Censor Dot Gov 2000

Censor Dot Gov THE INTERNET AND PRESS FREEDOM 2000 F NF PF Press freedom by world population With an essay on the state of press freedom by Leonard R. Sussman FREEDOM HOUSE BOARD OF TRUSTEES BETTE BAO L ORD, CHAIRMAN, MAX M. KAMPELMAN, CHAIRMAN EMERITUS, NED W. BANDLER, VICE CHAIRMAN, MARK PALMER, VICE CHAIRMAN, WALTER J. SCHLOSS, TREASURER, KENNETH L. ADELMAN, SECRETARY, MORTON ABRAMOWITZ, J. BRIAN ATWOOD, ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, PETER COLLIER, MITCHELL E. DANIELS, JR., PAULA DOBRIANSKY, WILLIAM C. DOHERTY, JR., ALAN DYE, SANDRA FELDMAN, MALCOLM S. FORBES, JR., THEODORE J. FORSTMANN, RICHARD GARDNER, NORMAN HILL, SAMUEL P. H UNTINGTON, JOHN T. J OYCE, JEANE J. KIRKPATRICK, ANTHONY LAKE, MARA LIASSON, JAY MAZUR, JOHN NORTON MOORE, PEGGY NOONAN, P.J. O’ROURKE, ORLANDO PATTERSON, SUSAN KAUFMAN PURCELL, OTTO J. REICH, PETER R ODMAN, DONALD RUMSFELD, WENDELL L. WILLKIE II, JACQUES D. WIMPFHEIMER, PAUL WOLFOWITZ, ANDREW YOUNG, RICHARD SAUBER, OF COUNSEL SENIOR STAFF ADRIAN KARATNYCKY, PRESIDENT, JAMES S. DENTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THERESE LYONS, VICE PRESIDENT FOR FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION, ARCH PUDDINGTON, VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH, LEONARD R. SUSSMAN, SENIOR SCHOLAR, LISA DAVIS, DIRECTOR, RIGHTS PROGRAM, PAULA GIBBONS, DIRECTOR OF REGIONAL EXCHANGE PROGRAMS, CRISTINA GUSETH, DIRECTOR, ROMANIA DEMOCRATIZATION PROGRAMS, JOHN KUBINIEC, DIRECTOR, PRU PROGRAM, NINA S HEA, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, PETER WIEBLER, DIRECTOR, REGIONAL NETWORKING PROJECT Press Freedom Survey 2000 1 Censor Dot Gov The Internet and Press Freedom 2000 Leonard R. Sussman Will the Internet become a censor’s web, tries (63 percent) restrict print and electronic journal- worldwide? ists. Some 80 percent of the world’s people live in Americans, a recent report concluded, are iso- nations with less than a free press. Listed in the free- lating themselves behind computers. Many govern- press category are 69 countries, representing all con- ments see this not as isolation, but as education and tinents. Fifty-one nations have partly free news media, empowerment. They fear that such freedom dimin- and in another 66 countries the print and broadcast ishes state control and justifies central regulation. These systems are not free of government control. rulers, reluctant to empower the Internet, follow 400 Three countries moved to higher categories years of press censorship. of press freedom in 1999. Bulgaria went from partly Today, in nearly two-thirds of the world’s na- free to free, and Jordan and Turkey moved from not tions, domestic messages are regulated by laws in- free to partly free. Harsher press restrictions were herited from print-press censorship and updated to applied in Pakistan and Sri Lanka. These two coun- restrict radio and television. To regulate the Internet tries moved from partly free to not free. Some 48 coun- internationally would require the impossible task of tries improved slightly within their categories. Another framing a treaty signed by every country. Some do- 36 nations declined somewhat. Unchanged last year mestic controls, country by country, therefore, are al- were 97 of the 186 countries examined. ready in place. By a French monitoring organization’s The median ratings for all countries improved estimate, 45 countries now restrict Internet access on by 4 percent over 1998, but from 1996 through 1998 the pretext of protecting the public from subversive the combined ratings showed greater press freedom ideas or violation of national security—code words than in 1999. After this survey was completed, how- used by censors since the sixteenth century. ever, several countries, including Russia, South Af- Last year in Russia, the successor to the KGB rica, Peru, and Yugoslavia, evoked concerns not re- began forcing Internet service providers (ISPs) to in- flected in the present survey. In Russia, the press was stall surveillance equipment. Security services can now increasingly dominated by specific business and po- monitor Internet communications without a court or- litical interests. Government operatives, often claiming der. Internet providers can lose their licenses for de- wartime restrictions, harassed or physically abused nying security forces access to private Internet traffic. journalists, seized newspapers, and confiscated radio Fears for freedom of information increased with the equipment. Self-censorship by the press increased. appointment at year’s end of Vladimir Putin, a former Ominous signs for the future were the creation of a high-ranking KGB official, as acting president. In Feb- press ministry directly answerable to the president and ruary, one online provider was temporarily blocked new security force directives to monitor the Internet. by authorities.With the fast growth of the Internet in The Belgrade government in 2000 stepped up Russia, such restrictions threaten the freedom of Rus- the use of its 1998 Law on Public Information to re- sian citizens. press the news media. Under the law, independent In January 2000, Freedom House’s press media have incurred debilitating fines which threaten freedom survey found that nearly two-thirds of coun- their ability to continue operating. Particular targets 2 Press Freedom Survey 2000 were Studio B television and Radio B2 92, whose and television in the nineteenth and twentieth centu- transmission equipment was seized in March, as well ries. as the daily Vecernje Novosti, whose parent com- The Internet, however, is the most formidable pany was in the process of privatization until early challenge to the censor. Cyberspace is everywhere, March 2000. The Higher Commercial Court then an- but headquartered nowhere. No single government can nulled its ownership transformation, placing it under yet control a message as it originates in another coun- the jurisdiction of a state publishing house and effec- try. A decade of bitter debates over “a new world tively ending its independence. information and communication order” failed in the The South African Human Rights Commis- 1980s to set a universal standard for cross-border sion in February 2000 subpoenaed six editors and a news flows. But that has not stopped countries in all number of journalists to discuss alleged racism in the regions from restricting domestic and transnational news media. The editors later appeared voluntarily. news flows. Some of these editors had been charged or jailed in The wide use of English and the high cost of the apartheid era for resisting racist laws applied to infrastructure limit the use of the Internet to the elite in journalism. Singling out journalists for examination now many countries. For that highly selective audience, the was perceived by the editors’ association as a threat rules governing the Internet can be somewhat less strict to press freedom. The conferees, faced with analyses than those controlling print and broadcast media, which claiming that blacks are perceived as “criminals,” or are more widely accessible to the masses. Still, official whites as “racists,” were told that “reinforcing stereo- clampdowns on ISPs, the technical conduit for do- types was often done without intent.” Yet the structure mestic as well as international information, restrict of the hearings suggested that journalists might be sub- interactivity on what was hailed as the limitless pur- jected to government-enforced training and reeduca- veyor of ideas that would expand human freedom. tion. Some 20 countries thoroughly restrict their citizens’ In Peru, the Fujimori regime sharply increased access to the Internet.* In Burma, owners must re- assaults on independent newspapers and broadcast port computers to the government or face a 15-year media. In March, prior to the April presidential elec- prison term. The Burmese government’s “cyberspace tion, the country’s most distinguished daily newspaper warfare center” counterattacks against possible dis- El Comercio was threatened with a takeover by allies sent by hacking into computers that receive or send of the president. forbidden messages. Press controls—lately more subtle and less Some countries maintain control through gov- detectable—are encouraged by international covenants ernment servers that censor incoming news and infor- in Europe and Latin America, and by so-called “Asian mation. Penalties including imprisonment await citizens values.” These empower officials to restrict journalists who use faxes, cell phones, or codes to circumvent for vague violations of national security, morality, or the government ISP. In China, many government of- public health—often code names for opposition to the fices and institutes are wired, but the official ISP limits political or religious establishment. content, particularly of incoming news from abroad. The explosion of news and information on the “Cyber dissidents” have been imprisoned. Security World Wide Web is tempting governments—devel- operatives inspect web sites to make sure they do not oped and developing, politically free and not free—to leak “state secrets.” These may include references to consider restricting content on the Internet. Censors the arrest and torture of practitioners of the banned have dogged every new communication technology Falun Gong, a movement which teaches meditation since the creation of movable type in the sixteenth cen- and breathing exercises to improve health and moral tury, through the innovation of the telephone, radio, habits. Based on such security surveillance, Internet * Countries which totally or largely control Internet access: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Burma,

Load more