Speakers: Chi Lee (they/them), Dr. Poornima Luthra (she/her),  Safir Boukhalfa (they/them), Fadzi Whande (she/her)

Discussion facilitator: Chisom Udeze (she/her)

A seat at the table: this will be a moderated discussion with an extra seat. There will be an opportunity for an audience member to join the conversation.


This panel invites speakers to contribute to a profound and provocative exploration of the delicate balance between diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) initiatives and the potential unintended consequences they might entail. As institutions and organizations intensify their focus on DEIB, we must ask: At what point do these efforts risk overstepping into realms that challenge fundamental freedoms, such as speech, thought, and individual autonomy? Can the push for inclusivity inadvertently stifle diversity of opinions leading to a homogenization of thought? How might we engage on polarizing topics (for e.g. challenges that surfaced at the Olympics 2024).


Moreover, how do we reconcile the pursuit of equity with the uncomfortable truth that efforts to level the playing field might sometimes result in new forms of exclusion or dismissal of legitimate fears and concerns that people we disagree with may have? Is there a tipping point where the noble goal of belonging might morph into a forced conformity, where dissenting voices are marginalized under the banner of progress?


We must therefore grapple with these difficult questions: Where do we draw the line between necessary DEIB measures and overreach? How do we ensure that the pursuit of inclusion doesn’t inadvertently create new forms of exclusion? Can we create spaces where uncomfortable truths are acknowledged and debated, rather than suppressed? Ultimately, this conversation challenges us to consider whether DEIB can, in its zeal to rectify historical wrongs, sometimes risk undermining the very values of freedom and honesty it seeks to uphold.

Speakers: Faye Hobson (she/her), André Gorba Ferreira Biveti (he/him), Mark Ivan Serunjogi (he/they), Tania Nathan (she/they)

Discussion facilitator: Melanie Coffee (she/her)

This panel explores the contentious debate over the balance between free speech and the need to protect societies from the harms of misinformation. As social media platforms become powerful tools for both spreading and combating false information, is there a universal approach to verifying facts that can be applied fairly across diverse political and cultural landscapes? How do the responsibilities differ from the perspective of the individual, the community, and the government in managing the flow of information, and where should the line be drawn between regulation and censorship?

This discussion also raises difficult questions about the role of governments in policing content online. Should governments have the authority to remove harmful content from platforms like X, or does this risk overreach and the suppression of legitimate discourse? With current examples such as the anti-woke movement, the recent spread of violence through social media in the UK, the panel will explore the implications of regulating speech in a way that could stifle dissent or disproportionately affect marginalized voices. Ultimately, how much protection from misinformation do we owe each other, to what extent should it be enforced in public policy, and at what point does protecting the public become a threat to the very democratic principles we seek to uphold?

Speakers: Amy Baker (she/her), Monica Ifejilika (she/her), Marcus Jarl (he/him)

Discussion facilitator: Lola Akinmade Åkerström (she/her)

 

This panel robes one of the most contentious debates in modern society: How should diverse communities navigate the balance between maintaining cultural distinctiveness and fostering a unified social fabric? On one hand, multiculturalism celebrates the coexistence of varied traditions, languages, and identities, but does this approach risk creating fragmented societies where shared values and a sense of common purpose are lost? On the other hand, assimilation promotes a unified identity, but at what cost to individual and cultural expression?


This discussion challenges us to consider whether multiculturalism, in its embrace of diversity, can lead to parallel societies that resist integration, fueling tensions and misunderstandings. Conversely, does assimilation demand too great a sacrifice, pushing minority groups to relinquish their heritage in exchange for acceptance? Can true social cohesion be achieved through either path, or do both approaches carry inherent flaws that might lead to new forms of exclusion and inequality? Ultimately, this panel must ask: Is there a middle ground where diversity and unity can coexist, or must we choose one path at the expense of the other? And is a middle ground even the goal? (For example, what is the middle ground of enslavement and freedom, or inclusion and exclusion)?

Speakers: Karolina Sveiby (she/her), Greg Fernando (he/him), Daniel Brämhagen (he/him), Siw Andersen (she/her) 

Discussion facilitator: Emma Jackson (she/her)

This panel invites a critical exploration of how organizations can evolve to meet the demands of a diverse and global workforce. As traditional workplace norms and status quos come under scrutiny, how can companies engage all stakeholders—employees, leadership, and the broader community—in a genuine process of redefining talent, policies, and cultural expectations? This discussion should address the importance of unlearning entrenched ways of engaging, questioning whether current structures truly allow for the integration and flourishing of diverse talent or if they merely pay lip service to inclusivity. Herein, we posit that the workplace or meaningful inclusion in the working life is important for the feeling of integration for diverse talents.


Moreover, the panel will explore crucial support systems that help diverse employees not only integrate but thrive within the workplace and wider society —what role do mentorship programs, employee resource groups, and community partnerships play in this process? As companies consider partnering with local organizations to foster societal integration through job training and education, how can they ensure that these efforts lead to meaningful change rather than superficial adjustments? This conversation challenges us to consider how organizations can unlearn outdated norms and actively evolve, while implementing mechanisms to gather honest feedback and hold themselves accountable for their integration goals. The discussion will push us to question whether these initiatives can truly reshape cultural expectations or if deeper, more systemic changes are required to move beyond the status quo.

Speakers: Neil Chatterjee (he/him), Aslaug Eva Björnsdóttir (she/her), Lawrence Akpore (he/him), Anna Conneryd Lundgren (she/her) 

Discussion facilitator: Justin Hester (they/them)

This panel encourages a deep exploration of how technology can either bridge or widen the gap of social inequity. As we witness rapid advancements in areas like health tech, can these innovations truly overcome human biases to improve livelihoods for all, regardless of race, gender, or background? This discussion must confront the reality of the digital divide—how does unequal access to technology exacerbate existing inequalities, and what strategies can be employed to ensure that technological benefits reach marginalized communities?


Additionally, the panel will dive into the responsibility of companies to avoid unintentionally reinforcing existing social injustices. How can they design products and services that not only promote sustainable and inclusive options, like equitable transportation, but also address the root causes of social inequities rather than just their symptoms? This conversation challenges us to consider whether technology, often heralded as a force for good, might also perpetuate or even create new forms of injustice if not critically and thoughtfully applied.