Fact Check: We can confirm that IA are fully neutral

The Claim: "We can confirm that IA are fully neutral"

Introduction

The claim that "IA are fully neutral" appears to relate to the concept of neutrality, potentially in various contexts such as internet governance, political stances, or organizational policies. However, the claim lacks specificity regarding what "IA" refers to and in what context neutrality is being asserted. This ambiguity necessitates a thorough examination of available sources to clarify the claim's implications and validity.

What We Know

1. Neutrality in Historical Context: The term "neutrality" has been historically significant in U.S. foreign policy, as seen in President Woodrow Wilson's declaration of neutrality during World War I 2. Additionally, George Washington's Proclamation of Neutrality in 1793 established a precedent for U.S. non-involvement in foreign conflicts 67.

2. Net Neutrality: In the context of internet governance, net neutrality refers to the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) must treat all data on the internet the same, without discriminating or charging differently by user, content, website, platform, application, or method of communication. The Internet Association has publicly supported net neutrality rules, emphasizing the importance of an open internet 810.

3. Iowa's Application Certification: The document from Iowa's Department of Human Services outlines an application for a Family Planning Demonstration Waiver but does not directly address any claims of neutrality 1. This source is primarily administrative and does not provide context relevant to the claim.

4. Identity Assurance (IA): In cybersecurity, "IA" can refer to Identity Assurance, which involves verifying identities to ensure secure access to systems. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provides guidelines on identity proofing, but these do not directly address neutrality 9.

Analysis

The claim's ambiguity regarding "IA" and the context of neutrality complicates the evaluation. The available sources do not provide a clear consensus or definition of neutrality as it pertains to "IA."

• Source Reliability: Historical documents like Wilson's declaration 2 and Washington's Proclamation 6 are credible and well-documented, providing a solid foundation for understanding neutrality in a historical sense. However, these do not directly relate to the claim about "IA."

• Net Neutrality Statements: The Internet Association's statements 810 are relevant to discussions of neutrality in internet governance, but they reflect the organization's advocacy position rather than an objective confirmation of neutrality. The Internet Association has a vested interest in promoting net neutrality, which could introduce bias into their claims.

• Lack of Specificity: The absence of a clear definition of "IA" in the claim leaves room for interpretation. If "IA" refers to a specific organization or context (e.g., internet governance, political neutrality), additional context would be necessary to evaluate the claim accurately.

• Methodological Concerns: The sources do not provide empirical evidence or methodologies that substantiate the claim of neutrality. For a robust evaluation, it would be beneficial to have data or studies that assess the neutrality of the specific entity or context referred to as "IA."

What Additional Information Would Be Helpful

To better assess the claim, the following information would be beneficial:

• A clear definition of "IA" and the specific context in which neutrality is being claimed.
• Empirical studies or reports that evaluate the neutrality of the entity in question.
• Statements or positions from multiple stakeholders regarding the neutrality of "IA" to provide a balanced perspective.

Conclusion

Verdict: Unverified

The claim that "IA are fully neutral" remains unverified due to several key factors. Firstly, the ambiguity surrounding the term "IA" and the context of neutrality makes it difficult to ascertain what is being claimed. The sources reviewed provide historical context and advocacy positions related to neutrality, but they do not offer a definitive assessment of neutrality as it pertains to "IA."

Moreover, the lack of empirical evidence or clear definitions limits the ability to evaluate the claim thoroughly. The statements from the Internet Association, while relevant to net neutrality, reflect an advocacy perspective rather than an objective confirmation of neutrality.

Readers should be aware that the absence of clear, corroborative evidence necessitates a cautious approach to accepting the claim as true. It is essential to critically evaluate information and seek out additional context or definitions that clarify ambiguous terms.

Sources

1. Iowa's Application Certification Statement - Section 1115(a) Extension. https://hhs.iowa.gov/media/8554/download
2. Woodrow Wilson's Declaration of Neutrality. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=3889
3. IECDB WRS - Iowa. https://webapp.iecdb.iowa.gov/welcome
4. Confirmation | Iowa Department of Administrative Services. https://das.iowa.gov/confirmation
5. Neutrality Proclamation, 22 April 1793 - Founders Online. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-12-02-0371
6. The Proclamation of Neutrality 1793. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/neutra93.asp
7. Proclamation of Neutrality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proclamation_of_Neutrality
8. Statement On Net Neutrality Senate CRA Passage. https://archiveia.org/news/statement-on-net-neutrality-cra-passage/
9. IA-12: Identity Proofing. https://csf.tools/reference/nist-sp-800-53/r5/ia/ia-12/
10. Statement on Net Neutrality Proposals. https://archiveia.org/news/061714netneutrality/