the internet? The decisions most users never notice

Imagine trying to register on a website, only to find that the system won’t accept your email address.  

The address is perfectly valid, but it contains characters from your native language that the developers didn’t account for.  

For non-English speaking users, it could mean losing access to a service, a customer, or an opportunity to earn a living. 

According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), approximately 6 billion people — 74 per cent of the world’s population — used the internet in 2025.  

Another 2.2 billion remained offline. Yet even among those who are connected, opportunities vary significantly. 

Who sets the rules of the internet for billions of people, and how much influence do those people have over the decisions that shape their digital opportunities? 

Internet access doesn’t guarantee equal opportunities 

Digital inclusion also means being able to participate in the digital environment safely and confidently. 

Consider a girl from a rural community who has been given internet access and taught how to use digital tools. On paper, the goal has been achieved.  

But if she doesn’t feel safe online, faces the risk of fraud, or lacks the confidence to use the internet for education and personal development, can we really say she has equal opportunities? c

Another example is a farmer whose value of the internet depends on whether he can find buyers, arrange the sale of his crops, and communicate in his native language.  

These examples reveal the limitations of traditional digital development indicators. 

Governments also need to assess how effectively people can use the internet for work, education, business, and accessing services.  

Developers of digital platforms and international standards, in turn, need to consider these needs from the earliest stages of designing technological solutions. 

Who has influence over global digital rules? 

The multistakeholder approach plays an important role in internet governance, bringing governments, technology companies, technical communities and civil society into decision-making processes.  

For example, ICANN coordinates key functions of the domain name system, international technical communities develop standards, governments establish legal requirements, and technology companies implement specific solutions in their products. 

But countries have very different capacities to participate in these processes. 

Developing international technical standards requires expertise, research resources, sustained participation in working groups, and strong institutions.  

Countries that are home to major technology companies and research centres have clear advantages. 

The Global South remains underrepresented in shaping the rules of the internet.  

This becomes particularly apparent when international decisions need to reflect the needs of people who speak different languages, have different income levels, and face different barriers to accessing technology. 

Nigeria is a telling example.  

It is Africa’s most populous country and has a thriving technology ecosystem. Fintech companies such as Paystack and Flutterwave were founded there and later expanded into international markets. 

However, the growth of a national technology industry does not automatically translate into a proportionate influence on international standard-setting.  

A country can develop successful digital products while remaining dependent on rules and infrastructure largely shaped beyond its borders. 

Another challenge is policy continuity. 

Inconsistent policies and weak institutions can mean that progress made under one government stalls when political leadership changes.  

Sometimes countries have to revisit stages they have already completed. 

This is particularly important for international digital governance. Participation in standards development can take years, while shifting government priorities can interrupt the accumulation of expertise and the implementation of decisions already made. 

Influence over global digital rules also depends on a country’s ability to build stable institutions capable of representing national interests across political cycles. 

When a technical standard determines access to opportunities 

Let’s return to the example of an email address that a website refuses to accept. 

Behind this problem lies a specific area of international standardisation known as Universal Acceptance.  

Its goal is to ensure that digital systems correctly process all valid domain names and email addresses, including internationalised addresses containing non-Latin characters. 

You might expect the modern internet to have solved this problem long ago.  

Yet ICANN continues to conduct dedicated studies assessing how well websites, applications, browsers, and email systems support these addresses. 

If a government platform cannot process valid user information, someone may face an obstacle when trying to access a public service. 

This issue is particularly relevant for countries with significant linguistic diversity.  

Hundreds of languages are spoken in Nigeria, and while many digital products are designed primarily for English speakers, the population’s needs are much broader. 

Universal Acceptance also addresses one part of the problem.  

Supporting internationalised email addresses and domain names does not, in itself, ensure that interfaces are fully translated or content is accessible.  

But without technical compatibility, even a well-localised service may remain inaccessible to some users. 

This example is particularly relevant for governments developing large-scale digital platforms.  

Technical requirements that seem secondary during development can ultimately determine who is able to use a system.  

That is why participation by different countries in international standard-setting matters in practical terms. 

A safer internet or more control? 

Artificial intelligence (AI) already makes it possible to create convincing deepfakes, automate fraudulent schemes, and spread disinformation at scale. 

Over the next decade, the internet may become more tightly controlled, partly because of advances in AI and the risks associated with them. 

This raises a broader question about control: who exercises it, what powers are they given, and how do their decisions affect users’ freedoms? 

According to Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalition, at least 313 deliberate internet shutdowns were recorded across 52 countries in 2025 — the highest number since monitoring began.  

Such restrictions affect access to information, business operations, and digital services, raising an important question: where is the line between ensuring security and restricting digital rights? 

According to ITU estimates, 96 per cent of people who remain offline live in low- and middle-income countries.  

These countries have the greatest potential for further expansion of the global internet, yet their influence over international digital rules remains limited. 

The rules of the internet are shaped long before users experience their consequences — when standards are developed, laws are passed, and digital products are designed.  

Whose interests are considered at these stages ultimately determines who can truly benefit from an internet that is accessible, safe, and open. 

Listen to the full podcast episode here at Code the State. 

The article was originally published on Kitsoft Insights here, and edited. 

--------------------------------- 

Helen is the International Programme Lead at Kitsoft and host of the Code the State podcast, while Amina is a Cybersecurity and Internet Governance Specialist from Nigeria; and Ibiso is an Internet Governance and Digital Policy Expert from Nigeria.