Editing Freedom of the press (section)

===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>