Editing Freedom of the press (section)

==History==

===Europe===
{{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 XVIII century and in the XIX 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=2025-03-08 |editor-last2=Wennberg |editor-first2=Bertil}}</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>

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=2021-02-10 }}, 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 = 2016-02-08|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 = 2016-01-24}}</ref>

====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=2017-01-30 }}, 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]]'']]
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"/>

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 [[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=2016-02-17 }}, ''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=2022-08-11 |website=victorianweb.org |archive-date=2022-12-08 |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:
: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.<ref>{{cite book|author=John Stuart Mill|title=On Liberty|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GxA-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA10|year=1867|page=10|publisher=Longmans |isbn=9780758337283}}</ref>

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 September 4, 1770 and October 7, 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, October 7, 1771.<ref>{{Cite journal
|title=David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s
|first=John Christian |last=Laursen
|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas |volume=59 |issue=1 |date=January 1998|pages=167–172 |doi=10.1353/jhi.1998.0004|jstor=3654060|s2cid=154481010}}</ref>

====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]]
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=2018-08-16}}</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.}}

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=2016-11-27}}</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.}}

The Constitution allows the [[Warrant (law)|warrantless]] [[confiscation]] of [[periodicals]] in cases of absolute urgency, when the [[Judiciary of Italy|Judiciary]] cannot timely intervene, on the condition that a [[Judicial review|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:

{{Blockquote|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.}}

====Nazi Germany (1933–1945)====
[[File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1989-0821-502,_Joseph_Goebbels.jpg|thumb|[[Joseph Goebbels]]' [[Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda]] was a driving force of suppressing freedom of the press in Nazi Germany.]]
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]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Green | first1=Jonathon |last2=Karolides |first2=Nicholas J. |title=Encyclopedia of Censorship|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bunHURgi7FcC&pg=PA194|year=2014|edition=2nd|publisher=Infobase Publishing|pages=194–196|isbn =9781438110011}}</ref> 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, [[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=2007-09-30}}</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=2011-09-26 |archive-date=2019-04-06 |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====
{{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 {{ill| Maria Ponomarenko|sv|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=2020-08-12 |access-date=2020-09-19 |archive-date=2020-09-17 |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> 

''[[Novaya Gazeta]]''{{'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]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-novaya-gazeta-newspaper-pauses-activities-after-official-warning-2022-03-28/|title=Russia's Novaya Gazeta newspaper pauses activities after official warning|website=Reuters|date=28 March 2022}}</ref> 

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 [[Russian 2022 war censorship laws|disseminating "false information"]] about the Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Russia's Interior Ministry added two [[Russian emigration during the Russian invasion of Ukraine|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.<ref>{{cite news |title=Russia issues arrest warrants for exiled journalists over war coverage |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-issues-arrest-warrants-for-exiled-journalists-over-war-coverage-/7684311.html |work=VOA News |date=3 July 2024}}</ref>

====Romania====
[[File:Simion, Digi 24.jpg|thumb|[[Alliance for the Union of Romanians|AUR]] leader [[George Simion]] answering a question from a [[Digi24|Digi 24]] reporter in [[Cluj-Napoca]], 2025]]
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=2022-09-22 |website=AP NEWS |language=en |archive-date=2022-04-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220408183712/https://apnews.com/article/e7d5de06d089fc6aca0452fca19e1da7 |url-status=live }}</ref>

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=2022-09-22 |website=Stirileprotv.ro |language=ro |archive-date=2022-08-03 |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=1999-08-17 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220309001313/https://ifex.org/editor-in-chief-arrested-2/ |archive-date=2022-03-09 |access-date=2025-03-11 |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=2023-05-16 |website=rsf.org |date=17 February 2023 |language=en |archive-date=2023-05-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230516083306/https://rsf.org/en/country/romania |url-status=live }}</ref> 

====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]]
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 11, 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=April 1, 2020}}</ref>

====Czechia====
Current general manager of Czech Television Jan Souček has courted controversy in his tenure given his attack on free media<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.irozhlas.cz/zpravy-domov/pro-zvane-novinare-ceska-televize-odmitla-vpustit-reportery-deniku-n-a-seznam_2504251410_ako |title='Pro zvané novináře.' Česká televize odmítla vpustit reportéry Deníku N a Seznam zpráv na brífink Součka }}</ref> and his attacks on employees of Czech Television.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://video.aktualne.cz/spotlight/spotlight-rozhovor-jan-soucek-video/r~cc291744692211ef95ee0cc47ab5f122/ |title=Souček: Myslíte, že Moravec může říkat, co chce, kdy chce? Ne, bianco šek nevystavuju &#124; Aktuálně.cz |date=4 September 2024 }}</ref> Souček compared himself to Milada Horáková<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.novinky.cz/clanek/domaci-byla-to-hloupost-soucek-lituje-prirovnani-k-milade-horakove-40514933 |title=Byla to hloupost. Souček lituje přirovnání k Miladě Horákové - Novinky |date=27 March 2025 }}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|url= https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/clanek/domaci/chci-aby-ct-udavala-trendy-na-digitalnim-trhu-rika-nastupujici-generalni-reditel-soucek-1881|title= Chci, aby ČT udávala trendy na digitálním trhu, říká nastupující generální ředitel Souček}}</ref>" 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.<ref>{{Cite web|url= https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/rada-ceske-televize-udelila-vytku-generalnimu-rediteli-souck/r~e6210172ff6111efb2180cc47ab5f122/|title= Šéf České televize dostal výtku. Za odstupné, začerňování smluv i způsob komunikace &#124; Aktuálně.cz|date= 12 March 2025}}</ref>

===Americas===

====United States====
{{main|Freedom of the press in the United States}}
The [[First Amendment of the United States Constitution]] states:
<blockquote>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.</blockquote>

====Canada====
[[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 |location=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.

====Mexico====

{{See also|Mass media in Mexico|List of journalists and media workers killed in Mexico}}

[[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=2016-11-16}}</ref>
<!----nothing, as of May 2022  Guatemala  Belize  El Salvador   Costa Rica  Panama   Honduras  Cuba  Jamaica  ---->

====Guatemala====
See [[Mass media in Guatemala]]

====Nicaragua====
See [[Freedom of the press in Nicaragua]] and [[Mass media in Nicaragua]]
<!--- South America  Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, and Venezuela ---->
====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====
See [[History of Chile (1990-)]]

====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#Independence|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===
====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>

====Iran====
According to the reports of the RSF in 2007, the freedom of 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=2007-05-04 |access-date=2020-09-08 |archive-date=2021-07-18 |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=2020-02-06 |access-date=2020-09-05 |archive-date=2020-09-05 |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 the 3rd of 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=2015-05-02 |last=شجاعی|first=میترا |language=fa |access-date=2020-11-09 |archive-date=2020-11-10 |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 21, 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=April 21, 2020 |access-date=May 3, 2020 |archive-date=2020-05-08 |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 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=2020-05-03 |access-date=2020-08-30 |archive-date=2020-08-17 |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=2020-02-08 |access-date=2020-08-31 |archive-date=2020-08-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200831060613/https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-51424918 |url-status=live }}</ref>

On November 26, 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=2019-11-26 |language=fa |access-date=2020-09-28 |archive-date=2019-11-30 |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=2019-12-11 |website=[[Committee to Protect Journalists|CPJ]] |access-date=2020-09-04 |archive-date=2020-08-31 |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=2019-12-11 |language=fa|access-date=2020-09-04 |archive-date=2020-09-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200904073225/https://www.bbc.com/persian/world-50746161 |url-status=live }}</ref>

On September 8, 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=2020-09-08 |language=fa|access-date=2020-09-09 |archive-date=2020-09-09 |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 9, 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=2020-10-30 |access-date=2020-11-24 |archive-date=2021-02-02 |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 12 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 December 8 and the journalist was executed on December 12.<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====
{{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]]
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=2024-03-07 |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====
{{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=2020-04-15|website=leadingweb.de|access-date=2019-10-03|archive-date=2020-07-31|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=2010-09-15|title=8 Tibet Activists Detained near Olympics Venue|date=2010-09-15|access-date=2019-10-03}}</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=2008-08-14|title=Hundreds of websites still censored at Beijing Olympics {{!}} Web Scout {{!}} Los Angeles Times|date=2008-08-14|access-date=2019-10-03}}</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=2009-03-05|title=AFP: Rogge urges China to keep foreign media freedoms|date=2009-03-05|access-date=2019-10-03}}</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=2008-09-15|title=Games fell short of standards|date=2008-09-15|access-date=2019-10-03}}</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.

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=2012-11-02|website=UN News|access-date=2019-10-03|archive-date=2018-03-17|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====
{{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=2019-10-03|archive-date=2018-09-07|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 CorporationsIronically, press freedom in Pakistan flourished for the first time in 2002 during Gen R Prevaiz 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=2019-10-03|archive-date=2020-01-14|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.

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=2019-10-03|archive-date=2023-01-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230117010440/https://rsf.org/en/ranking|url-status=live}}</ref>

====Malaysia====
[[Freedom of the press in 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]].<ref>{{cite news| url = https://www.reuters.com/article/malaysia-politics-journalist-idINL3N1SQ02Y| title = Briton exiled for reporting on 1MDB returns to Malaysia| website = [[Reuters]]| date = 19 May 2018| access-date = 30 December 2021| archive-date = 30 December 2021| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20211230023753/https://www.reuters.com/article/malaysia-politics-journalist-idINL3N1SQ02Y| url-status = live}}</ref>

====Singapore====
[[Mass media in Singapore|Singapore's media environment]] is considered to be controlled by the government.<ref>{{cite web|title=Singapore profile|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15966553|website=BBC News|date=5 September 2017|access-date=21 July 2018|archive-date=19 July 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180719041236/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-15966553|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Branigin|first1=William|title=Singapore vs The Foreign Press|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/12/17/singapore-vs-the-foreign-press/71642106-d3cb-4ba6-9df9-9542176a0c10/|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|date=17 December 1990|access-date=6 February 2018|archive-date=13 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171113165803/https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/12/17/singapore-vs-the-foreign-press/71642106-d3cb-4ba6-9df9-9542176a0c10/|url-status=live}}</ref>

====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 &#124; Jamal Khashoggi: What the Arab world needs most is free expression |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=2018-10-17 |accessdate=2022-02-16 |archive-date=2018-10-20 |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.
<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/>

====India====
{{main|Freedom of the press in India}}
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 (India)|Official Secrets Act]] and [[Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act]]<ref name=pota>{{cite web
|title = The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002
|url = http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm
|access-date = 2006-10-30
|archive-date = 2012-04-12
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120412153523/http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/actandordinances/POTA.htm
|url-status = live
}}</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.

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
|url = http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Media/freedom-press.htm
|title = Freedom of the Press
|journal = PUCL Bulletin
|publisher = People's Union for Civil Liberties
|date = July 1982
|access-date = 2006-10-30
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180411055721/http://www.pucl.org/from-archives/Media/freedom-press.htm
|archive-date = 2018-04-11
|url-status = dead
}}</ref>
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>

====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=2018-04-25|work=Dhaka Tribune|access-date=2018-08-11|archive-date=2018-08-11|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 June 18, 2018, by Bangladesh's regulatory authority. Another newspaper ''[[The Daily Star (Bangladesh)|The Daily Star]]''{{'s}} website was blocked for 22 hours on June 2, 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=2018-08-11|archive-date=2018-08-11|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=2018-08-11}}</ref>

===Africa===

====Tanzania====
As of 2018, online content providers [[Telecommunications in Tanzania|must be licensed]] and pay an annual fee to the government.<ref>{{cite news|title=Tanzania: Bloggers to be charged $900 (average annual income) per year for right to speak|url=http://perilofafrica.com/tanzania-bloggers-to-be-charged-900-annual-average-income-per-year-for-right-to-speak/|access-date=25 April 2018|publisher=Peril of Africa|date=15 April 2018|archive-date=11 September 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190911005116/http://perilofafrica.com/tanzania-bloggers-to-be-charged-900-annual-average-income-per-year-for-right-to-speak/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

====South Africa====
Following the transition to democracy in 1994, the post-apartheid [[Constitution of South Africa]] guarantees the freedom of the press.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2021-10-18-press-freedom-in-democratic-south-africa-is-a-fragile-concept/|title=Press freedom in democratic South Africa is a fragile concept|work=Daily Maverick|first=Brij|last=Maharaj|date=18 October 2021|access-date=3 January 2022|archive-date=3 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220103132442/https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2021-10-18-press-freedom-in-democratic-south-africa-is-a-fragile-concept/|url-status=live}}</ref>