Discourses of Censorship: A Historical and International Perspective Prof. Epp Lauk Fritt Ord & Department of Media and Communication UiO University of Tartu, Estonia

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 10. Dec. 1948) Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Freedom of speech – freedom of expression – is regarded as a basic human right This is also an attribute of the nature of political systems: democracies create an environment where citizens’ rights to free speech are not restricted by institutionalised censorship or suppressed by any other means. They may be limited by law to the extent that is necessary for protection of other human rights, morals and state security.

An increasing threat to the freedom of expression in today’s democracies comes from the conflict between the media’s need to provide a public service and their business profitability. Market forces increasingly influence the state of the freedom of expression, as the mainstream media are concentrated into multinational corporations whose main aim is the maximization of profits.

In non-democratic political regimes, the freedom of expression (speech, press) may be included in the Constitution and protected by legislation, but is, in reality, restricted by those people or organisations in power. Control over all types of expression may be less or more strict, less or more overt, and may take various forms. Censorship is one of the most frequent means of control and can be found in the most authoritarian and totalitarian regimes.

Most common arguments in favour of freedom of speech the freedom of speech is necessary for the proper working of democracy in a democracy the government should be accountable to the people that the freedom of speech is likely to be conducive to the discovery of truth.

Less common but increasingly favoured argument in favour of freedom of speech the discovery of truth requires a free ‘market-place of ideas’ which covers any form of expression

Human Rights argument in favour of freedom of speech in order for a government to respect the moral dignity of its citizens a government must grant them fairly broad and deep free-speech rights to deny the freedom of speech also denies the freedom to hear / listen the freedom of speech is intimately tied to ‘thinking’ the denial of the freedom to think ultimately affects the freedom of all expressions.

Arguments in favour of restricting the freedom of speech national security territorial integrity public safety public order public health the reputation or rights of others confidential private information the impartiality of legal proceedings the public from crime.

Freedom of the Press: A Global Survey of Media Independence  numerical rates Totally Free=0  100=Totally Not Free  rankings Totally Free=1  193=Totally Not Free CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS

Free media countries open political competition, where the rule of law prevails a climate of respect for civil liberties basic human rights are protected significant independent civic life independent media

Partly Free media countries limited respect for political rights and civil liberties suffer from an environment of corruption weak rule of law ethnic and religious strife often a setting in which a single political party enjoys dominance despite the façade of limited pluralism some legal, political or economic restrictions are focused on the media

Not Free media countries basic political rights are absent basic civil liberties are widely and systematically denied independent media do not exist

Not Free  Partly Free  Free Increasing political stability Unconditional Access to Information – the Internet and Uncensored Foreign Broadcasts Increasing Editorial Independence of the Media Free Movement of Journalists – national and international

Free  Partly Free  Not Free Political Turmoil Election related violence Murders of Journalists State directed control/censorship of the media State directed intimidation of the media – use of lawsuits against private media / revoking publishing licences / suspending or banning publications Opposition groups barred from using the media Anti-terror legislation, specifically that limiting public speech

Overall Ratings: No country has ever achieved a 0 score 8 is the best No country has achieved a 100 score 98 is the worst.

Worst case scenario A State where: independent media are either nonexistent or barely able to operate the role of the press is to act as a mouthpiece for the ruling regime citizens’ access to unbiased information is severely limited or absent; legal pressure is used against independent media outlets

Worst case scenario media outlets have their power supplies sabotaged by the State all other forms of harassment to severely curtail the ability of independent media outlets to report freely state employed journalists are arrested, tried, and sentenced to lengthy prison terms

Worst case scenario journalists are murdered on the orders of the State the democratically elected party is not allowed to form a government by the incumbents the media’s regulatory body or Press Council serves its own ends the profitability of multi-national corporations takes precedence over the dissemination of factual information

6 Continental Categories 1.Americas = North, Central and South America + West Indies 2.AsiaPacific = Asia, Australasia, Far East and Pacific Ocean States 3.C&EE&FSU = Central & Eastern European and Former Soviet Union 4.MidEast&Nafrica = Middle East and North Africa 5.Africa Sub Sahara = Sub-Saharan Africa 6.W. Europe = Western Europe

Characterise the situation of media freedom in one country of each continental area. Make a min presentation. What is the nature of the political order in this country? What are the political conditions for the media? Are the media independent from the government? Are they controlled by the government and in which way? Any institutionalised censorship? Legal conditions: how much is the media freedom regulated/restricted? Economic conditions: Who owns the media? Level of ownership concentration? Share of the national and foreign ownership? HOME ASSIGNMENT Deadline Sept. 7, 2004