Freedom of the press: Difference between revisions
imported>Hairy Dude rm {{see also}} – not appropriate for lead section |
imported>Achmad Rachmani →Canada: Added at. |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Freedom of communication and expression through various media}} | {{Short description|Freedom of communication and expression through various media}} | ||
{{Other uses|Freedom of the Press (disambiguation)}}{{Redirect|Free press|3=Free Press (disambiguation){{!}}Free Press}} | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2025}} | |||
{{Journalism sidebar}} | {{Journalism sidebar}} | ||
{{Liberalism sidebar}} | {{Liberalism sidebar}} | ||
'''Freedom of the press''' or '''freedom of the media''' is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic [[Media (communication)|media]], especially [[publication|published materials]], should be considered a right to be exercised freely. Such freedom implies no or minimal [[censorship]] or [[prior restraint]] from government, and is often | '''Freedom of the press''' or '''freedom of the media''' is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic [[Media (communication)|media]], especially [[publication|published materials]], should be considered a right to be exercised freely.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|title=Freedom of the Press|last=Youm |first=Kyu Ho|encyclopedia=International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition)|publisher=Elsevier|editor-last=Wright|editor-first=James D.|pages=392-397|doi=10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.95054-2|isbn=978-0-08-097087-5}}</ref> Such freedom implies no or minimal [[censorship]] or [[prior restraint]] from government, and is often protected by laws or a provision in a [[constitution]]. The concept of [[freedom of speech]] is often covered by the same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken and published expression; many countries also protect [[scientific freedom]]. | ||
Government restrictions on freedom of the press may include [[classified information]], [[state secrets]], punishment for [[libel]], punishment for violation of [[copyright]], [[privacy]], or judicial orders. Where freedom of the press is lacking, governments may require pre-publication approval, or punish distribution of documents critical of the government or certain political perspectives. Jurisdictions with high levels of transparency are subject to "[[sunshine laws]]" or [[freedom of information legislation]] that allow citizens broad access to government-held information. | Government restrictions on freedom of the press may include [[classified information]], [[state secrets]], punishment for [[libel]], punishment for violation of [[copyright]], [[privacy]], or judicial orders. Where freedom of the press is lacking, governments may require pre-publication approval, or punish distribution of documents critical of the government or certain political perspectives. Jurisdictions with high levels of transparency are subject to "[[sunshine laws]]" or [[freedom of information legislation]] that allow citizens broad access to government-held information. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 17: | ||
* [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RWB) ({{Langx|fr|Reporters sans frontières|links=no|italic=no}}) (RSF) considers the number of journalists murdered, expelled, or harassed, the existence of a [[State media|state monopoly]] on TV and radio, as well as the existence of [[censorship]] and [[self-censorship]] in the media, and the overall independence of media as well as the difficulties that foreign reporters may face to rank countries in levels of press freedom. | * [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RWB) ({{Langx|fr|Reporters sans frontières|links=no|italic=no}}) (RSF) considers the number of journalists murdered, expelled, or harassed, the existence of a [[State media|state monopoly]] on TV and radio, as well as the existence of [[censorship]] and [[self-censorship]] in the media, and the overall independence of media as well as the difficulties that foreign reporters may face to rank countries in levels of press freedom. | ||
* The [[Committee to Protect Journalists]] (CPJ) systematically tracks the number of journalists killed and imprisoned in reprisal for their work. It says it uses the tools of [[journalism]] to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and a network of foreign correspondents, including local working journalists in countries worldwide. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the [[International Freedom of Expression Exchange]], a global network of more than 119 free expression organizations. CPJ also tracks impunity in cases of journalist murders. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment. | * The [[Committee to Protect Journalists]] (CPJ) systematically tracks the number of journalists killed and imprisoned in reprisal for their work. It says it uses the tools of [[journalism]] to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and a network of foreign correspondents, including local working journalists in countries worldwide. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the [[International Freedom of Expression Exchange]], a global network of more than 119 free expression organizations. CPJ also tracks impunity in cases of journalist murders. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment. | ||
* [[Freedom House]] studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. Panels of experts assess the press freedom score and draft each country summary according to a weighted scoring system that analyzes the political, economic, legal and safety situation for journalists based on a 100-point scale. It then categorizes countries as having a free, partly free, or not free press.<ref>{{cite web |title=Summit for Democracy: New Scorecards Highlight State of Freedom in Participating Countries |url=https://freedomhouse.org/article/summit-democracy-new-scorecards-highlight-state-freedom-participating-countries |website=Freedom House |language=en |access-date=2022 | * [[Freedom House]] studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. Panels of experts assess the press freedom score and draft each country summary according to a weighted scoring system that analyzes the political, economic, legal and safety situation for journalists based on a 100-point scale. It then categorizes countries as having a free, partly free, or not free press.<ref>{{cite web |title=Summit for Democracy: New Scorecards Highlight State of Freedom in Participating Countries |url=https://freedomhouse.org/article/summit-democracy-new-scorecards-highlight-state-freedom-participating-countries |website=Freedom House |language=en |access-date=8 August 2022 |archive-date=4 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220804225841/https://freedomhouse.org/article/summit-democracy-new-scorecards-highlight-state-freedom-participating-countries |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
=== Annual report on journalists killed and Prison Census === | === Annual report on journalists killed and Prison Census === | ||
Each year, [[The Committee to Protect Journalists]] produces a comprehensive list of all working journalists killed in relation to their employment, including profiles of each deceased journalist within an exhaustive database, and an annual census of [[Incarceration|incarcerated]] journalists (as of midnight, December | Each year, [[The Committee to Protect Journalists]] produces a comprehensive list of all working journalists killed in relation to their employment, including profiles of each deceased journalist within an exhaustive database, and an annual census of [[Incarceration|incarcerated]] journalists (as of midnight, 1 December). The year 2017 reported record findings of jailed journalists, reaching 262. [[Turkey]], [[China]], and [[Egypt]] account for more than half of all global journalists jailed.<ref name=":2" /> | ||
As per a 2019 special report by the Committee to Protect Journalists, approximately 25 journalists were murdered on duty in 2019.<ref name=":2">{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/data/killed/2019/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=2019&end_year=2019&group_by=location|title=Explore CPJ's database of attacks on the press|website=cpj.org|access-date=2020 | As per a 2019 special report by the Committee to Protect Journalists, approximately 25 journalists were murdered on duty in 2019.<ref name=":2">{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/data/killed/2019/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=2019&end_year=2019&group_by=location|title=Explore CPJ's database of attacks on the press|website=cpj.org|access-date=7 March 2020|archive-date=11 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200411055558/https://cpj.org/data/killed/2019/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=2019&end_year=2019&group_by=location|url-status=live}}</ref> The figure is claimed to be the lowest since 2002, a year in which at least 21 journalists were killed while they were reporting from the field.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/data/killed/2019/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=2002&end_year=2002&group_by=location|title=Explore CPJ's database of attacks on the press|website=cpj.org|access-date=7 March 2020|archive-date=31 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200731205259/https://cpj.org/data/killed/2019/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=2002&end_year=2002&group_by=location|url-status=live}}</ref> Meanwhile, [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RSF) reported 49 killings, the lowest since 2003, when almost 36 journalists were killed. Leading press watchdogs fear persisting danger for the life of journalists. The drop in the murder of in-field journalists came across during the "global attention on the issue of impunity in [[journalist]] murders", focusing on the [[Assassination of Jamal Khashoggi|assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi]] in October 2018 and [[Daphne Caruana Galizia]], a Maltese blogger in October 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/reports/2019/12/journalists-killed-murdered-syria-mexico-impunity.php|title=Number of journalists killed falls sharply as reprisal murders hit record low|access-date=17 December 2019|website=Committee to Protect Journalists|archive-date=23 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923044431/https://cpj.org/reports/2019/12/journalists-killed-murdered-syria-mexico-impunity/|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
[[File: | [[File:Press_freedom_2025.svg|thumb|400x400px|'''2025 [[World Press Freedom Index]]'''<ref name=":02">{{cite web |year=2025 |title=2025 World Press Freedom Index |url=https://rsf.org/en/index |work=Reporters Without Borders}}</ref> {{legend|#005f9a|Good: 85–100 points}} {{legend|#8eb0d6|Satisfactory: 70–85 points}} {{legend|#ffb035|Problematic: 55–70 points}} {{legend|#ff3022|Difficult: 40–55 points}} {{legend|#83000b|Very serious <40 points}} {{legend|#dcdcdc|Not classified}}]] | ||
Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a subjective ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press. The [[Press Freedom Index]] list is based on responses to surveys sent to journalists that are members of partner organizations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, jurists, and human rights activists. The survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media and other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups. | Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a subjective ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press. The [[Press Freedom Index]] list is based on responses to surveys sent to journalists that are members of partner organizations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, jurists, and human rights activists. The survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media and other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups. | ||
In 2022, the eight countries with the most press freedom are, in order: [[Norway]], [[Denmark]], [[Sweden]], [[Estonia]], [[Finland]], [[Ireland]], [[Portugal]], and [[Costa Rica]]. The ten countries with the least press freedom are, in order: [[North Korea]], [[Eritrea]], [[Iran]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[Myanmar]], [[China]], [[Vietnam]], [[Cuba]], [[Iraq]], and [[Syria]].<ref>{{cite web|title=2022 World Press Freedom Index {{!}} Reporters Without Borders|url=https://rsf.org/en/index|access-date=2020 | In 2022, the eight countries with the most press freedom are, in order: [[Norway]], [[Denmark]], [[Sweden]], [[Estonia]], [[Finland]], [[Ireland]], [[Portugal]], and [[Costa Rica]]. The ten countries with the least press freedom are, in order: [[North Korea]], [[Eritrea]], [[Iran]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[Myanmar]], [[China]], [[Vietnam]], [[Cuba]], [[Iraq]], and [[Syria]].<ref>{{cite web|title=2022 World Press Freedom Index {{!}} Reporters Without Borders|url=https://rsf.org/en/index|access-date=5 December 2020|website=RSF|archive-date=27 April 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220427230843/https://rsf.org/en/ranking|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
===''Freedom of the Press''=== | ===''Freedom of the Press''=== | ||
| Line 36: | Line 37: | ||
=== Democratic states === | === Democratic states === | ||
A free and independent press has been theorized to be a key mechanism of a functioning, healthy [[democracy]].<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Ambrey|first1=Christopher L.|last2=Fleming|first2=Christopher M.|last3=Manning|first3=Matthew|last4=Smith|first4=Christine|date=2015 | A free and independent press has been theorized to be a key mechanism of a functioning, healthy [[democracy]].<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Ambrey|first1=Christopher L.|last2=Fleming|first2=Christopher M.|last3=Manning|first3=Matthew|last4=Smith|first4=Christine|date=4 August 2015|title=On the Confluence of Freedom of the Press, Control of Corruption and Societal Welfare|journal=Social Indicators Research|volume=128|issue=2|pages=859–880|doi=10.1007/s11205-015-1060-0|s2cid=153582103|issn=0303-8300}}</ref> In the absence of [[censorship]], journalism exists as a [[Watchdog journalism|watchdog]] of private and government action, providing information to maintain an informed citizenry of voters.<ref name=":3" /> In this perspective, "government efforts to influence published or broadcasted news content, either via media control or by inducing [[self-censorship]], represent a threat to the access of important and necessary information to the public and affect the quality of democracy".<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Solis|first1=Jonathan A.|last2=Antenangeli|first2=Leonardo|date=September 2017|title=Corruption Is Bad News for a Free Press: Reassessing the Relationship Between Media Freedom and Corruption: Corruption Is Bad News for a Free Press|journal=Social Science Quarterly|volume=98|issue=3|pages=1112–1137|doi=10.1111/ssqu.12438}}</ref> An independent press "serves to increase political knowledge, participation, and [[voter turnout]]",<ref name=":3" /> acting as an essential driver of civic participation. | ||
===Non-democratic states=== | ===Non-democratic states=== | ||
| Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of [[access to information]] is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional [[blacklisting]]) to [[death threat]]s, [[kidnapping]], [[torture]], and [[assassination]]. | Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of [[access to information]] is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional [[blacklisting]]) to [[death threat]]s, [[kidnapping]], [[torture]], and [[assassination]]. | ||
* The [[Lira Baysetova]] case in [[Kazakhstan]].<ref>[http://www.ifex.org/kazakhstan/2002/07/02/editor_s_daughter_killed_in_mysterious/ "Editor's daughter killed in mysterious circumstances"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502162311/https://ifex.org//kazakhstan/2002/07/02/editor_s_daughter_killed_in_mysterious/ |date=2019 | * The [[Lira Baysetova]] case in [[Kazakhstan]].<ref>[http://www.ifex.org/kazakhstan/2002/07/02/editor_s_daughter_killed_in_mysterious/ "Editor's daughter killed in mysterious circumstances"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502162311/https://ifex.org//kazakhstan/2002/07/02/editor_s_daughter_killed_in_mysterious/ |date=2 May 2019}}, International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), 2 July 2002</ref> | ||
* The [[Georgiy R. Gongadze]] case in [[Ukraine]]<ref>[ | * The [[Georgiy R. Gongadze]] case in [[Ukraine]].<ref>[https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3664494.stm "Ukraine remembers slain reporter"] , ''BBC News'', 16 September 2004</ref> | ||
* In [[Nepal]], [[Eritrea]], and [[mainland China]], journalists may spend years in jail simply for using the "wrong" word or photo.<ref name=RSF2003/> | * In [[Nepal]], [[Eritrea]], and [[mainland China]], journalists may spend years in jail simply for using the "wrong" word or photo.<ref name=RSF2003/> | ||
| Line 53: | Line 54: | ||
===Europe=== | ===Europe=== | ||
{{Main|Media freedom in the European Union}} | {{Main|Media freedom in the European Union}} | ||
Central, Northern, and Western Europe have a long tradition of freedom of speech, including freedom of the press, which yet exists in the | Central, Northern, and Western Europe have a long tradition of freedom of speech, including freedom of the press, which yet exists in the 18th century and in the 19th century.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Nordin |first=Jonas |url=https://portal.research.lu.se/en/publications/from-seemly-subjects-to-enlightened-citizens-censorship-and-press |title=Press Freedom 250 Years: Freedom of the Press and Public Access to Official Documents in Sweden and Finland – a living heritage from 1766 |publisher=Swedish Parliament |year=2018 |isbn=978-91-87541-75-9 |editor-last=Örtenhed |editor-first=Kristina |location=Stockholm |pages=27–59 |chapter=From seemly subjects to enlightened citizens: Censorship and press freedom from the Middle Ages to the 18th century |access-date=8 March 2025 |editor-last2=Wennberg |editor-first2=Bertil}}</ref> | ||
German Enlightenment writer [[Christoph Martin Wieland]] argued in 1788 that "press freedom is the ultimate bulwark of humanity" and that restrictions beyond general criminal law would lead to its "gradual erosion", emphasizing that "science, literature, and the printing press... belong to no single nation, but to all mankind".<ref>{{cite book|author=Wieland, Christoph Martin|editor=Bastian Terhorst|title=The Secret of the Order of Cosmopolitans|publisher=epubli|location=Berlin|date=2025|isbn=978-3819044144|pages=XIII}}</ref> | |||
After World War II, [[Hugh Baillie]], the president of the [[United Press International|United Press]] wire service based in the U.S., promoted freedom of news dissemination. In 1944, he called for an open system of news sources and transmission, and a minimum of government regulation of the news. His proposals were aired at the Geneva Conference on Freedom of Information in 1948 but were blocked by the Soviets and the French.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Political Profiles: The Truman Years |url=https://archive.org/details/politicalprofile0001unse |last=<!-- not stated --> |editor-last=Schoenebaum |editor-first=Eleonora W. |date=1978 |publisher=Facts on File, Inc. |isbn=978-0-87196-453-3 |pages=16–17}}</ref> | After World War II, [[Hugh Baillie]], the president of the [[United Press International|United Press]] wire service based in the U.S., promoted freedom of news dissemination. In 1944, he called for an open system of news sources and transmission, and a minimum of government regulation of the news. His proposals were aired at the Geneva Conference on Freedom of Information in 1948 but were blocked by the Soviets and the French.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Political Profiles: The Truman Years |url=https://archive.org/details/politicalprofile0001unse |last=<!-- not stated --> |editor-last=Schoenebaum |editor-first=Eleonora W. |date=1978 |publisher=Facts on File, Inc. |isbn=978-0-87196-453-3 |pages=16–17}}</ref> | ||
| Line 59: | Line 62: | ||
Since 1950, the [[European Convention on Human Rights]] includes "Article 10" related to Freedom of expression which applies to [[Member states of the Council of Europe]]. | Since 1950, the [[European Convention on Human Rights]] includes "Article 10" related to Freedom of expression which applies to [[Member states of the Council of Europe]]. | ||
Media freedom is a [[Fundamental rights|fundamental right]] that applies to all [[Member state of the European Union|member states]] of the [[European Union]] and its [[EU citizens|citizens]], as defined in the [[EU Charter of Fundamental Rights]] (since 2000) as well as the European Convention on Human Rights (since 1950).<ref name="eprs">Maria Poptcheva, [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/EPRS-Briefing-554214-Press-freedom-in-the-EU-FINAL.pdf Press freedom in the EU Legal framework and challenges] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210210114509/https://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/EPRS-Briefing-554214-Press-freedom-in-the-EU-FINAL.pdf |date=2021 | Media freedom is a [[Fundamental rights|fundamental right]] that applies to all [[Member state of the European Union|member states]] of the [[European Union]] and its [[EU citizens|citizens]], as defined in the [[EU Charter of Fundamental Rights]] (since 2000) as well as the European Convention on Human Rights (since 1950).<ref name="eprs">Maria Poptcheva, [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/EPRS-Briefing-554214-Press-freedom-in-the-EU-FINAL.pdf Press freedom in the EU Legal framework and challenges] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210210114509/https://www.europarl.europa.eu/EPRS/EPRS-Briefing-554214-Press-freedom-in-the-EU-FINAL.pdf |date=10 February 2021 }}, EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service, Briefing April 2015</ref>{{rp|1}} Within the [[EU enlargement]] process, guaranteeing media freedom is named a "key indicator of a country's readiness to become part of the EU".<ref>{{cite web|url = http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/policy-highlights/media-freedom/index_en.htm|title = European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations|access-date = 8 February 2016|publisher = European Commission|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160124161814/http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/policy-highlights/media-freedom/index_en.htm|archive-date = 24 January 2016}}</ref> | ||
====United Kingdom==== | ====United Kingdom==== | ||
According to the ''[[New York Times]]'', "Britain has a long tradition of a free, inquisitive press", but "[u]nlike the United States, Britain has no constitutional guarantee of press freedom".<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/15/opinion/british-press-freedom-under-threat.html "British Press Freedom Under Threat"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170130103749/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/15/opinion/british-press-freedom-under-threat.html |date=2017 | According to the ''[[New York Times]]'', "Britain has a long tradition of a free, inquisitive press", but "[u]nlike the United States, Britain has no constitutional guarantee of press freedom".<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/15/opinion/british-press-freedom-under-threat.html "British Press Freedom Under Threat"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170130103749/http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/15/opinion/british-press-freedom-under-threat.html |date=30 January 2017 }}, Editorial, ''[[New York Times]]'', 14 November 2013. Retrieved 19 November 2013.</ref> Freedom of the press was established in Great Britain in 1695, with [[Alan Rusbridger]], former editor of ''[[The Guardian]]'', stating: "When people talk about licensing journalists or newspapers the instinct should be to refer them to history. Read about how licensing of the press in Britain was abolished in 1695. Remember how the freedoms won here became a model for much of the rest of the world, and be conscious of how the world still watches us to see how we protect those freedoms".<ref>{{cite news|title=Leveson Inquiry: British press freedom is a model for the world, editor tells inquiry|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/gordon-rayner/8812486/Leveson-Inquiry-British-press-freedom-is-a-model-for-the-world-editor-tells-inquiry.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111007183949/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/gordon-rayner/8812486/Leveson-Inquiry-British-press-freedom-is-a-model-for-the-world-editor-tells-inquiry.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=7 October 2011|newspaper=The Telegraph|date=14 October 2017}}</ref> | ||
[[File:Areopagitica bridwell.jpg|thumb|upright|First page of [[John Milton]]'s 1644 edition of ''[[Areopagitica]]'']] | [[File:Areopagitica bridwell.jpg|thumb|upright|First page of [[John Milton]]'s 1644 edition of ''[[Areopagitica]].'']] | ||
Until 1694, Great Britain had an elaborate system of [[licensing]]; the most recent was seen in the [[Licensing of the Press Act 1662|Licensing of the Press Act, 1662]]. No publication was allowed without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Fifty years earlier, at a time of [[English Civil War|civil war]], [[John Milton]] wrote his [[pamphlet]] ''[[Areopagitica]]'' (1644).<ref name="Sanders">{{cite book | last = Sanders| first = Karen| title = Ethics & Journalism| publisher = Sage| year = 2003| page = 66| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=bnpliIUyO60C&q=Areopagitica+freedom+of+speech+britain| isbn = 978-0-7619-6967-9}}</ref> In this work Milton argued forcefully against this form of government censorship and parodied the idea, writing "when as debtors and delinquents may walk abroad without a keeper, but inoffensive books must not stir forth without a visible jailer in their title". Although at the time it did little to halt the practice of licensing, it would be viewed later a significant milestone as one of the most eloquent defenses of [[News media|press]] freedom.<ref name="Sanders"/> | Until 1694, Great Britain had an elaborate system of [[licensing]]; the most recent was seen in the [[Licensing of the Press Act 1662|Licensing of the Press Act, 1662]]. No publication was allowed without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Fifty years earlier, at a time of [[English Civil War|civil war]], [[John Milton]] wrote his [[pamphlet]] ''[[Areopagitica]]'' (1644).<ref name="Sanders">{{cite book | last = Sanders| first = Karen| title = Ethics & Journalism| publisher = Sage| year = 2003| page = 66| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=bnpliIUyO60C&q=Areopagitica+freedom+of+speech+britain| isbn = 978-0-7619-6967-9}}</ref> In this work Milton argued forcefully against this form of government censorship and parodied the idea, writing "when as debtors and delinquents may walk abroad without a keeper, but inoffensive books must not stir forth without a visible jailer in their title". Although at the time it did little to halt the practice of licensing, it would be viewed later a significant milestone as one of the most eloquent defenses of [[News media|press]] freedom.<ref name="Sanders"/> | ||
| Line 71: | Line 74: | ||
Locke contributed to the [[Statute of Anne#Lapse of the Licensing Act|lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695]], whereupon the press needed no license. Still, some libels were tried throughout the 18th century, until "the Society of the Bill of Rights" led by [[John Horne Tooke]] and [[John Wilkes]] organized a campaign to publish Parliamentary Debates. This culminated in three defeats of the Crown in the 1770 cases of Almon, Miller and [[Henry Sampson Woodfall|Woodfall]], who all had published one of the [[Letters of Junius]], and the unsuccessful arrest of [[John Wheble]] in 1771. Thereafter the Crown was much more careful in the application of [[libel]]; for example, in the aftermath of the [[Peterloo Massacre]], [[Francis Burdett|Burdett]] was convicted, whereas by contrast, the [[Junius (writer)|Junius]] affair was over a [[satire]] and sarcasm about the non-lethal conduct and policies of the government. | Locke contributed to the [[Statute of Anne#Lapse of the Licensing Act|lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695]], whereupon the press needed no license. Still, some libels were tried throughout the 18th century, until "the Society of the Bill of Rights" led by [[John Horne Tooke]] and [[John Wilkes]] organized a campaign to publish Parliamentary Debates. This culminated in three defeats of the Crown in the 1770 cases of Almon, Miller and [[Henry Sampson Woodfall|Woodfall]], who all had published one of the [[Letters of Junius]], and the unsuccessful arrest of [[John Wheble]] in 1771. Thereafter the Crown was much more careful in the application of [[libel]]; for example, in the aftermath of the [[Peterloo Massacre]], [[Francis Burdett|Burdett]] was convicted, whereas by contrast, the [[Junius (writer)|Junius]] affair was over a [[satire]] and sarcasm about the non-lethal conduct and policies of the government. | ||
In Britain's American colonies, the first editors discovered their readers enjoyed it when they criticised the local governor; the governors discovered they could shut down the newspapers. The most dramatic confrontation came in New York in 1734, where the governor brought [[John Peter Zenger]] to trial for criminal libel after the publication of satirical attacks. The defense lawyers argued that according to English common law, the truth was a valid defense against libel. The jury acquitted Zenger, who became the iconic American hero for freedom of the press. The result was an emerging tension between the media and the government. By the mid-1760s, there were 24 weekly newspapers in the 13 colonies, and the satirical attack on the government became common features in American newspapers.<ref>Alison Olson, [http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/eal/summary/v035/35.3olson.html "The Zenger Case Revisited: Satire, Sedition and Political Debate in Eighteenth Century America"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160217081612/http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/eal/summary/v035/35.3olson.html |date=2016 | In Britain's [[Thirteen Colonies|American colonies]], the first editors discovered their readers enjoyed it when they criticised the local governor; the governors discovered they could shut down the newspapers. The most dramatic confrontation came in New York in 1734, where the governor brought [[John Peter Zenger]] to trial for criminal libel after the publication of satirical attacks. The defense lawyers argued that according to English common law, the truth was a valid defense against libel. The jury acquitted Zenger, who became the iconic American hero for freedom of the press. The result was an emerging tension between the media and the government. By the mid-1760s, there were 24 weekly newspapers in the 13 colonies, and the satirical attack on the government became common features in American newspapers.<ref>Alison Olson, [http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/eal/summary/v035/35.3olson.html "The Zenger Case Revisited: Satire, Sedition and Political Debate in Eighteenth Century America"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160217081612/http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/eal/summary/v035/35.3olson.html |date=17 February 2016 }}, ''Early American Literature'', vol.35 no.3 (2000), pp. 223–245.</ref> | ||
In the [[Victorian era]], the press became more influential than it had been previously, to the dismay of some readers. [[Thomas Carlyle]], in his essay "[[Critical and Miscellaneous Essays|Signs of the Times]]" (1829), said that the "true [[Church of England]], at this moment, lies in the Editors of its Newspapers. These preach to the people daily, weekly; admonishing kings themselves; advising peace or war, with an authority which only the first [[Protestant Reformers|Reformers]], and a long-past class of [[Pope|Popes]], were possessed of". Similarly, [[Charles Dickens]], in his ''[[Pickwick Papers]]'' (1837), caricatured the newspapers as but the "chosen organ and representative" of either the [[Whigs (British political party)|Whigs]] or the [[Tories (UK)|Tories]], and that they were "essentially and indispensably necessary" to the parties' operations.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Carlyle and Dickens on the Dark Side of Freedom of the Press |url=https://victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pickwick/egervarymt2.html |access-date=2022 | In the [[Victorian era]], the press became more influential than it had been previously, to the dismay of some readers. [[Thomas Carlyle]], in his essay "[[Critical and Miscellaneous Essays|Signs of the Times]]" (1829), said that the "true [[Church of England]], at this moment, lies in the Editors of its Newspapers. These preach to the people daily, weekly; admonishing kings themselves; advising peace or war, with an authority which only the first [[Protestant Reformers|Reformers]], and a long-past class of [[Pope|Popes]], were possessed of". Similarly, [[Charles Dickens]], in his ''[[Pickwick Papers]]'' (1837), caricatured the newspapers as but the "chosen organ and representative" of either the [[Whigs (British political party)|Whigs]] or the [[Tories (UK)|Tories]], and that they were "essentially and indispensably necessary" to the parties' operations.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Carlyle and Dickens on the Dark Side of Freedom of the Press |url=https://victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pickwick/egervarymt2.html |access-date=11 August 2022 |website=victorianweb.org |archive-date=8 December 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221208134814/https://www.victorianweb.org/authors/dickens/pickwick/egervarymt2.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
[[John Stuart Mill]] in 1869 in his book ''[[On Liberty]]'' approached the problem of authority versus liberty from the viewpoint of a 19th-century [[utilitarian]]: The individual has the right of expressing himself so long as he does not harm other individuals. The good society is one in which the greatest number of persons enjoy the greatest possible amount of happiness. Applying these general principles of liberty to freedom of expression, Mill states that if we silence an opinion, we may silence the truth. The individual freedom of expression is therefore essential to the well-being of society. Mill wrote: | [[John Stuart Mill]] in 1869 in his book ''[[On Liberty]]'' approached the problem of authority versus liberty from the viewpoint of a 19th-century [[utilitarian]]: The individual has the right of expressing himself so long as he does not harm other individuals. The good society is one in which the greatest number of persons enjoy the greatest possible amount of happiness. Applying these general principles of liberty to freedom of expression, Mill states that if we silence an opinion, we may silence the truth. The individual freedom of expression is therefore essential to the well-being of society. Mill wrote: | ||
| Line 81: | Line 84: | ||
====Denmark–Norway==== | ====Denmark–Norway==== | ||
Between September | Between 4 September 1770 and 7 October 1771 the kingdom of [[Denmark–Norway]] had the most unrestricted freedom of press of any country in Europe. This occurred during the regime of [[Johann Friedrich Struensee]], whose second act was to abolish the old censorship laws. However, due to the great amount of mostly anonymous pamphlets published that was critical and often slanderous towards Struensee's own regime, he reinstated some restrictions regarding the freedom of press a year later, 7 October 1771.<ref>{{Cite journal | ||
|title=David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s | |title=David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s | ||
|first=John Christian |last=Laursen | |first=John Christian |last=Laursen | ||
| Line 89: | Line 92: | ||
{{See also|Censorship in Italy}} | {{See also|Censorship in Italy}} | ||
[[File:Statuto_Albertino_Avviso.jpg|thumb|305x305px|The Statute was adopted as the constitution of the Kingdom of Italy, granting freedom of the press]] | [[File:Statuto_Albertino_Avviso.jpg|thumb|305x305px|The Statute was adopted as the constitution of the Kingdom of Italy, granting freedom of the press]] | ||
After the [[Italian unification]] in 1861, the [[Albertine Statute]] of 1848 was adopted as the constitution of the [[Kingdom of Italy]]. The Statute granted the freedom of the press with some restrictions in case of abuses and in religious matters, as stated in Article 28:<ref>{{cite web|title=Lo Statuto Albertino|url=http://www.quirinale.it/allegati_statici/costituzione/Statutoalbertino.pdf|publisher=The official website of the Presidency of the Italian Republic|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180816025611/http://www.quirinale.it/allegati_statici/costituzione/Statutoalbertino.pdf|archive-date=2018 | After the [[Italian unification]] in 1861, the [[Albertine Statute]] of 1848 was adopted as the constitution of the [[Kingdom of Italy]]. The Statute granted the freedom of the press with some restrictions in case of abuses and in religious matters, as stated in Article 28:<ref>{{cite web|title=Lo Statuto Albertino|url=http://www.quirinale.it/allegati_statici/costituzione/Statutoalbertino.pdf|publisher=The official website of the Presidency of the Italian Republic|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180816025611/http://www.quirinale.it/allegati_statici/costituzione/Statutoalbertino.pdf|archive-date=16 August 2018}}</ref> | ||
{{Blockquote|The press shall be free, but the law may suppress abuses of this freedom. However, Bibles, catechisms, liturgical and prayer books shall not be printed without the prior permission of the Bishop.}} | {{Blockquote|The press shall be free, but the law may suppress abuses of this freedom. However, Bibles, catechisms, liturgical and prayer books shall not be printed without the prior permission of the Bishop.}} | ||
After the [[Italian constitutional referendum, 1946|abolition of the monarchy]] in 1946 and the [[repeal|abrogation]] of the Statute in 1948, the [[Constitution of Italy|Constitution]] of the [[Republic of Italy]] guarantees the freedom of the press, as stated in Article 21, Paragraphs 2 and 3:<ref>{{cite web|title=The Italian Constitution |url=http://www.quirinale.it/page/costituzione|publisher=The official website of the Presidency of the Italian Republic |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161127152449/http://www.quirinale.it/qrnw/costituzione/pdf/costituzione_inglese.pdf |archive-date=2016 | After the [[Italian constitutional referendum, 1946|abolition of the monarchy]] in 1946 and the [[repeal|abrogation]] of the Statute in 1948, the [[Constitution of Italy|Constitution]] of the [[Republic of Italy]] guarantees the freedom of the press, as stated in Article 21, Paragraphs 2 and 3:<ref>{{cite web|title=The Italian Constitution |url=http://www.quirinale.it/page/costituzione|publisher=The official website of the Presidency of the Italian Republic |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161127152449/http://www.quirinale.it/qrnw/costituzione/pdf/costituzione_inglese.pdf |archive-date=27 November 2016}}</ref> | ||
{{Blockquote|The press may not be subjected to any authorisation or censorship. Seizure may be permitted only by judicial order stating the reason and only for offences expressly determined by the law on the press or in case of violation of the obligation to identify the persons responsible for such offences.}} | {{Blockquote|The press may not be subjected to any authorisation or censorship. Seizure may be permitted only by judicial order stating the reason and only for offences expressly determined by the law on the press or in case of violation of the obligation to identify the persons responsible for such offences.}} | ||
| Line 106: | Line 109: | ||
====Sweden==== | ====Sweden==== | ||
One of the world's first freedom of the press acts was introduced in Sweden in 1766 ([[Swedish Freedom of the Press Act]]), due in part to [[classical liberal]] member of parliament, [[Ostrobothnia (historical province)|Ostrobothnia]]n priest, [[Anders Chydenius]].<ref name=":4" /><ref>[http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_Page____8908.aspx "The Freedom of the Press Act", Sveriges Riksdag] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070930182530/http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_Page____8908.aspx |date=2007 | One of the world's first freedom of the press acts was introduced in Sweden in 1766 ([[Swedish Freedom of the Press Act]]), due in part to [[classical liberal]] member of parliament, [[Ostrobothnia (historical province)|Ostrobothnia]]n priest, [[Anders Chydenius]].<ref name=":4" /><ref>[http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_Page____8908.aspx "The Freedom of the Press Act", Sveriges Riksdag] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070930182530/http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_Page____8908.aspx |date=30 September 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fecl.org/circular/1507.htm|title=FECL 15 (May 1993): The Swedish Tradition of Freedom of Press|author=Fortress Europe? – Circular Letter|access-date=14 March 2016|archive-date=8 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160308002445/http://fecl.org/circular/1507.htm|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/5885744/The-Worlds-First-Freedom-of-Information-Act-SwedenFinland-1766|title=The World's First Freedom of Information Act (Sweden/Finland 1766)|work=Scribd|access-date=14 March 2016|archive-date=15 December 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131215184308/http://www.scribd.com/doc/5885744/The-Worlds-First-Freedom-of-Information-Act-SwedenFinland-1766|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.freedominfo.org/regions/europe/sweden/ |title=freedominfo.org, "Sweden" |access-date=26 September 2011 |archive-date=6 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190406212230/http://www.freedominfo.org/regions/europe/sweden/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Excepted and liable to prosecution was only vocal opposition to the [[king]] and the [[Church of Sweden]]. The act was largely rolled back after [[Gustav III of Sweden|King Gustav]]'s coup d'état in 1772, restored after the overthrowing of his son, [[Gustav IV of Sweden]] in 1809, and fully recognized with the abolition of the king's prerogative to cancel licenses in the 1840s. | ||
====Russia==== | ====Russia==== | ||
{{main article|Media freedom in Russia}} | {{main article|Media freedom in Russia}} | ||
[[File:Berlin rally after Navalny's murder asv2024-02-16 img18.jpg|thumb|Protest outside the Russian Embassy in Berlin demanding the release of Russia's [[political prisoner]]s, including journalists [[Ivan Safronov (1990)|Ivan Safronov]] and | [[File:Berlin rally after Navalny's murder asv2024-02-16 img18.jpg|thumb|Protest outside the Russian Embassy in Berlin demanding the release of Russia's [[political prisoner]]s, including journalists [[Ivan Safronov (1990)|Ivan Safronov]] and [[Maria Ponomarenko]], 2024]] | ||
The US Secretary of State, [[Mike Pompeo]], criticized [[Russia]] for limiting the activities of [[VOA]] and [[Radio Free Europe]] in Russia with a governmental order demanding reviewing the subject by Moscow.<ref>{{cite web |title=Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Ray Furlong of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |url=https://www.state.gov/secretary-michael-r-pompeo-with-ray-furlong-of-radio-free-europe-radio-liberty/ |website=U.S. Department of State |date=2020 | The US Secretary of State, [[Mike Pompeo]], criticized [[Russia]] for limiting the activities of [[VOA]] and [[Radio Free Europe]] in Russia with a governmental order demanding reviewing the subject by Moscow.<ref>{{cite web |title=Secretary Michael R. Pompeo With Ray Furlong of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |url=https://www.state.gov/secretary-michael-r-pompeo-with-ray-furlong-of-radio-free-europe-radio-liberty/ |website=U.S. Department of State |date=12 August 2020 |access-date=19 September 2020 |archive-date=17 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200917214350/https://www.state.gov/secretary-michael-r-pompeo-with-ray-furlong-of-radio-free-europe-radio-liberty/ |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On 4 March 2022, Russian President [[Vladimir Putin]] signed into law a bill introducing [[Russian 2022 war censorship laws|prison sentences of up to 15 years]] for those who publish "knowingly false information" about the Russian military and its operations in Ukraine,<ref>{{cite news |title=Russia Jails Anti-War Journalist 6 Years for 'Fake News' |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/02/15/russia-jails-anti-war-journalist-6-years-for-fake-news-a80230 |work=The Moscow Times |date=15 February 2023}}</ref> forcing independent media in Russia to stop reporting on Ukraine or cease operations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/03/04/putin-signs-law-introducing-jail-terms-for-fake-news-on-army-a76768|title=Putin Signs Law Introducing Jail Terms for 'Fake News' on Army|website=The Moscow Times|date=4 March 2022|archive-date=6 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220306232328/https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/03/04/putin-signs-law-introducing-jail-terms-for-fake-news-on-army-a76768|url-status=live}}</ref> At least 1,000 Russian journalists have fled Russia since February 2022.<ref>{{cite news |title=1K Journalists Have Fled Russia Since Ukraine Invasion – Report |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/02/03/1k-journalists-have-fled-russia-since-ukraine-invasion-report-a80135 |work=The Moscow Times |date=3 February 2023}}</ref> About 85% of Russians get most of their information from Russian state-controlled media.<ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Stengel |first1=Richard |title=Putin May Be Winning the Information War Outside of the U.S. and Europe |url=https://time.com/6179221/putin-information-war-column/ |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|TIME]] |date=20 May 2022}}</ref> | On 4 March 2022, Russian President [[Vladimir Putin]] signed into law a bill introducing [[Russian 2022 war censorship laws|prison sentences of up to 15 years]] for those who publish "knowingly false information" about the Russian military and its operations in Ukraine,<ref>{{cite news |title=Russia Jails Anti-War Journalist 6 Years for 'Fake News' |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/02/15/russia-jails-anti-war-journalist-6-years-for-fake-news-a80230 |work=The Moscow Times |date=15 February 2023}}</ref> forcing independent media in Russia to stop reporting on Ukraine or cease operations.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/03/04/putin-signs-law-introducing-jail-terms-for-fake-news-on-army-a76768|title=Putin Signs Law Introducing Jail Terms for 'Fake News' on Army|website=The Moscow Times|date=4 March 2022|archive-date=6 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220306232328/https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/03/04/putin-signs-law-introducing-jail-terms-for-fake-news-on-army-a76768|url-status=live}}</ref> At least 1,000 Russian journalists have fled Russia since February 2022.<ref>{{cite news |title=1K Journalists Have Fled Russia Since Ukraine Invasion – Report |url=https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/02/03/1k-journalists-have-fled-russia-since-ukraine-invasion-report-a80135 |work=The Moscow Times |date=3 February 2023}}</ref> About 85% of Russians get most of their information from Russian state-controlled media.<ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Stengel |first1=Richard |title=Putin May Be Winning the Information War Outside of the U.S. and Europe |url=https://time.com/6179221/putin-information-war-column/ |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|TIME]] |date=20 May 2022}}</ref> | ||
| Line 120: | Line 123: | ||
====Romania==== | ====Romania==== | ||
Until 1989, [[Romania]] was part of the [[Communist Bloc|communist bloc]] as the [[Socialist Republic of Romania]]. The communist regime heavily restricted freedom of the press and other civil liberties. [[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty]], though available to the Romanian citizenry, was highly illegal and severe repercussions for existed for listening. Directly following the [[Romanian Revolution]], post-communist corruption was largely the subject of investigative reports. At the same time, widespread violence against journalists began. During the [[June 1990 Mineriad]], a series of protests against the [[National Salvation Front (Romania)|National Salvation Front]], counter-demonstrators assaulted reporting journalists.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pirvulescu |first=Christina |date=14 June 1990 |title=Journalists Clubbed, Newspaper Occupied as Miners Aid Iliescu |url=https://apnews.com/article/e7d5de06d089fc6aca0452fca19e1da7 |access-date=22 September 2022 |website=AP NEWS |language=en |archive-date=8 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220408183712/https://apnews.com/article/e7d5de06d089fc6aca0452fca19e1da7 |url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
Until 1989, [[Romania]] was part of the [[Communist Bloc|communist bloc]] as the [[Socialist Republic of Romania]]. The communist regime heavily restricted freedom of the press and other civil liberties. [[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty]], though available to the Romanian citizenry, was highly illegal and severe repercussions for existed for listening. Directly following the [[Romanian Revolution]], post-communist corruption was largely the subject of investigative reports. At the same time, widespread violence against journalists began. During the [[June 1990 Mineriad]], a series of protests against the [[National Salvation Front (Romania)|National Salvation Front]], counter-demonstrators assaulted reporting journalists.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pirvulescu |first=Christina |date=14 June 1990 |title=Journalists Clubbed, Newspaper Occupied as Miners Aid Iliescu |url=https://apnews.com/article/e7d5de06d089fc6aca0452fca19e1da7 |access-date=2022 | |||
In 1992, President [[Ion Iliescu]] had a nervous meltdown when called journalist [[Paul Pârvu]] asked him if he felt guilt over Romanian deaths during the revolution.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Anton |first=Christian |date=1 February 2022 |title=Ziaristul pe care Ion Iliescu l-a făcut "Măi, animalule!" a murit răpus de Covid-19. A fost înmormântat chiar de ziua lui |url=https://stirileprotv.ro/divers/ziaristul-pe-care-ion-iliescu-l-a-facut-mai-animalule-a-murit-rapus-de-covid-19-a-fost-inmormatat-chiar-de-ziua-lui.html |access-date=2022 | In 1992, President [[Ion Iliescu]] had a nervous meltdown when called journalist [[Paul Pârvu]] asked him if he felt guilt over Romanian deaths during the revolution.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Anton |first=Christian |date=1 February 2022 |title=Ziaristul pe care Ion Iliescu l-a făcut "Măi, animalule!" a murit răpus de Covid-19. A fost înmormântat chiar de ziua lui |url=https://stirileprotv.ro/divers/ziaristul-pe-care-ion-iliescu-l-a-facut-mai-animalule-a-murit-rapus-de-covid-19-a-fost-inmormatat-chiar-de-ziua-lui.html |access-date=22 September 2022 |website=Stirileprotv.ro |language=ro |archive-date=3 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220803152317/https://stirileprotv.ro/divers/ziaristul-pe-care-ion-iliescu-l-a-facut-mai-animalule-a-murit-rapus-de-covid-19-a-fost-inmormatat-chiar-de-ziua-lui.html |url-status=live }}</ref> During the exchange, Iliescu referred to Pârvu as an "animal". Modern, major media outlets were founded during the mid-1990s, such as [[Antena 1 (Romania)|Antena 1]] in 1994 and [[Pro TV|ProTV]] in 1995. In 1999, the editor of a ''Ora'', a local newspaper, Tiberiu Patru, was arrested<ref name="ifex">{{Cite web |title=Editor-in-chief arrested |url=https://ifex.org/editor-in-chief-arrested-2/ |last=International Federation of Journalists |date=17 August 1999 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220309001313/https://ifex.org/editor-in-chief-arrested-2/ |archive-date=9 March 2022 |access-date=11 March 2025 |website=[[IFEX (organization)|IFEX]] |author-link=International Federation of Journalists}}</ref> before being able to publish an investigation of corruption in [[Dolj County]] under. In response, ''Ora'' moved its newsroom in front of the National Theater of Craiova to protest Patru's arrest. | ||
The 2000s saw the creation of many new media outlets across television, radio, and the traditional press. In 2023, [[Reporters Without Borders]] identified safety as a concern for Romanian journalists.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Romania {{!}} RSF |url=https://rsf.org/en/country/romania |access-date=2023 | The 2000s saw the creation of many new media outlets across television, radio, and the traditional press. In 2023, [[Reporters Without Borders]] identified safety as a concern for Romanian journalists.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Romania {{!}} RSF |url=https://rsf.org/en/country/romania |access-date=16 May 2023 |website=rsf.org |date=17 February 2023 |language=en |archive-date=16 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230516083306/https://rsf.org/en/country/romania |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
====Turkey==== | ====Turkey==== | ||
{{See also|Freedom of the press in Turkey|List of arrested journalists in Turkey}} | {{See also|Freedom of the press in Turkey|List of arrested journalists in Turkey}} | ||
[[File:Turkish journalists protesting imprisonment of their colleagues in 2016.jpg|thumb|Turkish journalists protesting [[Media freedom in Turkey|imprisonment of their colleagues]] on [[Human Rights Day]], 2016]] | [[File:Turkish journalists protesting imprisonment of their colleagues in 2016.jpg|thumb|Turkish journalists protesting [[Media freedom in Turkey|imprisonment of their colleagues]] on [[Human Rights Day]], 2016.]] | ||
More than 120 journalists remained in prison in Turkey in 2019, making it the most prolific incarcerator of journalists in the world.<ref>{{cite news |title=More than 120 journalists still jailed in Turkey: International Press Institute |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-media-idUSKBN1XT26T |work=Reuters |date=19 November 2019 |access-date=27 February 2021 |archive-date=28 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210328110759/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-media-idUSKBN1XT26T |url-status=live }}</ref> | More than 120 journalists remained in prison in Turkey in 2019, making it the most prolific incarcerator of journalists in the world.<ref>{{cite news |title=More than 120 journalists still jailed in Turkey: International Press Institute |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-media-idUSKBN1XT26T |work=Reuters |date=19 November 2019 |access-date=27 February 2021 |archive-date=28 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210328110759/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-media-idUSKBN1XT26T |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
In some countries, including Turkey,<ref>{{cite news |title=Turkish journalists arrested for reporting Covid-19 cases |url=https://rsf.org/en/news/turkish-journalists-arrested-reporting-covid-19-cases |work=Reporters Without Borders |date=May | In some countries, including Turkey,<ref>{{cite news |title=Turkish journalists arrested for reporting Covid-19 cases |url=https://rsf.org/en/news/turkish-journalists-arrested-reporting-covid-19-cases |work=Reporters Without Borders |date=11 May 2020}}</ref> journalists were threatened or [[COVID-19 misinformation#Government censorship|arrested]] for their [[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on journalism|coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Coronavirus Has Started a Censorship Pandemic |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/01/coronavirus-censorship-pandemic-disinformation-fake-news-speech-freedom |work=[[Foreign Policy]] |date=1 April 2020}}</ref> | ||
====Belarus==== | |||
[[File:Katsyaryna Andreyeva.jpg|thumb|180px|Belarusian journalist [[Katsyaryna Andreeva]] was sentenced to 8 years in prison in 2022.]] | |||
Since the 2000s, Reporters Without Borders have been ranking [[Belarus]] below all other European countries in its [[Press Freedom Index]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/belarus|title=Reporters Without Borders: Belarus |access-date=30 November 2017}}</ref> Under the authoritarian president [[Alexander Lukashenko]], journalists like [[Katsyaryna Andreeva]] and [[Darya Chultsova]] have been arrested for their work. | |||
In May 2021, top news site [[Tut.By]] which was read by circa 40% of internet users in Belarus was blocked and several its journalists were detained.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/may/19/belarus-blocks-top-news-site-in-full-scale-assault-on-free-press Belarus blocks top news site in ‘full-scale assault’ on free press], Retrieved 16 June 2025.</ref> In July 2021, [[Nasha Niva]], a news site, was blocked with simultaneous detention of the editors took place.<ref>[https://www.svoboda.org/a/v-belarusi-obyski-u-zhurnalistov-izdaniya-nasha-niva/31347251.html В Беларуси обыски у журналистов издания "Наша Нива"], Retrieved 16 June 2025.</ref> | |||
====Czechia==== | ====Czechia==== | ||
| Line 145: | Line 153: | ||
====Canada==== | ====Canada==== | ||
[[File:Scrum_-_Mêlée_de_presse_(37100733570).jpg|thumb|Canadian politician [[Andrew Scheer]] being interviewed in a [[Media scrum|scrum]], 2017]] | [[File:Scrum_-_Mêlée_de_presse_(37100733570).jpg|thumb|Canadian politician [[Andrew Scheer]] being interviewed in a [[Media scrum|scrum]], 2017.]] | ||
Section 2(b) of the ''[[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]]'' states that everyone has "the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication".<ref>{{cite web|title=Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms |url=http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html |publisher=Government of Canada |access-date=20 November 2016 | | Section 2(b) of the ''[[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]]'' states that everyone has "the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication".<ref>{{cite web|title=Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms |url=http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html |publisher=Government of Canada |access-date=20 November 2016 |at=Paragraph 2(b) |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160110221331/http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html |archive-date=10 January 2016}}</ref> | ||
The [[open court principle]] ensures the '''freedom of the press''' by requiring that court proceedings presumptively be open and accessible to the public and to the media. | The [[open court principle]] ensures the '''freedom of the press''' by requiring that court proceedings presumptively be open and accessible to the public and to the media. | ||
| Line 155: | Line 163: | ||
[[File:Caso Narvarte - First anniversary protest - 7.jpg|thumb|Mexican journalist [[Rubén Espinosa]] was murdered, along with four women, in [[Mexico City]] after fleeing death threats in Veracruz.]] | [[File:Caso Narvarte - First anniversary protest - 7.jpg|thumb|Mexican journalist [[Rubén Espinosa]] was murdered, along with four women, in [[Mexico City]] after fleeing death threats in Veracruz.]] | ||
In 2016, Reporters Without Borders ranked [[Mexico]] 149 out of 180 in the [[Press Freedom Index|World Press Freedom Index]], declaring Mexico to be "the world's most dangerous country for [[journalist]]s".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/news/mexico-two-mexican-journalists-murdered-space-three-days|title=Mexico: Two Mexican journalists murdered in space of three days {{!}} Reporters without borders|website=RSF|date=20 September 2016 |language=fr-FR|access-date=2016 | In 2016, Reporters Without Borders ranked [[Mexico]] 149 out of 180 in the [[Press Freedom Index|World Press Freedom Index]], declaring Mexico to be "the world's most dangerous country for [[journalist]]s".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/news/mexico-two-mexican-journalists-murdered-space-three-days|title=Mexico: Two Mexican journalists murdered in space of three days {{!}} Reporters without borders|website=RSF|date=20 September 2016 |language=fr-FR|access-date=16 November 2016}}</ref> | ||
<!----nothing, as of May 2022 Guatemala Belize El Salvador Costa Rica Panama Honduras Cuba Jamaica ----> | <!----nothing, as of May 2022 Guatemala Belize El Salvador Costa Rica Panama Honduras Cuba Jamaica ----> | ||
| Line 201: | Line 209: | ||
===Asia=== | ===Asia=== | ||
====Azerbaijan ==== | |||
[[File:Sevinj Vagifgizi in 2020.jpg|thumb|[[Abzas Media]]'s editor-in-chief [[Sevinj Vagifgizi]] was sentenced to 9 years in prison in June 2025.]] | |||
According to Reporters Without Borders, [[Azerbaijan]]'s President [[Ilham Aliyev]] launched "a new wave of fierce repression against the country’s last remaining journalists" in late 2023.<ref>{{cite news |title=She covered human rights for VOA in Azerbaijan. Now she’s in jail. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/05/15/voice-of-america-journalist-arrested-azerbaijan/ |work=The Washington Post |date=15 May 2025}}</ref> Journalists from the independent [[Abzas Media]], Toplum TV, and [[Meydan TV]] were prosecuted in 2024 and 2025 in trials that international human rights organizations described as unfair.<ref>{{cite news |title=Azerbaijan Convicts Critics in Relentless Crackdown |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/07/03/azerbaijan-convicts-critics-in-relentless-crackdown |work=Human Rights Watch |date=3 July 2025}}</ref> The long prison sentences for seven journalists from Abzas Media are widely seen as retaliation for the outlet's investigations into [[Corruption in Azerbaijan|corruption]] in the family of Ilham Aliyev and his inner circle.<ref>{{cite news |title=Azerbaijan: Seven journalists sentenced in latest shocking crackdown on free speech |url=https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/06/azerbaijan-seven-journalists-sentenced-in-latest-shocking-crackdown-on-free-speech/ |work=Amnesty International |date=20 June 2025}}</ref> | |||
====Bahrain ==== | ====Bahrain ==== | ||
According to Reporters without Borders, a number of reporters in Bahrain were jailed. Some were also tortured or were exiled.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://rsf.org/en/news/tenth-anniversary-bahraini-bloggers-arrest| title = Tenth anniversary of Bahraini blogger's arrest {{!}} RSF| date = 17 March 2021| access-date = 30 December 2021| archive-date = 30 December 2021| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211230023223/https://rsf.org/en/news/tenth-anniversary-bahraini-bloggers-arrest| url-status = live}}</ref> | According to Reporters without Borders, a number of reporters in [[Bahrain]] were jailed. Some were also tortured or were exiled.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://rsf.org/en/news/tenth-anniversary-bahraini-bloggers-arrest| title = Tenth anniversary of Bahraini blogger's arrest {{!}} RSF| date = 17 March 2021| access-date = 30 December 2021| archive-date = 30 December 2021| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211230023223/https://rsf.org/en/news/tenth-anniversary-bahraini-bloggers-arrest| url-status = live}}</ref> | ||
====Iran==== | ====Iran==== | ||
According to the reports of the RSF in 2007, the freedom of | According to the reports of the RSF in 2007, the [[Censorship in Iran|freedom of the press in Iran]] ranked 166 among 169 states. The report reads the Iranian journalists face the "extreme harsh behavior of the Iranian regime that prevents them criticizing authorities or expressing political and social demands.<ref>{{cite web |title=Country of origin information report Iran |url=https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2013/06/12/iran050407.pdf |website=www.justice.gov |date=4 May 2007 |access-date=8 September 2020 |archive-date=18 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210718122811/https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2013/06/12/iran050407.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
After a [[Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752| Ukrainian airliner was shot down]] in 2020 by the [[Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps]], agents of the [[Iranian Ministry of Intelligence]] raided the houses and offices of many Iranian journalists seeking for their PCs, cell phones, books, and documents. These journalists had revealed the lies of the Iranian regime. Some of the journalists received warnings by the authorities and were forced to shut down their accounts in Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.<ref>{{cite news |title=Reporters Without Borders: Iranian Journalists Are Victims Of Jet Crash Lies |url=https://www.rferl.org/a/reporters-without-borders-iranian-journalists-are-victims-of-jet-crash-lies-/30421140.html |last = <!-- not stated -->|website=[[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty]] |date=2020 | After a [[Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752| Ukrainian airliner was shot down]] in 2020 by the [[Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps]], agents of the [[Iranian Ministry of Intelligence]] raided the houses and offices of many Iranian journalists seeking for their PCs, cell phones, books, and documents. These journalists had revealed the lies of the Iranian regime. Some of the journalists received warnings by the authorities and were forced to shut down their accounts in Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.<ref>{{cite news |title=Reporters Without Borders: Iranian Journalists Are Victims Of Jet Crash Lies |url=https://www.rferl.org/a/reporters-without-borders-iranian-journalists-are-victims-of-jet-crash-lies-/30421140.html |last = <!-- not stated -->|website=[[Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty]] |date=6 February 2020 |access-date=5 September 2020 |archive-date=5 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200905025141/https://www.rferl.org/a/reporters-without-borders-iranian-journalists-are-victims-of-jet-crash-lies-/30421140.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
Demanding promotion of the global Freedom of Media, in December 1993, UNESCO called | Demanding promotion of the global Freedom of Media, in December 1993, UNESCO called 3 April as "International day for Freedom of Media". This is while the RSF reported at least 860 journalists have been detained and imprisoned from 1979 to 2009 in Iran.<ref>{{cite news |title=روز آزادی مطبوعات؛ ایران جزو پنج زندان بزرگ روزنامهنگاران |url=https://www.dw.com/fa-ir/%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%A2%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%DB%8C-%D9%85%D8%B7%D8%A8%D9%88%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AC%D8%B2%D9%88-%D9%BE%D9%86%D8%AC-%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%B2%D8%B1%DA%AF-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86/a-18423206 |website=[[Deutsche Welle]]|date=2 May 2015 |last=شجاعی|first=میترا |language=fa |access-date=9 November 2020 |archive-date=10 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201110042029/https://www.dw.com/fa-ir/%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%A2%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%DB%8C-%D9%85%D8%B7%D8%A8%D9%88%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AC%D8%B2%D9%88-%D9%BE%D9%86%D8%AC-%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%B2%D8%B1%DA%AF-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86/a-18423206 |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On April | On 21 April 2020, [[Paris]]-based [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RSF) said in its annual press [[freedom]] rankings that the pandemic was "highlighting many crises" already casting a shadow on [[press freedom]], around the world, with authoritarian states including Iran suppressing details of the outbreak.<ref name="Amplifies">{{cite news |title=Coronavirus pandemic 'amplifies press freedom threats' |url=https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-pandemic-amplifies-press-freedom-threats-040853085.html |agency=AFP |date=21 April 2020 |access-date=3 May 2020 |archive-date=8 May 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200508055600/https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-pandemic-amplifies-press-freedom-threats-040853085.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> | ||
RSF accused | RSF accused Iran in 173rd place of censoring major coronavirus outbreaks.<ref name="Amplifies" /> | ||
On the occasion of [[World Press Freedom Day]] in 2020, the [[Writers' Association of Iran]] released a statement emphasizing the existence of censorship and violation of freedom of speech and its destructive impacts on the structure and vital foundation of the society. It noted that during the past decades, the rulers in the country imprisoned more than 890 journalists and reporters, some of whom have been executed. The Iranian Writer Association expressed its regret, when Iran ranked 173 among 180 states due to freedom of speech.<ref>{{cite news |title=بیانیه کانون نویسنگان ایران به مناسبت روز جهانی آزادی مطبوعات |url=https://www.hra-news.org/statements/a-479/ |language=fa |website=Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) |date=2020 | On the occasion of [[World Press Freedom Day]] in 2020, the [[Writers' Association of Iran]] released a statement emphasizing the existence of censorship and violation of freedom of speech and its destructive impacts on the structure and vital foundation of the society. It noted that during the past decades, the rulers in the country imprisoned more than 890 journalists and reporters, some of whom have been executed. The Iranian Writer Association expressed its regret, when Iran ranked 173 among 180 states due to freedom of speech.<ref>{{cite news |title=بیانیه کانون نویسنگان ایران به مناسبت روز جهانی آزادی مطبوعات |url=https://www.hra-news.org/statements/a-479/ |language=fa |website=Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) |date=3 May 2020 |access-date=30 August 2020 |archive-date=17 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200817010335/https://www.hra-news.org/statements/a-479/ |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On 7 February 2020, the International Federation of Journalists in a statement condemned "raiding of Iranian Security Forces upon the houses of six Iranian journalists, holding the forces of "IRGC's Intelligence" responsible for recent pressures on the journalists. The secretary-general of the federation, Anthony Blunker, said that intimidating and threatening journalists are unpleasant tools to silence the public opinion of the administration.<ref>{{cite news |title=ادامه انتقاد نهادهای بینالمللی نسبت به موج تازه فشارها علیه روزنامهنگاران ایران |language=fa |url=https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-51424918 |website=BBC |date=2020 | On 7 February 2020, the International Federation of Journalists in a statement condemned "raiding of Iranian Security Forces upon the houses of six Iranian journalists, holding the forces of "IRGC's Intelligence" responsible for recent pressures on the journalists. The secretary-general of the federation, Anthony Blunker, said that intimidating and threatening journalists are unpleasant tools to silence the public opinion of the administration.<ref>{{cite news |title=ادامه انتقاد نهادهای بینالمللی نسبت به موج تازه فشارها علیه روزنامهنگاران ایران |language=fa |url=https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-51424918 |website=BBC |date=8 February 2020 |access-date=31 August 2020 |archive-date=31 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200831060613/https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-51424918 |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On November | On 26 November 2019, the RSF condemned the pressure on families of reporters by the Iranian regime, saying Iran ranked 170 among 180 states regarding Freedom of Press in 2019.<ref>{{cite news |title=گزارشگران بدون مرز: سفیر ایران در لندن تهدیدی علیه رسانهها و روزنامهنگاران است |url=https://www.radiofarda.com/a/rfs_statment_iran_harrasment_journalists_iranian_abroad/30293459.html |website=[[Radio Farda]] |date=26 November 2019 |language=fa |access-date=28 September 2020 |archive-date=30 November 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191130220157/https://www.radiofarda.com/a/rfs_statment_iran_harrasment_journalists_iranian_abroad/30293459.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
In its 2019 annual report, the Committee to Protect Journalists found at least 250 journalists in jail in relation to their work and stated that the number of imprisoned journalists in Iran was 11, citing the crackdown on protests by the Iranian people over rising gasoline prices. The report named Eritrea, Vietnam and Iran as "the worst prisons for journalists" after China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.<ref>{{cite web |title=China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt are world's worst jailers of journalists |url=https://cpj.org/reports/2019/12/journalists-jailed-china-turkey-saudi-arabia-egypt/ |last=Beiser |first=Elana |date=2019 | In its 2019 annual report, the Committee to Protect Journalists found at least 250 journalists in jail in relation to their work and stated that the number of imprisoned journalists in Iran was 11, citing the crackdown on protests by the Iranian people over rising gasoline prices. The report named Eritrea, Vietnam and Iran as "the worst prisons for journalists" after China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.<ref>{{cite web |title=China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt are world's worst jailers of journalists |url=https://cpj.org/reports/2019/12/journalists-jailed-china-turkey-saudi-arabia-egypt/ |last=Beiser |first=Elana |date=11 December 2019 |website=[[Committee to Protect Journalists|CPJ]] |access-date=4 September 2020 |archive-date=31 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200831164308/https://cpj.org/reports/2019/12/journalists-jailed-china-turkey-saudi-arabia-egypt/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=کمیته حمایت از روزنامهنگاران: ۲۵۰ روزنامهنگار در جهان زندانی هستند |url=https://www.bbc.com/persian/world-50746161 |website=BBC |date=11 December 2019 |language=fa|access-date=4 September 2020 |archive-date=4 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200904073225/https://www.bbc.com/persian/world-50746161 |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On September | On 8 September 2020, Reporters Without Borders expressed concern about the continuing detention and repression of journalists in Iran and warned for the journalists and Reporters who have been arrested for their activities and subjected to harassment. "The [[Human Rights Council]] must take more serious action to protect and defend journalists", said an official.<ref>{{cite news |title=خبرنگاران بدون مرز: سرکوب روزنامهنگاران ایران تشدید شده است |url=https://www.dw.com/fa-ir/%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%B2-%D8%B3%D8%B1%DA%A9%D9%88%D8%A8-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AA%D8%B4%D8%AF%DB%8C%D8%AF-%D8%B4%D8%AF%D9%87-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA/a-54858009 |website=[[Deutsche Welle]] |date=8 September 2020 |language=fa|access-date=9 September 2020 |archive-date=9 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200909082720/https://www.dw.com/fa-ir/%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%B2-%D8%B3%D8%B1%DA%A9%D9%88%D8%A8-%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%AA%D8%B4%D8%AF%DB%8C%D8%AF-%D8%B4%D8%AF%D9%87-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA/a-54858009/ |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
On Monday, November | On Monday, 9 November 2020, Ralf Nestmeyer, vice president of [[PEN International|PEN]] Germany, referred to the repressive methods of authoritarian regimes: "Freedom of expression has declined in many parts of the world". He added that dictatorial regimes respond to any criticism with violence and imprisonment.{{Citation needed|date=March 2025}} This year the World Pen Association (Pen), will concentrate on the fate of writers in Iran, China, Turkey, Peru and Uganda.<ref>{{cite web |title=Iran: Writers Baktash Abtin, Reza Khandan-Mahabadi and Keyvan Bazhan Imprisoned |url=https://pen-international.org/news/iran-writers-baktash-abtin-reza-khandan-mahabadi-and-keyvan-bazhan-imprisoned |website=[[PEN International]] |last= <!-- not stated -->|date=30 October 2020 |access-date=24 November 2020 |archive-date=2 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210202211636/https://pen-international.org/news/iran-writers-baktash-abtin-reza-khandan-mahabadi-and-keyvan-bazhan-imprisoned |url-status=live }}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=March 2025|reason=This statement makes no mention of the organization focusing on writers in various countries.}} | ||
[[Human Rights Watch]] condemned the punishment of the [[death penalty]] and demanded that it be prevented at all costs, following the December | [[Human Rights Watch]] condemned the punishment of the [[death penalty]] and demanded that it be prevented at all costs, following the 12 December execution of an Iranian dissident on vague charges. Rouhallah Zam, the founder of Telegram channel [[Amadnews]], was allegedly detained when he was visiting Iran in October 2019. He was deported forcibly to Iran and convicted of vague national security charges, as per Human Rights Watch. Zam faced trial for his ‘activism’ after being deported to Iran. The Iranian Supreme Court confirmed his verdict on 8 December and the journalist was executed on 12 December.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/12/iran-dissident-executed-vague-charges|title=Iran: Dissident Executed on Vague Charges|access-date=12 December 2020|website=Human Rights Watch|date=12 December 2020|archive-date=12 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201212214942/https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/12/iran-dissident-executed-vague-charges|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
====Palestine and Israel==== | ====Palestine and Israel==== | ||
{{Seealso|List of journalists killed in the Gaza war}} | {{Seealso|List of journalists killed in the Gaza war}} | ||
[[File:Hossam Shabat.jpg|thumb|[[Al Jazeera]]'s Gaza correspondent [[Hossam Shabat]] was assassinated by the [[Israel Defense Forces|IDF]] on 24 March 2025]] | [[File:Hossam Shabat.jpg|thumb|[[Al Jazeera]]'s Gaza correspondent [[Hossam Shabat]] was assassinated by the [[Israel Defense Forces|IDF]] on 24 March 2025.]] | ||
In October 2019, the [[Palestinian National Authority|Palestinian Authority]] blocked 59 websites, claiming that they were critical of the government. These websites were both Palestinian and Arabic and were identified to have been publishing material that "threaten national security and civil peace". Quds News Network, among the blocked sites, stated that the move reflected the Palestinian Authority's repression of the press.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.palestinechronicle.com/palestinian-court-blocks-59-websites-critical-of-pa/|title=Palestinian Court Blocks 59 Websites Critical of PA|access-date=22 October 2019|website=The Palestine Chronicle|date=22 October 2019|archive-date=23 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191023132716/http://www.palestinechronicle.com/palestinian-court-blocks-59-websites-critical-of-pa/|url-status=live}}</ref> | In October 2019, the [[Palestinian National Authority|Palestinian Authority]] blocked 59 websites, claiming that they were critical of the government. These websites were both Palestinian and Arabic and were identified to have been publishing material that "threaten national security and civil peace". Quds News Network, among the blocked sites, stated that the move reflected the Palestinian Authority's repression of the press.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.palestinechronicle.com/palestinian-court-blocks-59-websites-critical-of-pa/|title=Palestinian Court Blocks 59 Websites Critical of PA|access-date=22 October 2019|website=The Palestine Chronicle|date=22 October 2019|archive-date=23 October 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191023132716/http://www.palestinechronicle.com/palestinian-court-blocks-59-websites-critical-of-pa/|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
In 2023, nearly 75% of journalists killed worldwide were Palestinians who had died in [[Israel]]’s [[Gaza war|war in Gaza]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nearly 75% of journalists killed in 2023 died in Israel's war on Gaza: CPJ |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/15/nearly-75-of-journalists-killed-in-2023-died-in-israels-war-on-gaza-cpj |access-date=2024 | In 2023, nearly 75% of journalists killed worldwide were Palestinians who had died in [[Israel]]’s [[Gaza war|war in Gaza]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nearly 75% of journalists killed in 2023 died in Israel's war on Gaza: CPJ |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/15/nearly-75-of-journalists-killed-in-2023-died-in-israels-war-on-gaza-cpj |access-date=7 March 2024 |website=Al Jazeera |language=en}}</ref> According to the [[Committee to Protect Journalists]], Israel was the second worst country in the world for allowing the murderers of journalists to go unpunished.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Scott |first1=Liam |title=Haiti, Israel ranked worst for securing justice in journalist killings |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/haiti-israel-ranked-worst-for-securing-justice-in-journalist-killings/7845113.html |website=Voice of America |date=30 October 2024 |access-date=1 November 2024}}</ref> [[UNESCO]] awarded its 2024 World Press Freedom Prize to the Palestinian journalists of [[Gaza Strip|Gaza]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2 May 2024 |title=Palestinian journalists covering Gaza awarded 2024 UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize |url=https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/palestinian-journalists-covering-gaza-awarded-2024-unesco/guillermo-cano-world-press-freedom-prize?hub=910 |website=UNESCO}}</ref> | ||
====China==== | ====China==== | ||
{{main|Freedom of the press in China}} | {{main|Freedom of the press in China}} | ||
Critics argue that the [[Chinese Communist Party|Communist Party]] in China has failed to live up to its promises about the freedom of the [[Media of China|mainland Chinese media]]. [[Freedom House]] consistently ranks China as 'Not Free'<ref>{{cite web|url=https://leadingweb.de/freedom-of-preess-china/|title=China|date=2020 | Critics argue that the [[Chinese Communist Party|Communist Party]] in China has failed to live up to its promises about the freedom of the [[Media of China|mainland Chinese media]]. [[Freedom House]] consistently ranks China as 'Not Free'<ref>{{cite web|url=https://leadingweb.de/freedom-of-preess-china/|title=China|date=15 April 2020|website=leadingweb.de|access-date=3 October 2019|archive-date=31 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200731204711/https://leadingweb.de/freedom-of-preess-china/|url-status=dead}}</ref> in its annual press freedom survey, including the 2014 report. PRC journalist [[He Qinglian]] says that the PRC's media are controlled by directives from the Communist Party's propaganda department and are subjected to intense monitoring which threatens punishment for violators, rather than to pre-publication censorship. In 2008, [[ITV News]] reporter John Ray was arrested while covering a 'Free Tibet' protest.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=13844|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100915040919/http://irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=13844|url-status=dead|archive-date=15 September 2010|title=8 Tibet Activists Detained near Olympics Venue|date=15 September 2010|access-date=3 October 2019}}</ref> International media coverage of Tibetan protests only a few months before the Beijing Olympics in 2008 triggered a strong reaction inside China. Chinese media practitioners took the opportunity to argue with propaganda authorities for more media freedom: one journalist asked, 'If not even Chinese journalists are allowed to report about the problems in Tibet, how can foreign journalists know about the Chinese perspective about the events?' Foreign journalists also reported that their access to certain websites, including those of human rights organizations, was restricted.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/08/hundreds-of-web.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080814212635/http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/08/hundreds-of-web.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=14 August 2008|title=Hundreds of websites still censored at Beijing Olympics {{!}} Web Scout {{!}} Los Angeles Times|date=14 August 2008|access-date=3 October 2019}}</ref> | ||
[[International Olympic Committee]] president [[Jacques Rogge]] stated at the end of the 2008 Olympic Games that "The regulations [governing foreign media freedom during the Olympics] might not be perfect but they are a sea-change compared to the situation before. We hope that they will continue".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXmzlCbGH43nO0lzYAWpSHGiqBhg|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090305093246/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXmzlCbGH43nO0lzYAWpSHGiqBhg|url-status=dead|archive-date=2009 | [[International Olympic Committee]] president [[Jacques Rogge]] stated at the end of the 2008 Olympic Games that "The regulations [governing foreign media freedom during the Olympics] might not be perfect but they are a sea-change compared to the situation before. We hope that they will continue".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXmzlCbGH43nO0lzYAWpSHGiqBhg|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090305093246/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXmzlCbGH43nO0lzYAWpSHGiqBhg|url-status=dead|archive-date=5 March 2009|title=AFP: Rogge urges China to keep foreign media freedoms|date=5 March 2009|access-date=3 October 2019}}</ref> The Foreign Correspondents Club of China (FCCC) issued a statement during the Olympics that 'despite welcome progress in terms of accessibility and the number of press conferences within the Olympic facilities, the FCCC has been alarmed at the use of violence, intimidation and harassment outside. The club has confirmed more than 30 cases of reporting interference since the formal opening of the Olympic media centre on 25 July, and is checking at least 20 other reported incidents.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24240947-2722,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080915162044/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24240947-2722,00.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=15 September 2008|title=Games fell short of standards|date=15 September 2008|access-date=3 October 2019}}</ref> | ||
Since the Chinese state continues to exert a considerable amount of control over media, public support for domestic reporting has come as a surprise to many observers. Not much is known about the extent to which the Chinese citizenry believe the official statements of the CPC, nor about which media sources they perceive as credible and why. So far, research on the media in China has focused on the changing relationship between media outlets and the state during the reform era. Nor is much known about how China's changing media environment has affected the government's ability to persuade media audiences. Research on political trust reveals that exposure to the media correlates positively with support for the government in some instances, and negatively in others. The research has been cited as evidence that the Chinese public believes propaganda transmitted to them through the news media, but also that they disbelieve it. | Since the Chinese state continues to exert a considerable amount of control over media, public support for domestic reporting has come as a surprise to many observers. Not much is known about the extent to which the Chinese citizenry believe the official statements of the CPC, nor about which media sources they perceive as credible and why. So far, research on the media in China has focused on the changing relationship between media outlets and the state during the reform era. Nor is much known about how China's changing media environment has affected the government's ability to persuade media audiences. Research on political trust reveals that exposure to the media correlates positively with support for the government in some instances, and negatively in others. The research has been cited as evidence that the Chinese public believes propaganda transmitted to them through the news media, but also that they disbelieve it. | ||
In 2012 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights urged the Chinese government to lift restrictions on media access to the region and allow independent and impartial monitors to visit and assess conditions in Tibet. The Chinese government did not change its position.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.un.org/en/story/2012/11/424662-china-must-urgently-address-rights-violations-tibet-un-senior-official|title=China must urgently address rights violations in Tibet – UN senior official|date=2012 | In 2012 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights urged the Chinese government to lift restrictions on media access to the region and allow independent and impartial monitors to visit and assess conditions in Tibet. The Chinese government did not change its position.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.un.org/en/story/2012/11/424662-china-must-urgently-address-rights-violations-tibet-un-senior-official|title=China must urgently address rights violations in Tibet – UN senior official|date=2 November 2012|website=UN News|access-date=3 October 2019|archive-date=17 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180317221244/https://news.un.org/en/story/2012/11/424662-china-must-urgently-address-rights-violations-tibet-un-senior-official|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
====Pakistan==== | ====Pakistan==== | ||
{{Main|Freedom of the press in Pakistan}} | {{Main|Freedom of the press in Pakistan}} | ||
Article 19 of the constitution of the Pakistan states that: "Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defense of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, commission of or incitement to an offence".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/|title=The Constitution of Pakistan|website=www.pakistani.org|access-date=2019 | Article 19 of the constitution of the Pakistan states that: "Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defense of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, commission of or incitement to an offence".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/|title=The Constitution of Pakistan|website=www.pakistani.org|access-date=3 October 2019|archive-date=7 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180907231721/http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/|url-status=dead}}</ref> Since independence the electronic media in Pakistan remained dominated by the state-run Pakistan Television and Pakistan Broadcasting Corporations. Ironically, press freedom in Pakistan flourished for the first time in 2002 during Gen. [[Pervez Musharraf]]'s era.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.pakistanpressfoundation.org/musharrafs-respect-for-press-freedom/|title=Musharraf's respect for press freedom {{!}} Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF)|website=www.pakistanpressfoundation.org|access-date=3 October 2019|archive-date=14 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200114181053/https://www.pakistanpressfoundation.org/musharrafs-respect-for-press-freedom/|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
To a large extent the media enjoys freedom of expression in spite of political pressure and direct bans sometimes administered by political stake holders. Political pressure on media is mostly done indirectly. One tool widely used by the government is to cut off 'unfriendly' media from governmental advertising. Using draconian laws, the government has also banned or officially silenced popular television channels. The [[Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority]] (PEMRA) has been used to silence the broadcast media by either suspending licenses or by simply threatening to do so. In addition, media is also threatened by non-state actors involved in the current conflict. | To a large extent the media enjoys freedom of expression in spite of political pressure and direct bans sometimes administered by political stake holders. Political pressure on media is mostly done indirectly. One tool widely used by the government is to cut off 'unfriendly' media from governmental advertising. Using draconian laws, the government has also banned or officially silenced popular television channels. The [[Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority]] (PEMRA) has been used to silence the broadcast media by either suspending licenses or by simply threatening to do so. In addition, media is also threatened by non-state actors involved in the current conflict. | ||
In its 2018 [[Press Freedom Index]], [[Reporters Without Borders]] ranked Pakistan number 139 out of 180 countries based on freedom of the press. The report implied considerable improvement in the freedom of press compared to the preceding years.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/ranking|title=2019 World Press Freedom Index {{!}} Reporters Without Borders|website=RSF|date=30 January 2013|access-date=2019 | In its 2018 [[Press Freedom Index]], [[Reporters Without Borders]] ranked Pakistan number 139 out of 180 countries based on freedom of the press. The report implied considerable improvement in the freedom of press compared to the preceding years.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/ranking|title=2019 World Press Freedom Index {{!}} Reporters Without Borders|website=RSF|date=30 January 2013|access-date=3 October 2019|archive-date=17 January 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230117010440/https://rsf.org/en/ranking|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
====Malaysia==== | ====Malaysia==== | ||
| Line 261: | Line 273: | ||
====Saudi Arabia==== | ====Saudi Arabia==== | ||
[[File:Jamal Khashoggi in March 2018.jpg|thumb|Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was a journalist and critic but was murdered by the Saudi Government.<ref name="washingtonpost.com">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/jamal-khashoggi-what-the-arab-world-needs-most-is-free-expression/2018/10/17/adfc8c44-d21d-11e8-8c22-fa2ef74bd6d6_story.html |title=Opinion | Jamal Khashoggi: What the Arab world needs most is free expression |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=2018 | [[File:Jamal Khashoggi in March 2018.jpg|thumb|Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was a journalist and critic but was murdered by the Saudi Government.<ref name="washingtonpost.com">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/jamal-khashoggi-what-the-arab-world-needs-most-is-free-expression/2018/10/17/adfc8c44-d21d-11e8-8c22-fa2ef74bd6d6_story.html |title=Opinion | Jamal Khashoggi: What the Arab world needs most is free expression |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=17 October 2018 |accessdate=16 February 2022 |archive-date=20 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181020001008/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/jamal-khashoggi-what-the-arab-world-needs-most-is-free-expression/2018/10/17/adfc8c44-d21d-11e8-8c22-fa2ef74bd6d6_story.html |url-status=live }}</ref>]] | ||
[[Saudi Arabia]] does not tolerate dissidents and it can impose penalties on such people. Saudi Arabia is also responsible for executing [[Saudi Americans|Saudi American]] journalist, [[Jamal Khashoggi]] in 2018. As he entered a Saudi embassy in Turkey, a group of Saudi assassins killed him. | [[Saudi Arabia]] does not tolerate dissidents and it can impose penalties on such people. Saudi Arabia is also responsible for executing [[Saudi Americans|Saudi American]] journalist, [[Jamal Khashoggi]] in 2018. As he entered a Saudi embassy in Turkey, a group of Saudi assassins killed him.<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/> | ||
<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/> | |||
====India==== | ====India==== | ||
| Line 270: | Line 281: | ||
|title = The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 | |title = The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 | ||
|url = http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm | |url = http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm | ||
|access-date = 2006 | |access-date = 30 October 2006 | ||
|archive-date = 2012 | |archive-date = 12 April 2012 | ||
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120412153523/http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm | |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120412153523/http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm | ||
|url-status = live | |url-status = live | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> (PoTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under PoTA, person could be detained for up to six months for being in contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. PoTA was repealed in 2006, but the Official Secrets Act 1923 continues. | ||
(PoTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under PoTA, person could be detained for up to six months for being in contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. PoTA was repealed in 2006, but the Official Secrets Act 1923 continues. | |||
For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. [[Indira Gandhi]] famously stated in 1975 that [[All India Radio]] is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..."<ref>{{Cite journal | For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. [[Indira Gandhi]] famously stated in 1975 that [[All India Radio]] is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..."<ref>{{Cite journal | ||
| Line 283: | Line 293: | ||
|publisher = People's Union for Civil Liberties | |publisher = People's Union for Civil Liberties | ||
|date = July 1982 | |date = July 1982 | ||
|access-date = 2006 | |access-date = 30 October 2006 | ||
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180411055721/http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Media/freedom-press.htm | |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180411055721/http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Media/freedom-press.htm | ||
|archive-date = 2018 | |archive-date = 11 April 2018 | ||
|url-status = dead | |url-status = dead | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> With the liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. | ||
With the liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. | |||
It ranks poorly at 142nd<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/india|title=India : Deadly threat from Modi's nationalism – Reporters without borders|website=RSF|date=22 March 2023|access-date=2 June 2017|archive-date=2 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170602191728/https://rsf.org/en/india|url-status=live}}</ref> rank out of 180 listed countries in the [[Press Freedom Index]] 2021 released by [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RSF).<ref name=":1">{{cite web | title= 2018 Press Freedom Index | url= https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2018 | publisher= Reporters Without Borders | access-date= 23 June 2018 | archive-date= 10 June 2020 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200610224246/https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2018 | url-status= dead }}</ref> Analytically India's press freedom, as could be deduced by the [[Press Freedom Index]], has constantly reduced since 2002, when it culminated in terms of apparent freedom, achieving a rank of 80 among the reported countries. In 2018, India's freedom of press ranking declined two placed to 138. In explaining the decline, RSF cited growing intolerance from [[Hindu nationalist]] supporters of Indian Prime Minister [[Narendra Modi]], and the murders of journalists such as [[Gauri Lankesh]].<ref>{{cite news|title=World Press Freedom Index: India down two ranks to 138, one place above Pakistan|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/india/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138-reporters-without-borders-5151340/|access-date=29 May 2018|work=Indian|date=27 April 2018|archive-date=29 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180529204146/http://indianexpress.com/article/india/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138-reporters-without-borders-5151340/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=India's ranking in press freedom falls to 138|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138/article23679187.ece|access-date=29 May 2018|work=The Hindu|date=26 April 2018|archive-date=30 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191230224958/https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138/article23679187.ece|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Faisal|first1=Mohammed|title=World Press Freedom Index Report 2018: India placed only one rank above Pakistan, but why?|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/world-press-freedom-index-report-2018-india-placed-only-one-rank-above-pakistan-but-why-1220666-2018-05-03|access-date=29 May 2018|work=India Today|date=3 May 2018|archive-date=3 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503132828/https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/world-press-freedom-index-report-2018-india-placed-only-one-rank-above-pakistan-but-why-1220666-2018-05-03|url-status=live}}</ref> | It ranks poorly at 142nd<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rsf.org/en/india|title=India : Deadly threat from Modi's nationalism – Reporters without borders|website=RSF|date=22 March 2023|access-date=2 June 2017|archive-date=2 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170602191728/https://rsf.org/en/india|url-status=live}}</ref> rank out of 180 listed countries in the [[Press Freedom Index]] 2021 released by [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RSF).<ref name=":1">{{cite web | title= 2018 Press Freedom Index | url= https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2018 | publisher= Reporters Without Borders | access-date= 23 June 2018 | archive-date= 10 June 2020 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200610224246/https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2018 | url-status= dead }}</ref> Analytically India's press freedom, as could be deduced by the [[Press Freedom Index]], has constantly reduced since 2002, when it culminated in terms of apparent freedom, achieving a rank of 80 among the reported countries. In 2018, India's freedom of press ranking declined two placed to 138. In explaining the decline, RSF cited growing intolerance from [[Hindu nationalist]] supporters of Indian Prime Minister [[Narendra Modi]], and the murders of journalists such as [[Gauri Lankesh]].<ref>{{cite news|title=World Press Freedom Index: India down two ranks to 138, one place above Pakistan|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/india/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138-reporters-without-borders-5151340/|access-date=29 May 2018|work=Indian|date=27 April 2018|archive-date=29 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180529204146/http://indianexpress.com/article/india/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138-reporters-without-borders-5151340/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=India's ranking in press freedom falls to 138|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138/article23679187.ece|access-date=29 May 2018|work=The Hindu|date=26 April 2018|archive-date=30 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191230224958/https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/indias-ranking-in-press-freedom-falls-to-138/article23679187.ece|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Faisal|first1=Mohammed|title=World Press Freedom Index Report 2018: India placed only one rank above Pakistan, but why?|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/world-press-freedom-index-report-2018-india-placed-only-one-rank-above-pakistan-but-why-1220666-2018-05-03|access-date=29 May 2018|work=India Today|date=3 May 2018|archive-date=3 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503132828/https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/world-press-freedom-index-report-2018-india-placed-only-one-rank-above-pakistan-but-why-1220666-2018-05-03|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
| Line 294: | Line 303: | ||
====Bangladesh==== | ====Bangladesh==== | ||
{{main|Freedom of the press in Bangladesh}} | {{main|Freedom of the press in Bangladesh}} | ||
[[Media of Bangladesh|Bangladeshi media]] is reportedly following self-censorship due to the controversial Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act. Under this act, 25 journalists and several hundred bloggers and Facebook users are reportedly prosecuted in Bangladesh in 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/law-rights/2018/04/25/press-freedom-report-bangladesh-shows-no-progress|title=Press freedom report: media self-censorship on rise in Bangladesh|date=2018 | [[Media of Bangladesh|Bangladeshi media]] is reportedly following self-censorship due to the controversial Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act. Under this act, 25 journalists and several hundred bloggers and Facebook users are reportedly prosecuted in Bangladesh in 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/law-rights/2018/04/25/press-freedom-report-bangladesh-shows-no-progress|title=Press freedom report: media self-censorship on rise in Bangladesh|date=25 April 2018|work=Dhaka Tribune|access-date=11 August 2018|archive-date=11 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180811063724/https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/law-rights/2018/04/25/press-freedom-report-bangladesh-shows-no-progress|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
Bangladesh ranks poorly at 146th rank out of 180 listed countries in the [[Press Freedom Index]] 2018 released by [[Reporters Without Borders]] (RWB).<ref name=":1" /> Bangladeshi media has faced many problems in 2018. The country's most popular online newspaper [[bdnews24.com]] was blocked for a few hours on 18 June 2018, by Bangladesh's regulatory authority. Another newspaper ''[[The Daily Star (Bangladesh)|The Daily Star]]''{{'s}} website was blocked for 22 hours on 2 June 2018, after it had published a report about a victim of an extrajudicial execution in the southeastern city of [[Cox's Bazar]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/en/is-bangladeshs-media-freedom-deteriorating/a-44854327|title=Is Bangladesh's media freedom deteriorating?|date=27 July 2018|website=dw.com|access-date=11 August 2018|archive-date=11 August 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180811063316/https://www.dw.com/en/is-bangladeshs-media-freedom-deteriorating/a-44854327|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
During the [[2018 Bangladesh road-safety protests|road-safety protests in 2018]], Bangladeshi government switched off 3G and 4G mobile data and also arrested a photographer named [[Shahidul Alam]] under ICT act, after he had given an interview with [[Al Jazeera Arabic|Al Jazeera]].<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=https://time.com/5359850/bangladesh-photographer-arrest-shahidul-alam-protests/|title=A Bangladeshi Photographer's Arrest Is a Worrying Sign for Press Freedom|magazine=Time|access-date=11 August 2018}}</ref> | |||
====Japan==== | |||
In Japan's system, the Japanese government excludes foreign media outlets and freelance journalists from briefings, giving the [[kisha clubs]] (journalists mainly from Japan's mainstream media) the right to use primary sources. Also, the elite group of journalists provides a mechanism whereby politicians threaten to block journalists from briefings if their report is critical of the government. The clubs are considered to be one of the reasons why Japan came bottom among the G7 nations and was ranked 68th in the world in the 2023 World Press Freedom Index.<ref>{{Cite web | |||
|url=https://www.dw.com/en/why-japan-ranks-poorly-in-press-freedom/a-65549778 | |||
|title=Why Japan ranks poorly in press freedom | |||
|date=8 May 2023 | |||
|publisher=DW | |||
}}</ref> | |||
===Africa=== | ===Africa=== | ||
| Line 311: | Line 328: | ||
Many of the traditional means of delivering information are being slowly superseded by the increasing pace of modern technological advance. Almost every conventional mode of media and information dissemination has a modern counterpart that offers significant potential advantages to journalists seeking to maintain and enhance their freedom of speech. A few simple examples of such phenomena include: | Many of the traditional means of delivering information are being slowly superseded by the increasing pace of modern technological advance. Almost every conventional mode of media and information dissemination has a modern counterpart that offers significant potential advantages to journalists seeking to maintain and enhance their freedom of speech. A few simple examples of such phenomena include: | ||
* [[Satellite television]] versus [[terrestrial television]]: Whilst terrestrial television is relatively easy to manage and manipulate, satellite television is much more difficult to control as journalistic content can easily be broadcast from other jurisdictions beyond the control of individual governments. An example of this in the Middle East is the satellite broadcaster [[Al Jazeera Arabic|Al Jazeera]]. This Arabic-language media channel operates out of [[Qatar]], whose government is relatively liberal compared to many of its neighboring states. As such, its views and content are often problematic to a number of governments in the region and beyond. However, because of the increased affordability and miniaturisation of satellite technology (e.g., dishes and receivers) it is simply not practicable for most states to control popular access to the channel. | * [[Satellite television]] versus [[terrestrial television]]: Whilst terrestrial television is relatively easy to manage and manipulate, satellite television is much more difficult to control as journalistic content can easily be broadcast from other jurisdictions beyond the control of individual governments. An example of this in the Middle East is the satellite broadcaster [[Al Jazeera Arabic|Al Jazeera]]. This Arabic-language media channel operates out of [[Qatar]], whose government is relatively liberal compared to many of its neighboring states. As such, its views and content are often problematic to a number of governments in the region and beyond. However, because of the increased affordability and miniaturisation of satellite technology (e.g., dishes and receivers) it is simply not practicable for most states to control popular access to the channel. | ||
* Internet-based publishing (e.g., [[blog]]ging, [[social media]]) vs. traditional [[publishing]]: Traditional magazines and newspapers rely on physical resources (e.g., offices, printing presses) that can easily be targeted and forced to close down. Internet-based publishing systems can be run using ubiquitous and inexpensive equipment and can operate from any global jurisdiction. Nations and organisations are increasingly resorting to legal measures to take control of online publications, using national security, anti-terror measures and [[DMCA takedown|copyright laws]] to issue takedown notices and restrict opposition speech.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/blog/2016/01/how-us-copyright-law-is-being-used-to-take-down-co.php|title=How U.S. copyright law is being used to take down Correa's critics in Ecuador – Committee to Protect Journalists|website=cpj.org|date=21 January 2016|access-date=2017 | * Internet-based publishing (e.g., [[blog]]ging, [[social media]]) vs. traditional [[publishing]]: Traditional magazines and newspapers rely on physical resources (e.g., offices, printing presses) that can easily be targeted and forced to close down. Internet-based publishing systems can be run using ubiquitous and inexpensive equipment and can operate from any global jurisdiction. Nations and organisations are increasingly resorting to legal measures to take control of online publications, using national security, anti-terror measures and [[DMCA takedown|copyright laws]] to issue takedown notices and restrict opposition speech.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://cpj.org/blog/2016/01/how-us-copyright-law-is-being-used-to-take-down-co.php|title=How U.S. copyright law is being used to take down Correa's critics in Ecuador – Committee to Protect Journalists|website=cpj.org|date=21 January 2016|access-date=20 January 2017|archive-date=20 January 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170120195203/https://cpj.org/blog/2016/01/how-us-copyright-law-is-being-used-to-take-down-co.php|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
* Internet, anonymity software and [[strong cryptography]]: In addition to Internet-based publishing, the Internet (in combination with anonymity software such as [[Tor (network)|Tor]] and [[cryptography]]) allows for [[Source (journalism)|sources]] to remain anonymous and sustain confidentiality while delivering information to or [[secure communication|securely communicating]] with journalists anywhere in the world in an instant (e.g. [[SecureDrop]], [[WikiLeaks]]). | * Internet, anonymity software and [[strong cryptography]]: In addition to Internet-based publishing, the Internet (in combination with anonymity software such as [[Tor (network)|Tor]] and [[cryptography]]) allows for [[Source (journalism)|sources]] to remain anonymous and sustain confidentiality while delivering information to or [[secure communication|securely communicating]] with journalists anywhere in the world in an instant (e.g. [[SecureDrop]], [[WikiLeaks]]). | ||
* [[VOIP|Voice over Internet protocol]] (VOIP) vs. conventional [[telephony]]: Although conventional telephony systems are easily tapped and recorded, modern VOIP technology can employ low-cost strong cryptography to evade surveillance. As VOIP and similar technologies become more widespread they are likely to make the effective monitoring of journalists (and their contacts and activities) a very difficult task for governments. | * [[VOIP|Voice over Internet protocol]] (VOIP) vs. conventional [[telephony]]: Although conventional telephony systems are easily tapped and recorded, modern VOIP technology can employ low-cost strong cryptography to evade surveillance. As VOIP and similar technologies become more widespread they are likely to make the effective monitoring of journalists (and their contacts and activities) a very difficult task for governments. | ||
| Line 319: | Line 336: | ||
== World ranking == | == World ranking == | ||
=== World ranking 2023 === | === World ranking 2023 === | ||
In its 2023 report published on May | In its 2023 report published on 3 May, Reporters Without Borders evaluated the state of media freedom in 180 countries. According to this report, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ranks 177 out of 180 countries after North Korea, China and Vietnam, and it has also been named as one of the most dangerous countries for journalists.<ref>{{Cite web |title=2023 World Press Freedom Index – journalism threatened by fake content industry {{!}} RSF |url=https://rsf.org/en/2023-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-threatened-fake-content-industry |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230504023654/https://rsf.org/en/2023-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-threatened-fake-content-industry |archive-date=4 May 2023 |access-date=4 May 2023 |website=rsf.org |language=en}}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2021 === | === World ranking 2021 === | ||
| Line 325: | Line 342: | ||
=== World ranking 2020 === | === World ranking 2020 === | ||
On April | On 21 April, the RSF in its 2020 annual report published the latest ranking of Freedom of Media. The [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] is the 173rd in the list, declining three steps compared to 2019. The three Iranian allied countries, [[Syria]], [[China]], and [[North Korea]] are 174th, 177th, and 180th. This organization accuses China and Iran of censorship of news about the [[COVID-19 pandemic]].<ref>{{cite web |date=21 April 2020 |title=2020 World Press Freedom Index: "Entering a decisive decade for journalism, exacerbated by coronavirus" |url=https://rsf.org/en/2020-world-press-freedom-index-entering-decisive-decade-journalism-exacerbated-coronavirus |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200507142239/https://rsf.org/en/2020-world-press-freedom-index-entering-decisive-decade-journalism-exacerbated-coronavirus |archive-date=7 May 2020 |access-date=17 August 2020 |website=rsf.org}}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2019 === | === World ranking 2019 === | ||
On April | On 18 April, the RSF published its annual report, Indication for Free Media in the world. In this report, among 180 states, [[Norway]] was the freest and safest country in the world. [[Finland]] and [[Sweden]] are the next. Meanwhile, [[Iran]] lost its position in the list- compare to 2018- and is among the 11 countries that suppress the freedom of the media. Iran is on the bottom of the list, ranked as the 170th state.<ref>{{cite web |title=2019 World Press Freedom Index – A cycle of fear |url=https://rsf.org/en/2019-world-press-freedom-index-cycle-fear |website=RSF |date=15 April 2019 |access-date=18 August 2020 |archive-date=2 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200602234620/https://rsf.org/en/2019-world-press-freedom-index-cycle-fear |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2018 === | === World ranking 2018 === | ||
The RSF in its annual report in 2018 documented deadly violence and | The RSF in its annual report in 2018 documented deadly violence and misbehaviour against reporters saying for one year 80 reporters have been killed, 348 detained, and 60 taken hostage which indicates an unprecedented hostility against media staff. This organization recognizes Iran as one of the five states which is called "prison of reporters" along with [[China]], [[Saudi Arabia]], Egypt, and Turkey. Based on this report Iran is ranked 144th and is still one of the greatest prisons for journalists.<ref>{{cite web |date=14 December 2018 |title=RSF's 2018 round-up of deadly attacks and abuses against journalists – figures up in all categories |url=https://rsf.org/en/news/rsfs-2018-round-deadly-attacks-and-abuses-against-journalists-figures-all-categories |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200530054514/https://rsf.org/en/news/rsfs-2018-round-deadly-attacks-and-abuses-against-journalists-figures-all-categories |archive-date=30 May 2020 |access-date=20 August 2020 |website=RSF}}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2017 === | === World ranking 2017 === | ||
Based on the 2017 annual report on RSF, Iran along with [[China]], [[Turkey]], [[Vietnam]], and [[Syria]] are the largest prison for reporters and media activists. The report says during 2017, among professional journalists, 50 have been killed and 326 detained; 54 reporters have been taken hostage.<ref>{{cite web |date=December | Based on the 2017 annual report on RSF, Iran along with [[China]], [[Turkey]], [[Vietnam]], and [[Syria]] are the largest prison for reporters and media activists. The report says during 2017, among professional journalists, 50 have been killed and 326 detained; 54 reporters have been taken hostage.<ref>{{cite web |date=18 December 2017 |title=RSF round-up: these figures are alarming |url=https://rsf.org/en/reports/rsf-round-these-figures-are-alarming |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805023155/https://rsf.org/en/reports/rsf-round-these-figures-are-alarming |archive-date=5 August 2020 |access-date=22 August 2020 |website=rsf}}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2016 === | === World ranking 2016 === | ||
On December | On 13 December 2016, the Reporters without Borders (RSF) published its annual report. The report reads: 348 journalists have been detained and 52 taken hostage in Iran in 2016. Following Turkey, the countries China, Syria, [[Egypt]], and Iran have almost two-thirds of detained [[journalist|journalists]].<ref>{{cite web |date=23 August 2019 |title=2016 Round-Up: Number of journalists detained worldwide continues to rise |url=https://rsf.org/en/reports/2016-round-number-journalists-detained-worldwide-continues-rise |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201001200318/https://rsf.org/en/reports/2016-round-number-journalists-detained-worldwide-continues-rise |archive-date=1 October 2020 |access-date=24 August 2020 |website=rsf}}</ref> | ||
=== World ranking 2015 === | === World ranking 2015 === | ||
On February | On 12 February 2015, the [[Reporters without Borders]] (RSF) published its annual report. In this report, 180 states have been reviewed based on the freedom of press, independent media and also the situation of reporters and journalists. Iran is at the 173rd of this list that indicates, despite the [[Rouhani]]'s promises, freedom of speeches and journalists has not been improved; the RSF concerns continue. According to the report, Iran ranked third on the list on the imprisonment of journalists.<ref>{{cite web |date=25 January 2016 |title=World Press Freedom Index 2015: decline on all fronts |url=https://rsf.org/en/news/world-press-freedom-index-2015-decline-all-fronts |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200908223405/https://rsf.org/en/news/world-press-freedom-index-2015-decline-all-fronts |archive-date=8 September 2020 |access-date=29 August 2020 |website=rsf}}</ref> | ||
==Organizations for press freedom== | ==Organizations for press freedom== | ||
| Line 355: | Line 372: | ||
* [[Media Legal Defence Initiative]] | * [[Media Legal Defence Initiative]] | ||
* [[OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media]] | * [[OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media]] | ||
* [[Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press]] | |||
* [[Reporters Without Borders]] | * [[Reporters Without Borders]] | ||
* [[Student Press Law Center]] | * [[Student Press Law Center]] | ||
| Line 396: | Line 414: | ||
* [[Turkey's media purge after the failed July 2016 coup d'état]] | * [[Turkey's media purge after the failed July 2016 coup d'état]] | ||
* [[Virginia Declaration of Rights]] | * [[Virginia Declaration of Rights]] | ||
* [[World Press Freedom Day]] on May | * [[World Press Freedom Day]] on 3 May | ||
* [[Press Freedom Index]] | * [[Press Freedom Index]] | ||
* [[Press freedom under the Restoration]] | * [[Press freedom under the Restoration]] | ||
* [[Press support]] | * [[Press support]] | ||
* [[Le Peuple breton]] | |||
{{div col end}} | {{div col end}} | ||
{{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
| Line 422: | Line 441: | ||
{{Wikiquote}} | {{Wikiquote}} | ||
{{NSRW Poster|Press, Freedom of the|Freedom of the press}} | {{NSRW Poster|Press, Freedom of the|Freedom of the press}} | ||
* [http://www.cjfe.org/indias_free_press_problem Canadian Journalists for Free Expression] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190731201951/https://www.cjfe.org/indias_free_press_problem |date=2019 | * [http://www.cjfe.org/indias_free_press_problem Canadian Journalists for Free Expression] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190731201951/https://www.cjfe.org/indias_free_press_problem |date=31 July 2019 }} | ||
* [http://akademie.dw.de/navigator Media Freedom Navigator] Media Freedom Indices at a Glance | * [http://akademie.dw.de/navigator Media Freedom Navigator] Media Freedom Indices at a Glance | ||
* [http://www.risorsetiche.it Risorse Etiche] Publish and translate articles of independent journalists | * [http://www.risorsetiche.it Risorse Etiche] Publish and translate articles of independent journalists | ||
| Line 429: | Line 448: | ||
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070315043810/http://www.bannedmagazine.com/ ''Banned Magazine'', the journal of censorship and secrecy.] (archived 15 March 2007) | * [https://web.archive.org/web/20070315043810/http://www.bannedmagazine.com/ ''Banned Magazine'', the journal of censorship and secrecy.] (archived 15 March 2007) | ||
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20060205092739/http://blog.newspaperindex.com/ News and Free Speech – Newspaper Index Blog] (archived 5 February 2006) | * [https://web.archive.org/web/20060205092739/http://blog.newspaperindex.com/ News and Free Speech – Newspaper Index Blog] (archived 5 February 2006) | ||
* [http://www.beepworld.de/members/press-freedom/ Press Freedom] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100106032839/http://www.beepworld.de/members/press-freedom/ |date=2010 | * [http://www.beepworld.de/members/press-freedom/ Press Freedom] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100106032839/http://www.beepworld.de/members/press-freedom/ |date=6 January 2010 }} | ||
* [http://www.osce.org/fom OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media] | * [http://www.osce.org/fom OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media] | ||
* [http://independentmedia.ca MANA – the Media Alliance for New Activism] | * [http://independentmedia.ca MANA – the Media Alliance for New Activism] | ||
Latest revision as of 07:45, 18 November 2025
Template:Short description Script error: No such module "other uses".Script error: No such module "redirect hatnote". Template:Use dmy dates Script error: No such module "Sidebar". Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the fundamental principle that communication and expression through various media, including printed and electronic media, especially published materials, should be considered a right to be exercised freely.[1] Such freedom implies no or minimal censorship or prior restraint from government, and is often protected by laws or a provision in a constitution. The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by the same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken and published expression; many countries also protect scientific freedom.
Government restrictions on freedom of the press may include classified information, state secrets, punishment for libel, punishment for violation of copyright, privacy, or judicial orders. Where freedom of the press is lacking, governments may require pre-publication approval, or punish distribution of documents critical of the government or certain political perspectives. Jurisdictions with high levels of transparency are subject to "sunshine laws" or freedom of information legislation that allow citizens broad access to government-held information.
Freedom of the press was formally established in Great Britain with the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695. Sweden was the first country in the world to adopt freedom of the press into its constitution with the Freedom of the Press Act of 1766.[2] The United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers".[3]
Relationship to self-publishing
Freedom of the press is not construed as an absence of interference by outside entities, such as a government or religious organization, but rather as a right for authors to have their works published by other people.[4] This idea was famously summarized by the 20th-century American journalist, A. J. Liebling, who wrote, "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one". Freedom of the press gives the printer or publisher exclusive control over what the publisher chooses to publish, including the right to refuse to print anything for any reason.[4] If the author cannot reach a voluntary agreement with a publisher to produce the author's work, then the author must turn to self-publishing.
Status of press freedom worldwide
Beyond legal definitions, several non-governmental organizations use other criteria to judge the level of press freedom worldwide. Some create subjective lists, while others are based on quantitative data:
- Reporters Without Borders (RWB) (Template:Langx) (RSF) considers the number of journalists murdered, expelled, or harassed, the existence of a state monopoly on TV and radio, as well as the existence of censorship and self-censorship in the media, and the overall independence of media as well as the difficulties that foreign reporters may face to rank countries in levels of press freedom.
- The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) systematically tracks the number of journalists killed and imprisoned in reprisal for their work. It says it uses the tools of journalism to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and a network of foreign correspondents, including local working journalists in countries worldwide. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, a global network of more than 119 free expression organizations. CPJ also tracks impunity in cases of journalist murders. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment.
- Freedom House studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. Panels of experts assess the press freedom score and draft each country summary according to a weighted scoring system that analyzes the political, economic, legal and safety situation for journalists based on a 100-point scale. It then categorizes countries as having a free, partly free, or not free press.[5]
Annual report on journalists killed and Prison Census
Each year, The Committee to Protect Journalists produces a comprehensive list of all working journalists killed in relation to their employment, including profiles of each deceased journalist within an exhaustive database, and an annual census of incarcerated journalists (as of midnight, 1 December). The year 2017 reported record findings of jailed journalists, reaching 262. Turkey, China, and Egypt account for more than half of all global journalists jailed.[6]
As per a 2019 special report by the Committee to Protect Journalists, approximately 25 journalists were murdered on duty in 2019.[6] The figure is claimed to be the lowest since 2002, a year in which at least 21 journalists were killed while they were reporting from the field.[7] Meanwhile, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reported 49 killings, the lowest since 2003, when almost 36 journalists were killed. Leading press watchdogs fear persisting danger for the life of journalists. The drop in the murder of in-field journalists came across during the "global attention on the issue of impunity in journalist murders", focusing on the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018 and Daphne Caruana Galizia, a Maltese blogger in October 2017.[8]
Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a subjective ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press. The Press Freedom Index list is based on responses to surveys sent to journalists that are members of partner organizations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, jurists, and human rights activists. The survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media and other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as non-governmental groups.
In 2022, the eight countries with the most press freedom are, in order: Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Portugal, and Costa Rica. The ten countries with the least press freedom are, in order: North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, China, Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq, and Syria.[10]
Freedom of the Press
Freedom of the Press is a yearly report by the US-based non-profit organization Freedom House. It is known to subjectively measure the level of freedom and editorial independence that is enjoyed by the press in every nation and significant disputed territories around the world. Levels of freedom are scored on a scale from 1 (most free) to 100 (least free). Depending on the basics, the nations are then classified in three types: 1. "Free" 2. "Partly Free" 3. "Not Free".
Democratic states
A free and independent press has been theorized to be a key mechanism of a functioning, healthy democracy.[12] In the absence of censorship, journalism exists as a watchdog of private and government action, providing information to maintain an informed citizenry of voters.[12] In this perspective, "government efforts to influence published or broadcasted news content, either via media control or by inducing self-censorship, represent a threat to the access of important and necessary information to the public and affect the quality of democracy".[13] An independent press "serves to increase political knowledge, participation, and voter turnout",[12] acting as an essential driver of civic participation.
Non-democratic states
Turkey, China, Egypt, Eritrea, and Saudi Arabia accounted for 70% of all journalists that were imprisoned in 2018.[14] CPJ reported that "After China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, the worst jailers are Eritrea, Vietnam, and Iran".[15]
According to Reporters Without Borders, more than a third of the world's people live in countries where there is no press freedom.[16] Overwhelmingly, these people live in countries where there is no system of democracy or where there are serious deficiencies in the democratic process.[17]
Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of access to information is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional blacklisting) to death threats, kidnapping, torture, and assassination.
- The Lira Baysetova case in Kazakhstan.[18]
- The Georgiy R. Gongadze case in Ukraine.[19]
- In Nepal, Eritrea, and mainland China, journalists may spend years in jail simply for using the "wrong" word or photo.[16]
History
Europe
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Central, Northern, and Western Europe have a long tradition of freedom of speech, including freedom of the press, which yet exists in the 18th century and in the 19th century.[20]
German Enlightenment writer Christoph Martin Wieland argued in 1788 that "press freedom is the ultimate bulwark of humanity" and that restrictions beyond general criminal law would lead to its "gradual erosion", emphasizing that "science, literature, and the printing press... belong to no single nation, but to all mankind".[21]
After World War II, Hugh Baillie, the president of the United Press wire service based in the U.S., promoted freedom of news dissemination. In 1944, he called for an open system of news sources and transmission, and a minimum of government regulation of the news. His proposals were aired at the Geneva Conference on Freedom of Information in 1948 but were blocked by the Soviets and the French.[22]
Since 1950, the European Convention on Human Rights includes "Article 10" related to Freedom of expression which applies to Member states of the Council of Europe.
Media freedom is a fundamental right that applies to all member states of the European Union and its citizens, as defined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (since 2000) as well as the European Convention on Human Rights (since 1950).[23]Template:Rp Within the EU enlargement process, guaranteeing media freedom is named a "key indicator of a country's readiness to become part of the EU".[24]
United Kingdom
According to the New York Times, "Britain has a long tradition of a free, inquisitive press", but "[u]nlike the United States, Britain has no constitutional guarantee of press freedom".[25] Freedom of the press was established in Great Britain in 1695, with Alan Rusbridger, former editor of The Guardian, stating: "When people talk about licensing journalists or newspapers the instinct should be to refer them to history. Read about how licensing of the press in Britain was abolished in 1695. Remember how the freedoms won here became a model for much of the rest of the world, and be conscious of how the world still watches us to see how we protect those freedoms".[26]
Until 1694, Great Britain had an elaborate system of licensing; the most recent was seen in the Licensing of the Press Act, 1662. No publication was allowed without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Fifty years earlier, at a time of civil war, John Milton wrote his pamphlet Areopagitica (1644).[27] In this work Milton argued forcefully against this form of government censorship and parodied the idea, writing "when as debtors and delinquents may walk abroad without a keeper, but inoffensive books must not stir forth without a visible jailer in their title". Although at the time it did little to halt the practice of licensing, it would be viewed later a significant milestone as one of the most eloquent defenses of press freedom.[27]
Milton's central argument was that the individual is capable of using reason and distinguishing right from wrong, and good from bad. In order to be able to exercise this ration right, the individual must have unlimited access to the ideas of his fellow men in "a free and open encounter" Milton's writings developed the concept of the open marketplace of ideas, the idea that when people argue against each other, good arguments will prevail. One form of speech that was widely restricted in Great Britain was seditious libel, and laws were in place that made criticizing the government a crime. The king was above public criticism and statements critical of the government were forbidden, according to the English court of the Star Chamber. The truth was not a defense to seditious libel because the goal was to prevent and punish all condemnation of the government.
Locke contributed to the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695, whereupon the press needed no license. Still, some libels were tried throughout the 18th century, until "the Society of the Bill of Rights" led by John Horne Tooke and John Wilkes organized a campaign to publish Parliamentary Debates. This culminated in three defeats of the Crown in the 1770 cases of Almon, Miller and Woodfall, who all had published one of the Letters of Junius, and the unsuccessful arrest of John Wheble in 1771. Thereafter the Crown was much more careful in the application of libel; for example, in the aftermath of the Peterloo Massacre, Burdett was convicted, whereas by contrast, the Junius affair was over a satire and sarcasm about the non-lethal conduct and policies of the government.
In Britain's American colonies, the first editors discovered their readers enjoyed it when they criticised the local governor; the governors discovered they could shut down the newspapers. The most dramatic confrontation came in New York in 1734, where the governor brought John Peter Zenger to trial for criminal libel after the publication of satirical attacks. The defense lawyers argued that according to English common law, the truth was a valid defense against libel. The jury acquitted Zenger, who became the iconic American hero for freedom of the press. The result was an emerging tension between the media and the government. By the mid-1760s, there were 24 weekly newspapers in the 13 colonies, and the satirical attack on the government became common features in American newspapers.[28]
In the Victorian era, the press became more influential than it had been previously, to the dismay of some readers. Thomas Carlyle, in his essay "Signs of the Times" (1829), said that the "true Church of England, at this moment, lies in the Editors of its Newspapers. These preach to the people daily, weekly; admonishing kings themselves; advising peace or war, with an authority which only the first Reformers, and a long-past class of Popes, were possessed of". Similarly, Charles Dickens, in his Pickwick Papers (1837), caricatured the newspapers as but the "chosen organ and representative" of either the Whigs or the Tories, and that they were "essentially and indispensably necessary" to the parties' operations.[29]
John Stuart Mill in 1869 in his book On Liberty approached the problem of authority versus liberty from the viewpoint of a 19th-century utilitarian: The individual has the right of expressing himself so long as he does not harm other individuals. The good society is one in which the greatest number of persons enjoy the greatest possible amount of happiness. Applying these general principles of liberty to freedom of expression, Mill states that if we silence an opinion, we may silence the truth. The individual freedom of expression is therefore essential to the well-being of society. Mill wrote:
- If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and one, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.[30]
The December 1817 Trials of writer and satirist William Hone for publishing three political pamphlets is considered a landmark in the fight for a free press.
Denmark–Norway
Between 4 September 1770 and 7 October 1771 the kingdom of Denmark–Norway had the most unrestricted freedom of press of any country in Europe. This occurred during the regime of Johann Friedrich Struensee, whose second act was to abolish the old censorship laws. However, due to the great amount of mostly anonymous pamphlets published that was critical and often slanderous towards Struensee's own regime, he reinstated some restrictions regarding the freedom of press a year later, 7 October 1771.[31]
Italy
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
After the Italian unification in 1861, the Albertine Statute of 1848 was adopted as the constitution of the Kingdom of Italy. The Statute granted the freedom of the press with some restrictions in case of abuses and in religious matters, as stated in Article 28:[32]
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
The press shall be free, but the law may suppress abuses of this freedom. However, Bibles, catechisms, liturgical and prayer books shall not be printed without the prior permission of the Bishop.
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
After the abolition of the monarchy in 1946 and the abrogation of the Statute in 1948, the Constitution of the Republic of Italy guarantees the freedom of the press, as stated in Article 21, Paragraphs 2 and 3:[33]
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
The press may not be subjected to any authorisation or censorship. Seizure may be permitted only by judicial order stating the reason and only for offences expressly determined by the law on the press or in case of violation of the obligation to identify the persons responsible for such offences.
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
The Constitution allows the warrantless confiscation of periodicals in cases of absolute urgency, when the Judiciary cannot timely intervene, on the condition that a judicial validation must be obtained within 24 hours. Article 21 also gives restrictions against those publications considered offensive by public morality, as stated in Paragraph 6:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
Publications, performances, and other exhibits offensive to public morality shall be prohibited. Measures of preventive and repressive measure against such violations shall be established by law.
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Nazi Germany (1933–1945)
In 1933, freedom of the press was suppressed in Nazi Germany by the Reichstag Fire Decree of President Paul von Hindenburg, just as Adolf Hitler was coming to power. Hitler suppressed freedom of the press through Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda.[34] The Ministry acted as a central control point for all media, issuing orders as to what stories could be run and what stories would be suppressed. Anyone involved in the film industry, from directors to the lowliest assistant, had to sign an oath of loyalty to the Nazi Party due to the opinion-changing power Goebbels perceived movies to have; Goebbels himself maintained some personal control over every single film made in Nazi Europe. Journalists who crossed the Propaganda Ministry were routinely imprisoned.
Sweden
One of the world's first freedom of the press acts was introduced in Sweden in 1766 (Swedish Freedom of the Press Act), due in part to classical liberal member of parliament, Ostrobothnian priest, Anders Chydenius.[2][35][36][37][38] Excepted and liable to prosecution was only vocal opposition to the king and the Church of Sweden. The act was largely rolled back after King Gustav's coup d'état in 1772, restored after the overthrowing of his son, Gustav IV of Sweden in 1809, and fully recognized with the abolition of the king's prerogative to cancel licenses in the 1840s.
Russia
The US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, criticized Russia for limiting the activities of VOA and Radio Free Europe in Russia with a governmental order demanding reviewing the subject by Moscow.[39]
On 4 March 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed into law a bill introducing prison sentences of up to 15 years for those who publish "knowingly false information" about the Russian military and its operations in Ukraine,[40] forcing independent media in Russia to stop reporting on Ukraine or cease operations.[41] At least 1,000 Russian journalists have fled Russia since February 2022.[42] About 85% of Russians get most of their information from Russian state-controlled media.[43]
Novaya GazetaTemplate:'s editor-in-chief Dmitry Muratov was awarded the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize for his "efforts to safeguard freedom of expression". In March 2022, Novaya Gazeta suspended its print activities after receiving a second warning from the Russian censorship apparatus Roskomnadzor.[44]
On 17 June 2024, a Moscow court issued arrest warrants for IStories editor-in-chief and award-winning investigative reporter Roman Anin and Ekaterina Fomina, a journalist at TV Rain and a former IStories correspondent, on charges of disseminating "false information" about the Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Russia's Interior Ministry added two Russian journalists in exile to its wanted list. Fomina said the arrest warrant would affect her professional life as she would not be able to travel to many countries that could arrest her and extradite her to Russia.[45]
Romania
Until 1989, Romania was part of the communist bloc as the Socialist Republic of Romania. The communist regime heavily restricted freedom of the press and other civil liberties. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, though available to the Romanian citizenry, was highly illegal and severe repercussions for existed for listening. Directly following the Romanian Revolution, post-communist corruption was largely the subject of investigative reports. At the same time, widespread violence against journalists began. During the June 1990 Mineriad, a series of protests against the National Salvation Front, counter-demonstrators assaulted reporting journalists.[46]
In 1992, President Ion Iliescu had a nervous meltdown when called journalist Paul Pârvu asked him if he felt guilt over Romanian deaths during the revolution.[47] During the exchange, Iliescu referred to Pârvu as an "animal". Modern, major media outlets were founded during the mid-1990s, such as Antena 1 in 1994 and ProTV in 1995. In 1999, the editor of a Ora, a local newspaper, Tiberiu Patru, was arrested[48] before being able to publish an investigation of corruption in Dolj County under. In response, Ora moved its newsroom in front of the National Theater of Craiova to protest Patru's arrest.
The 2000s saw the creation of many new media outlets across television, radio, and the traditional press. In 2023, Reporters Without Borders identified safety as a concern for Romanian journalists.[49]
Turkey
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
More than 120 journalists remained in prison in Turkey in 2019, making it the most prolific incarcerator of journalists in the world.[50]
In some countries, including Turkey,[51] journalists were threatened or arrested for their coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic.[52]
Belarus
Since the 2000s, Reporters Without Borders have been ranking Belarus below all other European countries in its Press Freedom Index.[53] Under the authoritarian president Alexander Lukashenko, journalists like Katsyaryna Andreeva and Darya Chultsova have been arrested for their work.
In May 2021, top news site Tut.By which was read by circa 40% of internet users in Belarus was blocked and several its journalists were detained.[54] In July 2021, Nasha Niva, a news site, was blocked with simultaneous detention of the editors took place.[55]
Czechia
Current general manager of Czech Television Jan Souček has courted controversy in his tenure given his attack on free media[56] and his attacks on employees of Czech Television.[57] Souček compared himself to Milada Horáková[58] after strong criticism of his managerial skills from Czech Television Council. Souček later commented that it was silly from him. In an interview on 5. 9. 2023 Souček, as the incoming director general, stated: "I am constantly asking for money. A press conference of the Ministry of Culture has been announced for Tuesday, where the ministerial commission should reveal how it envisions the reform of financing public service media. According to my information, our call will be heard for the most part.[59]" During his tenure, Souček constantly asks for more money from the public fees, however it seems that he is not able to use money economically while blacking out financial documents to hide it from the public.[60]
Americas
United States
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Canada
Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that everyone has "the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication".[61]
The open court principle ensures the freedom of the press by requiring that court proceedings presumptively be open and accessible to the public and to the media.
Mexico
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
In 2016, Reporters Without Borders ranked Mexico 149 out of 180 in the World Press Freedom Index, declaring Mexico to be "the world's most dangerous country for journalists".[62]
Guatemala
Nicaragua
See Freedom of the press in Nicaragua and Mass media in Nicaragua
Argentina
See History of Argentina#New democracy (1983–present) and Mass media in Argentina
Bolivia
See History of Bolivia (1982–present) and Mass media in Bolivia
Brazil
See History of Brazil (1985–present)
Chile
Colombia
See History of Colombia#From 2004 and on and Mass media in Colombia
Ecuador
See History of Ecuador#Instability (2000–2007)
Guyana
See Guyana#UNASUR
Paraguay
See History of Paraguay#Modern Paraguay and Mass media in Paraguay
Peru
See Freedom of the press in Peru and Mass media in Peru
Suriname
See History of Suriname's Independence
Uruguay
See History of Uruguay#Recent history and Mass media in Uruguay
Venezuela
See History of Venezuela (1999–present) and Mass media in Venezuela
Asia
Azerbaijan
According to Reporters Without Borders, Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev launched "a new wave of fierce repression against the country’s last remaining journalists" in late 2023.[63] Journalists from the independent Abzas Media, Toplum TV, and Meydan TV were prosecuted in 2024 and 2025 in trials that international human rights organizations described as unfair.[64] The long prison sentences for seven journalists from Abzas Media are widely seen as retaliation for the outlet's investigations into corruption in the family of Ilham Aliyev and his inner circle.[65]
Bahrain
According to Reporters without Borders, a number of reporters in Bahrain were jailed. Some were also tortured or were exiled.[66]
Iran
According to the reports of the RSF in 2007, the freedom of the press in Iran ranked 166 among 169 states. The report reads the Iranian journalists face the "extreme harsh behavior of the Iranian regime that prevents them criticizing authorities or expressing political and social demands.[67]
After a Ukrainian airliner was shot down in 2020 by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, agents of the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence raided the houses and offices of many Iranian journalists seeking for their PCs, cell phones, books, and documents. These journalists had revealed the lies of the Iranian regime. Some of the journalists received warnings by the authorities and were forced to shut down their accounts in Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.[68]
Demanding promotion of the global Freedom of Media, in December 1993, UNESCO called 3 April as "International day for Freedom of Media". This is while the RSF reported at least 860 journalists have been detained and imprisoned from 1979 to 2009 in Iran.[69]
On 21 April 2020, Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said in its annual press freedom rankings that the pandemic was "highlighting many crises" already casting a shadow on press freedom, around the world, with authoritarian states including Iran suppressing details of the outbreak.[70]
RSF accused Iran in 173rd place of censoring major coronavirus outbreaks.[70]
On the occasion of World Press Freedom Day in 2020, the Writers' Association of Iran released a statement emphasizing the existence of censorship and violation of freedom of speech and its destructive impacts on the structure and vital foundation of the society. It noted that during the past decades, the rulers in the country imprisoned more than 890 journalists and reporters, some of whom have been executed. The Iranian Writer Association expressed its regret, when Iran ranked 173 among 180 states due to freedom of speech.[71]
On 7 February 2020, the International Federation of Journalists in a statement condemned "raiding of Iranian Security Forces upon the houses of six Iranian journalists, holding the forces of "IRGC's Intelligence" responsible for recent pressures on the journalists. The secretary-general of the federation, Anthony Blunker, said that intimidating and threatening journalists are unpleasant tools to silence the public opinion of the administration.[72]
On 26 November 2019, the RSF condemned the pressure on families of reporters by the Iranian regime, saying Iran ranked 170 among 180 states regarding Freedom of Press in 2019.[73]
In its 2019 annual report, the Committee to Protect Journalists found at least 250 journalists in jail in relation to their work and stated that the number of imprisoned journalists in Iran was 11, citing the crackdown on protests by the Iranian people over rising gasoline prices. The report named Eritrea, Vietnam and Iran as "the worst prisons for journalists" after China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.[74][75]
On 8 September 2020, Reporters Without Borders expressed concern about the continuing detention and repression of journalists in Iran and warned for the journalists and Reporters who have been arrested for their activities and subjected to harassment. "The Human Rights Council must take more serious action to protect and defend journalists", said an official.[76]
On Monday, 9 November 2020, Ralf Nestmeyer, vice president of PEN Germany, referred to the repressive methods of authoritarian regimes: "Freedom of expression has declined in many parts of the world". He added that dictatorial regimes respond to any criticism with violence and imprisonment.Script error: No such module "Unsubst". This year the World Pen Association (Pen), will concentrate on the fate of writers in Iran, China, Turkey, Peru and Uganda.[77]Script error: No such module "Unsubst".
Human Rights Watch condemned the punishment of the death penalty and demanded that it be prevented at all costs, following the 12 December execution of an Iranian dissident on vague charges. Rouhallah Zam, the founder of Telegram channel Amadnews, was allegedly detained when he was visiting Iran in October 2019. He was deported forcibly to Iran and convicted of vague national security charges, as per Human Rights Watch. Zam faced trial for his ‘activism’ after being deported to Iran. The Iranian Supreme Court confirmed his verdict on 8 December and the journalist was executed on 12 December.[78]
Palestine and Israel
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
In October 2019, the Palestinian Authority blocked 59 websites, claiming that they were critical of the government. These websites were both Palestinian and Arabic and were identified to have been publishing material that "threaten national security and civil peace". Quds News Network, among the blocked sites, stated that the move reflected the Palestinian Authority's repression of the press.[79]
In 2023, nearly 75% of journalists killed worldwide were Palestinians who had died in Israel’s war in Gaza.[80] According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Israel was the second worst country in the world for allowing the murderers of journalists to go unpunished.[81] UNESCO awarded its 2024 World Press Freedom Prize to the Palestinian journalists of Gaza.[82]
China
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Critics argue that the Communist Party in China has failed to live up to its promises about the freedom of the mainland Chinese media. Freedom House consistently ranks China as 'Not Free'[83] in its annual press freedom survey, including the 2014 report. PRC journalist He Qinglian says that the PRC's media are controlled by directives from the Communist Party's propaganda department and are subjected to intense monitoring which threatens punishment for violators, rather than to pre-publication censorship. In 2008, ITV News reporter John Ray was arrested while covering a 'Free Tibet' protest.[84] International media coverage of Tibetan protests only a few months before the Beijing Olympics in 2008 triggered a strong reaction inside China. Chinese media practitioners took the opportunity to argue with propaganda authorities for more media freedom: one journalist asked, 'If not even Chinese journalists are allowed to report about the problems in Tibet, how can foreign journalists know about the Chinese perspective about the events?' Foreign journalists also reported that their access to certain websites, including those of human rights organizations, was restricted.[85]
International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge stated at the end of the 2008 Olympic Games that "The regulations [governing foreign media freedom during the Olympics] might not be perfect but they are a sea-change compared to the situation before. We hope that they will continue".[86] The Foreign Correspondents Club of China (FCCC) issued a statement during the Olympics that 'despite welcome progress in terms of accessibility and the number of press conferences within the Olympic facilities, the FCCC has been alarmed at the use of violence, intimidation and harassment outside. The club has confirmed more than 30 cases of reporting interference since the formal opening of the Olympic media centre on 25 July, and is checking at least 20 other reported incidents.[87]
Since the Chinese state continues to exert a considerable amount of control over media, public support for domestic reporting has come as a surprise to many observers. Not much is known about the extent to which the Chinese citizenry believe the official statements of the CPC, nor about which media sources they perceive as credible and why. So far, research on the media in China has focused on the changing relationship between media outlets and the state during the reform era. Nor is much known about how China's changing media environment has affected the government's ability to persuade media audiences. Research on political trust reveals that exposure to the media correlates positively with support for the government in some instances, and negatively in others. The research has been cited as evidence that the Chinese public believes propaganda transmitted to them through the news media, but also that they disbelieve it.
In 2012 the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights urged the Chinese government to lift restrictions on media access to the region and allow independent and impartial monitors to visit and assess conditions in Tibet. The Chinese government did not change its position.[88]
Pakistan
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Article 19 of the constitution of the Pakistan states that: "Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defense of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, commission of or incitement to an offence".[89] Since independence the electronic media in Pakistan remained dominated by the state-run Pakistan Television and Pakistan Broadcasting Corporations. Ironically, press freedom in Pakistan flourished for the first time in 2002 during Gen. Pervez Musharraf's era.[90]
To a large extent the media enjoys freedom of expression in spite of political pressure and direct bans sometimes administered by political stake holders. Political pressure on media is mostly done indirectly. One tool widely used by the government is to cut off 'unfriendly' media from governmental advertising. Using draconian laws, the government has also banned or officially silenced popular television channels. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) has been used to silence the broadcast media by either suspending licenses or by simply threatening to do so. In addition, media is also threatened by non-state actors involved in the current conflict.
In its 2018 Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders ranked Pakistan number 139 out of 180 countries based on freedom of the press. The report implied considerable improvement in the freedom of press compared to the preceding years.[91]
Malaysia
The press in Malaysia is controlled and journalists cannot have a conversation about certain things. For instance, a British reporter in Malaysia was arrested after she reported on the 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal and published details of the alleged transfer of $681 million from 1MDB to bank accounts held by Najib Razak.[92]
Singapore
Singapore's media environment is considered to be controlled by the government.[93][94]
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia does not tolerate dissidents and it can impose penalties on such people. Saudi Arabia is also responsible for executing Saudi American journalist, Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. As he entered a Saudi embassy in Turkey, a group of Saudi assassins killed him.[95]
India
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word "press", provides for "the right to freedom of speech and expression" (Article 19(1) a). However, this right is subject to restrictions under sub clause, whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of "sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt, court, defamation, or incitement to an offense". Laws such as the Official Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act[96] (PoTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under PoTA, person could be detained for up to six months for being in contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. PoTA was repealed in 2006, but the Official Secrets Act 1923 continues.
For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..."[97] With the liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government.
It ranks poorly at 142nd[98] rank out of 180 listed countries in the Press Freedom Index 2021 released by Reporters Without Borders (RSF).[99] Analytically India's press freedom, as could be deduced by the Press Freedom Index, has constantly reduced since 2002, when it culminated in terms of apparent freedom, achieving a rank of 80 among the reported countries. In 2018, India's freedom of press ranking declined two placed to 138. In explaining the decline, RSF cited growing intolerance from Hindu nationalist supporters of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and the murders of journalists such as Gauri Lankesh.[100][101][102]
Bangladesh
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Bangladeshi media is reportedly following self-censorship due to the controversial Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act. Under this act, 25 journalists and several hundred bloggers and Facebook users are reportedly prosecuted in Bangladesh in 2017.[103]
Bangladesh ranks poorly at 146th rank out of 180 listed countries in the Press Freedom Index 2018 released by Reporters Without Borders (RWB).[99] Bangladeshi media has faced many problems in 2018. The country's most popular online newspaper bdnews24.com was blocked for a few hours on 18 June 2018, by Bangladesh's regulatory authority. Another newspaper The Daily StarTemplate:'s website was blocked for 22 hours on 2 June 2018, after it had published a report about a victim of an extrajudicial execution in the southeastern city of Cox's Bazar.[104]
During the road-safety protests in 2018, Bangladeshi government switched off 3G and 4G mobile data and also arrested a photographer named Shahidul Alam under ICT act, after he had given an interview with Al Jazeera.[105]
Japan
In Japan's system, the Japanese government excludes foreign media outlets and freelance journalists from briefings, giving the kisha clubs (journalists mainly from Japan's mainstream media) the right to use primary sources. Also, the elite group of journalists provides a mechanism whereby politicians threaten to block journalists from briefings if their report is critical of the government. The clubs are considered to be one of the reasons why Japan came bottom among the G7 nations and was ranked 68th in the world in the 2023 World Press Freedom Index.[106]
Africa
Tanzania
As of 2018, online content providers must be licensed and pay an annual fee to the government.[107]
South Africa
Following the transition to democracy in 1994, the post-apartheid Constitution of South Africa guarantees the freedom of the press.[108]
Implications of new technologies
Many of the traditional means of delivering information are being slowly superseded by the increasing pace of modern technological advance. Almost every conventional mode of media and information dissemination has a modern counterpart that offers significant potential advantages to journalists seeking to maintain and enhance their freedom of speech. A few simple examples of such phenomena include:
- Satellite television versus terrestrial television: Whilst terrestrial television is relatively easy to manage and manipulate, satellite television is much more difficult to control as journalistic content can easily be broadcast from other jurisdictions beyond the control of individual governments. An example of this in the Middle East is the satellite broadcaster Al Jazeera. This Arabic-language media channel operates out of Qatar, whose government is relatively liberal compared to many of its neighboring states. As such, its views and content are often problematic to a number of governments in the region and beyond. However, because of the increased affordability and miniaturisation of satellite technology (e.g., dishes and receivers) it is simply not practicable for most states to control popular access to the channel.
- Internet-based publishing (e.g., blogging, social media) vs. traditional publishing: Traditional magazines and newspapers rely on physical resources (e.g., offices, printing presses) that can easily be targeted and forced to close down. Internet-based publishing systems can be run using ubiquitous and inexpensive equipment and can operate from any global jurisdiction. Nations and organisations are increasingly resorting to legal measures to take control of online publications, using national security, anti-terror measures and copyright laws to issue takedown notices and restrict opposition speech.[109]
- Internet, anonymity software and strong cryptography: In addition to Internet-based publishing, the Internet (in combination with anonymity software such as Tor and cryptography) allows for sources to remain anonymous and sustain confidentiality while delivering information to or securely communicating with journalists anywhere in the world in an instant (e.g. SecureDrop, WikiLeaks).
- Voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) vs. conventional telephony: Although conventional telephony systems are easily tapped and recorded, modern VOIP technology can employ low-cost strong cryptography to evade surveillance. As VOIP and similar technologies become more widespread they are likely to make the effective monitoring of journalists (and their contacts and activities) a very difficult task for governments.
Governments are responding to the challenges posed by new media technologies by deploying increasingly sophisticated technology of their own (a notable example being China's attempts to impose control through a state-run internet service provider that controls access to the Internet).
World ranking
World ranking 2023
In its 2023 report published on 3 May, Reporters Without Borders evaluated the state of media freedom in 180 countries. According to this report, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ranks 177 out of 180 countries after North Korea, China and Vietnam, and it has also been named as one of the most dangerous countries for journalists.[110]
World ranking 2021
The World Press Freedom Index 2021, compiled by Reporters Without Borders, shows that journalism is completely blocked or severely restricted in 73 countries and restricted in 59 others. According to the report, Norway ranks first among 180 countries for the fifth year in a row. Finland is second and Sweden third. In this index, Iran is ranked 174th with a decline. Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria ranked consequently 150th, 177th, 170th, 166th and 173rd.[111][112]
World ranking 2020
On 21 April, the RSF in its 2020 annual report published the latest ranking of Freedom of Media. The Islamic Republic of Iran is the 173rd in the list, declining three steps compared to 2019. The three Iranian allied countries, Syria, China, and North Korea are 174th, 177th, and 180th. This organization accuses China and Iran of censorship of news about the COVID-19 pandemic.[113]
World ranking 2019
On 18 April, the RSF published its annual report, Indication for Free Media in the world. In this report, among 180 states, Norway was the freest and safest country in the world. Finland and Sweden are the next. Meanwhile, Iran lost its position in the list- compare to 2018- and is among the 11 countries that suppress the freedom of the media. Iran is on the bottom of the list, ranked as the 170th state.[114]
World ranking 2018
The RSF in its annual report in 2018 documented deadly violence and misbehaviour against reporters saying for one year 80 reporters have been killed, 348 detained, and 60 taken hostage which indicates an unprecedented hostility against media staff. This organization recognizes Iran as one of the five states which is called "prison of reporters" along with China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey. Based on this report Iran is ranked 144th and is still one of the greatest prisons for journalists.[115]
World ranking 2017
Based on the 2017 annual report on RSF, Iran along with China, Turkey, Vietnam, and Syria are the largest prison for reporters and media activists. The report says during 2017, among professional journalists, 50 have been killed and 326 detained; 54 reporters have been taken hostage.[116]
World ranking 2016
On 13 December 2016, the Reporters without Borders (RSF) published its annual report. The report reads: 348 journalists have been detained and 52 taken hostage in Iran in 2016. Following Turkey, the countries China, Syria, Egypt, and Iran have almost two-thirds of detained journalists.[117]
World ranking 2015
On 12 February 2015, the Reporters without Borders (RSF) published its annual report. In this report, 180 states have been reviewed based on the freedom of press, independent media and also the situation of reporters and journalists. Iran is at the 173rd of this list that indicates, despite the Rouhani's promises, freedom of speeches and journalists has not been improved; the RSF concerns continue. According to the report, Iran ranked third on the list on the imprisonment of journalists.[118]
Organizations for press freedom
- American Civil Liberties Union
- Article 19
- Canadian Journalists for Free Expression
- Committee to Protect Journalists
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Freedom House
- Index on Censorship
- Inter American Press Association
- International Freedom of Expression Exchange
- International Press Institute
- Media Legal Defence Initiative
- OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
- Reporters Without Borders
- Student Press Law Center
- World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
- World Press Freedom Committee
- Worldwide Governance Indicators
See also
Template:Censorship by country Template:Div col
- Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
- Chilling effect (term)
- Declaration of Windhoek (1991)
- Free Speech, "The People's Darling Privilege"
- Freedom of the Press Act (1766)
- Freedom of the press in the Russian Federation
- Freedom of the press in the United States
- Freedom of the press in Ukraine
- Free speech in the media during the 2011 Libyan civil war
- Gag order
- Investigative journalism
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on journalism
- Journalism ethics and standards
- Journaliste en danger
- Journalistic standards
- Internet censorship
- List of indices of freedom
- Media activism
- Media blackout
- Media independence
- Media transparency
- Muckraker
- News embargo
- New York Press Club
- Photography is Not a Crime
- Prior restraint
- Section Two of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
- Transparency of media ownership in Europe
- Tunisia Monitoring Group
- Turkey's media purge after the failed July 2016 coup d'état
- Virginia Declaration of Rights
- World Press Freedom Day on 3 May
- Press Freedom Index
- Press freedom under the Restoration
- Press support
- Le Peuple breton
References
Citations
Sources
- Gardner, Mary A. The Inter American Press Association: Its Fight for Freedom of the Press, 1926–1960 (University of Texas Press, 2014)
- George, Cherian. Freedom from the Press: Journalism and State Power in Singapore (2012)
- Molnár, Peter, ed. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Information Since the Fall of the Berlin Wall (Central European University Press, 2014)
- Nord, Lars W., and Torbjörn Von Krogh. "The Freedom of The Press or The Fear Factor? Analysing Political Decisions and Non-Decisions in British Media Policy 1990–2012". Observatorio (OBS*) (2015) 9#1 pp. 1–16.
- Stockmann, Daniela. Media Commercialization and Authoritarian Rule in China (2012)
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
External links
Template:Sister project Template:Sister project Template:Sister project Template:NSRW Poster
- Canadian Journalists for Free Expression Template:Webarchive
- Media Freedom Navigator Media Freedom Indices at a Glance
- Risorse Etiche Publish and translate articles of independent journalists
- the ACTivist Magazine (archived 14 August 2006)
- South East Europe Media Organisation
- Banned Magazine, the journal of censorship and secrecy. (archived 15 March 2007)
- News and Free Speech – Newspaper Index Blog (archived 5 February 2006)
- Press Freedom Template:Webarchive
- OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media
- MANA – the Media Alliance for New Activism
- International Freedom of Expression Exchange – Monitors press freedom around the world (archived 23 December 1996)
- IPS Inter Press Service Independent news on press freedom around the world (archived 29 August 2006)
- The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
- Reporters Without Borders (archived 15 June 2006)
- Template:Usurped
- World Press Freedom Committee
- Student Press Law Center
- Union syndicale des journalistes CFDT
- Mapping media freedom in Europe (archived 31 May 2015)
Script error: No such module "Navbox". Template:Liberty Template:Journalism Template:Sexual revolution Template:Western culture Template:Portal bar
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ "Editor's daughter killed in mysterious circumstances" Template:Webarchive, International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX), 2 July 2002
- ↑ "Ukraine remembers slain reporter" , BBC News, 16 September 2004
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Maria Poptcheva, Press freedom in the EU Legal framework and challenges Template:Webarchive, EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service, Briefing April 2015
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ "British Press Freedom Under Threat" Template:Webarchive, Editorial, New York Times, 14 November 2013. Retrieved 19 November 2013.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Alison Olson, "The Zenger Case Revisited: Satire, Sedition and Political Debate in Eighteenth Century America" Template:Webarchive, Early American Literature, vol.35 no.3 (2000), pp. 223–245.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ "The Freedom of the Press Act", Sveriges Riksdag Template:Webarchive
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Template:Cite magazine
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Belarus blocks top news site in ‘full-scale assault’ on free press, Retrieved 16 June 2025.
- ↑ В Беларуси обыски у журналистов издания "Наша Нива", Retrieved 16 June 2025.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Template:Cite magazine
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".