DOCSLIB.ORG

Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach Prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General Information Society and Media SMART 007A 2007-0002 by K.U.Leuven – ICRI (lead contractor) Jönköping International Business School - MMTC Central European University - CMCS Ernst & Young Consultancy Belgium Preliminary Final Report Contract No.: 30-CE-0154276/00-76 Leuven, April 2009 Editorial Note: The findings reported here provide the basis for a public hearing to be held in Brussels in the spring of 2009. The Final Report will take account of comments and suggestions made by stakeholders at that meeting, or subsequently submitted in writing. The deadline for the submission of written comments will be announced at the hearing as well as on the website of the European Commission from where this preliminary report is available. Prof. Dr. Peggy Valcke Project leader Independent Study on “Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach” AUTHORS OF THE REPORT This study is carried out by a consortium of three academic institutes, K.U. Leuven – ICRI, Central European University – CMCS and Jönköping International Business School – MMTC, and a consultancy firm, Ernst & Young Consultancy Belgium. The consortium is supported by three categories of subcontractors: non-affiliated members of the research team, members of the Quality Control Team and members of the network of local media experts (‘Country Correspondents’). The following persons have contributed to the Second Interim Report: For K.U.Leuven – ICRI: Prof. Dr. Peggy Valcke (project leader; senior legal expert) Katrien Lefever Robin Kerremans Aleksandra Kuczerawy Michael Dunstan and Jago Chanter (linguistic revision) For Central European University – CMCS: Prof. Dr. Miklos Sükosd (senior communications science expert) Prof. Dr. Mihály Gálik Laura Ranca Artemon Vogl For Jönköping International Business School – MMTC: Prof. Dr. Robert Picard (senior economic expert) Dr. Cinzia dal Zotto For Ernst & Young Consultancy Belgium: Jo Sanders (senior risk expert) Johan Carton Peggy Excelmans Bruno Stas de Richelle Subcontractors (individual academic researchers): Prof. Dr. Beata Klimkiewicz (Jagiellonian University) Brankica Petkovic (The Peace Institute) Prof. Dr. Sandra Hrvatin (University of Ljubljana) Oliver Füg (University of Exeter) The Quality Control Team consists of: Prof. Dr. Gillian Doyle Dr. Karol Jakubowicz Prof. Dr. Lesley Hitchens Dr. Stefaan Verhulst Prof. Dr. Monroe Price Dr. Josef Trappel The names of the Country Correspondents are listed in Annex II (WP1 – Country Reports). i Independent Study on “Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach” TABLE OF CONTENTS __________________ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vii ABBREVIATIONS ix 1 CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ................................................................ 1 1.1 Context of the Study ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Study Objectives ....................................................................................................... 3 2 NOTION AND MEASURABILITY OF MEDIA PLURALISM .............................................. 5 2.1 Broad Working Definition of Media Pluralism ........................................................... 5 2.2 Measurability and Normative Approaches to Media Pluralism ................................. 5 2.3 Measuring as an Evidentiary Basis for Policy-Making .............................................. 6 2.4 A Holistic Approach Towards Measuring Media Pluralism ....................................... 7 3 TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC TRENDS IN THE MEDIA SECTOR AND THEIR IMPACT ON MEDIA PLURALISM ............................................................................................ 9 4 APPROACH AND METHOD ........................................................................................... 10 4.1 Presentation of Study Team ................................................................................... 10 4.2 Quality Assurance .................................................................................................. 11 4.3 Work Plan ............................................................................................................... 11 4.3.1 Phase I: Development of indicators – Disciplinary Approach – First Interim Report ............................................................................................................................ 11 4.3.1.1 Common Structure and Common Scheme ................................................. 11 4.3.1.2 Method Followed to Develop Legal Indicators ............................................ 14 4.3.1.3 Method Followed to Develop Socio-Demographic Indicators ..................... 15 4.3.1.4 Method Followed to Develop Economic Indicators ..................................... 16 4.3.2 Phase II: Integration of Indicators in Risk-Based Framework – Multidisciplinary Approach – Second Interim Report ................................................................................. 17 4.3.3 Phase III: Testing of the MPM ............................................................................ 18 4.3.4 Preliminary Final Report ..................................................................................... 18 4.3.5 Contacts with Stakeholders ................................................................................ 19 4.4 Basic Features and Implications ............................................................................. 20 4.4.1 Neutral Monitoring Tool ...................................................................................... 20 4.4.2 Holistic Monitoring Tool ...................................................................................... 20 4.4.3 Risk-Based Monitoring Tool ................................................................................ 21 ii Independent Study on “Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach” 4.4.4 Objective Monitoring Tool ................................................................................... 21 4.4.5 EU-Wide Monitoring Tool .................................................................................... 22 4.4.6 Evolving Monitoring Tool .................................................................................... 25 4.4.7 Practicability and User-Friendliness. .................................................................. 25 5 INDICATORS FOR MEDIA PLURALISM ........................................................................ 29 5.1 Legal Indicators ...................................................................................................... 29 5.1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 29 5.1.2 Legal Indicators for the Basic Domain ................................................................ 29 5.1.3 Legal Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Pluralism of Media Ownership and Control’ ............................................................................................................................ 31 5.1.4 Legal Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Pluralism of Media Types and Genres’ ... 33 5.1.5 Legal Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Political Pluralism in the Media’ .............. 34 5.1.6 Legal Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Cultural Pluralism in the Media’ .............. 36 5.1.7 Legal Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Geographical Pluralism in the Media’ ..... 37 5.1.8 Legal Indicators for the Additional Risk Domain ‘Distribution’ ............................ 39 5.2 Socio-Demographic Indicators ............................................................................... 40 5.2.1 Socio-Demographic Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Pluralism of Media Ownership and Control’ ................................................................................................... 40 5.2.2 Socio-Demographic Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Pluralism of Media Types and Genres’ ..................................................................................................................... 40 5.2.2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 40 5.2.2.2 Threats ........................................................................................................ 41 5.2.2.3 Indicators and methods............................................................................... 41 5.2.2.4 Data sources ............................................................................................... 42 5.2.3 Socio-Demographic Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Political Pluralism in the Media’ ............................................................................................................................ 43 5.2.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 43 5.2.3.2 Threats ........................................................................................................ 44 5.2.3.3 Indicators and methods............................................................................... 45 5.2.3.4 Data sources ............................................................................................... 49 5.2.4 Socio-Demographic Indicators for the Risk Domain ‘Cultural Pluralism in the Media’ ...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Media Pluralism Monitor: Conceptualizing Media Pluralism for the Online Environment Elda Brogi
    The Media pluralism monitor: Conceptualizing media pluralism for the online environment Elda Brogi How to cite this article: Brogi, Elda (2020). “The media pluralism monitor: Conceptualizing media pluralism for the online environment”. Profesional de la información, v. 29, n. 5, e290529. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.sep.29 Invited manuscript received on 18th October 2020 Elda Brogi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2682-0528 Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom European University Institute Via Boccaccio, 121/111 50133 Florence, Italy [email protected] Abstract Media pluralism is an essential feature and pillar of contemporary democracies. It is a corollary of the right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by European national constitutions, as well as by theConvention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms (art. 10) and by the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union (art. 11). Ensuring a plural media environment is a precondition for democracy and may be seen as a policy goal. The availability and accessibility of diverse information and views create the conditions for citizens to form and express their opinions and participate in the democratic debate in an informed way. Due to technological developments and the rapid rise of digital platforms intermediating online content, the concept of media pluralism has been reinterpreted at both academic and policy level, taking into account the recent structural changes in the media sector. The Media pluralism monitor is a methodology to assess the risks to media pluralism, based on a set of 20 indicators covering a broad definition of media pluralism and, therefore, having a holistic perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Hybrid Online Audience Measurement Calculations Are Only As Good As the Input Data Quality
    People First: A User-Centric Hybrid Online Audience by John Brauer, Manager, Product Leadership, Measurement Model Nielsen Overview As with any media measurement methodology, hybrid online audience measurement calculations are only as good as the input data quality. Hybrid online audience measurement goes beyond a single metric to forecast online audiences more accurately by drawing on multiple data sources. The open question for online publishers and advertisers is, ‘Which hybrid audience measurement model provides the most accurate measure?’ • User-centric online hybrid models rely exclusively on high quality panel data for audience measurement calculations, then project activity to all sites informed by consumer behavior patterns on tagged sites • Site-centric online hybrid models depend on cookies for audience calculations, subject to the inherent weaknesses of cookie data that cannot tie directly to unique individuals and their valuable demographic information • Both hybrid models assume that panel members are representative of the universe being measured and comprise a base large enough to provide statistical reliability, measured in a way that accurately captures behavior • The site-centric hybrid model suffers from the issue of inaccurately capturing unique users as a result of cookie deletion and related activities that can result in audience measurement estimates different than the actual number • Rapid uptake of new online access devices further exacerbates site-centric cookie data tracking issues (in some cases overstating unique browsers by a factor of five) by increasing the likelihood of one individual representing multiple cookies Only the user-centric hybrid model enables a fair comparison of audiences across all web sites, avoids the pitfall of counting multiple cookies versus unique users, and employs a framework that anticipates future changes such as additional data sets and access devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Reporting Facts: Free from Fear Or Favour
    Reporting Facts: Free from Fear or Favour PREVIEW OF IN FOCUS REPORT ON WORLD TRENDS IN FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND MEDIA DEVELOPMENT INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLAY AN ESSENTIAL ROLE IN SOCIETIES. They make a vital contribution to achieving sustainable development – including, topically, Sustainable Development Goal 3 that calls for healthy lives and promoting well-being for all. In the context of COVID-19, this is more important than ever. Journalists need editorial independence in order to be professional, ethical and serve the public interest. But today, journalism is under increased threat as a result of public and private sector influence that endangers editorial independence. All over the world, journalists are struggling to stave off pressures and attacks from both external actors and decision-making systems or individuals in their own outlets. By far, the greatest menace to editorial independence in a growing number of countries across the world is media capture, a form of media control that is achieved through systematic steps by governments and powerful interest groups. This capture is through taking over and abusing: • regulatory mechanisms governing the media, • state-owned or state-controlled media operations, • public funds used to finance journalism, and • ownership of privately held news outlets. Such overpowering control of media leads to a shrinking of journalistic autonomy and contaminates the integrity of the news that is available to the public. However, there is push-back, and even more can be done to support editorial independence
    [Show full text]
  • Women and Men in the News
    Nordic Council of Ministers TemaNord 2017:527 Women and men in the news and men in Women 2017:527 TemaNord Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen K www.norden.org WOMEN AND MEN IN THE NEWS The media carry significant notions of social and cultural norms and values and have a powerful role in constructing and reinforcing gendered images. The news WOMEN AND MEN in particular has an important role in how notions of power are distributed in the society. This report presents study findings on how women and men are represented in the news in the Nordic countries, and to what extent women and IN THE NEWS men occupy the decision-making positions in the media. The survey is based on the recent findings from three cross-national research projects. These findings REPORT ON GENDER REPRESENTATION IN NORDIC NEWS CONTENT are supported by national studies. The results indicate that in all the Nordic AND THE NORDIC MEDIA INDUSTRY countries women are underrepresented in the news media both as news subjects and as sources of information. Men also dominate in higher-level decision-making positions. The report includes examples of measures used to improve the gender balance in Nordic news. Women and men in the news Report on gender representation in Nordic news content and the Nordic media industry Saga Mannila TemaNord 2017:527 Women and men in the news Report on gender representation in Nordic news content and the Nordic media industry Saga Mannila ISBN 978-92-893-4973-4 (PRINT) ISBN 978-92-893-4974-1 (PDF) ISBN 978-92-893-4975-8 (EPUB) http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/TN2017-527 TemaNord 2017:527 ISSN 0908-6692 Standard: PDF/UA-1 ISO 14289-1 © Nordic Council of Ministers 2017 Layout: NMR Print: Rosendahls Printed in Denmark Although the Nordic Council of Ministers funded this publication, the contents do not necessarily reflect its views, policies or recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Adolescents, Virtual War, and the Government-Gaming Nexus
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2012 Why We Still Fight: Adolescents, Virtual War, and the Government Gaming Nexus Margot A. Susca Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION WHY WE STILL FIGHT: ADOLESCENTS, VIRTUAL WAR, AND THE GOVERNMENT- GAMING NEXUS By MARGOT A. SUSCA A dissertation submitted to the School of Communication in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2012 Margot A. Susca defended this dissertation on February 29, 2012. The members of the supervisory committee were: Jennifer M. Proffitt Professor Directing Dissertation Ronald L. Mullis University Representative Stephen D. McDowell Committee Member Arthur A. Raney Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For my mother iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my major professor, Jennifer M. Proffitt, Ph.D., for her unending support, encouragement, and guidance throughout this process. I thank her for the endless hours of revision and counsel and for having chocolate in her office, where I spent more time than I would like to admit looking for words of inspiration and motivation. I also would like to thank my committee members, Stephen McDowell, Ph.D., Arthur Raney, Ph.D., and Ronald Mullis, Ph.D., who all offered valuable feedback and reassurance during these last two years.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Disinformation on Democratic Processes and Human Rights in the World
    STUDY Requested by the DROI subcommittee The impact of disinformation on democratic processes and human rights in the world @Adobe Stock Authors: Carme COLOMINA, Héctor SÁNCHEZ MARGALEF, Richard YOUNGS European Parliament coordinator: Policy Department for External Relations EN Directorate General for External Policies of the Union PE 653.635 - April 2021 DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY The impact of disinformation on democratic processes and human rights in the world ABSTRACT Around the world, disinformation is spreading and becoming a more complex phenomenon based on emerging techniques of deception. Disinformation undermines human rights and many elements of good quality democracy; but counter-disinformation measures can also have a prejudicial impact on human rights and democracy. COVID-19 compounds both these dynamics and has unleashed more intense waves of disinformation, allied to human rights and democracy setbacks. Effective responses to disinformation are needed at multiple levels, including formal laws and regulations, corporate measures and civil society action. While the EU has begun to tackle disinformation in its external actions, it has scope to place greater stress on the human rights dimension of this challenge. In doing so, the EU can draw upon best practice examples from around the world that tackle disinformation through a human rights lens. This study proposes steps the EU can take to build counter-disinformation more seamlessly into its global human rights and democracy policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020
    Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Nic Newman with Richard Fletcher, Anne Schulz, Simge Andı, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Supported by Surveyed by © Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2020 4 Contents Foreword by Rasmus Kleis Nielsen 5 3.15 Netherlands 76 Methodology 6 3.16 Norway 77 Authorship and Research Acknowledgements 7 3.17 Poland 78 3.18 Portugal 79 SECTION 1 3.19 Romania 80 Executive Summary and Key Findings by Nic Newman 9 3.20 Slovakia 81 3.21 Spain 82 SECTION 2 3.22 Sweden 83 Further Analysis and International Comparison 33 3.23 Switzerland 84 2.1 How and Why People are Paying for Online News 34 3.24 Turkey 85 2.2 The Resurgence and Importance of Email Newsletters 38 AMERICAS 2.3 How Do People Want the Media to Cover Politics? 42 3.25 United States 88 2.4 Global Turmoil in the Neighbourhood: 3.26 Argentina 89 Problems Mount for Regional and Local News 47 3.27 Brazil 90 2.5 How People Access News about Climate Change 52 3.28 Canada 91 3.29 Chile 92 SECTION 3 3.30 Mexico 93 Country and Market Data 59 ASIA PACIFIC EUROPE 3.31 Australia 96 3.01 United Kingdom 62 3.32 Hong Kong 97 3.02 Austria 63 3.33 Japan 98 3.03 Belgium 64 3.34 Malaysia 99 3.04 Bulgaria 65 3.35 Philippines 100 3.05 Croatia 66 3.36 Singapore 101 3.06 Czech Republic 67 3.37 South Korea 102 3.07 Denmark 68 3.38 Taiwan 103 3.08 Finland 69 AFRICA 3.09 France 70 3.39 Kenya 106 3.10 Germany 71 3.40 South Africa 107 3.11 Greece 72 3.12 Hungary 73 SECTION 4 3.13 Ireland 74 References and Selected Publications 109 3.14 Italy 75 4 / 5 Foreword Professor Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Director, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ) The coronavirus crisis is having a profound impact not just on Our main survey this year covered respondents in 40 markets, our health and our communities, but also on the news media.
    [Show full text]
  • EFAMRO / ESOMAR Position Statement on the Proposal for an Eprivacy Regulation —
    EFAMRO / ESOMAR Position Statement on the Proposal for an ePrivacy Regulation — April 2017 EFAMRO/ESOMAR Position Statement on the Proposal for an ePrivacy Regulation April 2017 00. Table of contents P3 1. About EFAMRO and ESOMAR 2. Key recommendations P3 P4 3. Overview P5 4. Audience measurement research P7 5. Telephone and online research P10 6. GDPR framework for research purposes 7. List of proposed amendments P11 a. Recitals P11 b. Articles P13 2 EFAMRO/ESOMAR Position Statement on the Proposal for an ePrivacy Regulation April 2017 01. About EFAMRO and ESOMAR This position statement is submitted In particular our sector produces research on behalf of EFAMRO, the European outcomes that guide decisions of public authorities (e.g. the Eurobarometer), the non- Research Federation, and ESOMAR, profit sector including charities (e.g. political the World Association for Data, opinion polling), and business (e.g. satisfaction Research and Insights. In Europe, we surveys, product improvement research). represent the market, opinion and In a society increasingly driven by data, our profession ensures the application of appropriate social research and data analytics methodologies, rigour and provenance controls sectors, accounting for an annual thus safeguarding access to quality, relevant, turnover of €15.51 billion1. reliable, and aggregated data sets. These data sets lead to better decision making, inform targeted and cost-effective public policy, and 1 support economic development - leading to ESOMAR Global Market Research 2016 growth and jobs. 02. Key Recommendations We support the proposal for an ePrivacy Amendment of Article 8 and Recital 21 to enable Regulation to replace the ePrivacy Directive as research organisations that comply with Article this will help to create a level playing field in a true 89 of the General Data Protection Regulation European Digital Single Market whilst increasing (GDPR) to continue conducting independent the legal certainty for organisations operating in audience measurement research activities for different EU member states.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional Review of Plurality Policies, Guidelines, Practices and Rules
    Jurisdictional Review of plurality policies, guidelines, practices and rules. Prepared on behalf of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) Deirdre Kevin, Commsol Ltd March 2018 1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction and outline of report .............................................................................................. 12 Note on methodology .................................................................................................................. 14 Section I: the European and international context ............................................................. 15 Chapter 1. Placing the pluralism debate in a market context ......................................... 16 1.1 Traditional media ...................................................................................................................... 16 News sources, trust and reliability .................................................................................................... 17 1.2 The new digital media world..................................................................................................... 17 Digitisation, proliferation of TV channels and their distribution ...................................................... 17 New online players in the provision and delivery of news ................................................................ 18 Enhancing understanding of new forms of access to news .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Running Head: FAKE NEWS AS a THREAT to the DEMOCRATIC MEDIA ENVIRONMENT
    Running head: FAKE NEWS AS A THREAT TO THE DEMOCRATIC MEDIA ENVIRONMENT Fake News as a Threat to the Democratic Media Environment: Past Conditions of Media Regulation and Their Contemporary Applicability to New Media in the United States of America and South Korea Jae Hyun Park Duke University FAKE NEWS AS A THREAT TO THE DEMOCRATIC MEDIA ENVIRONMENT 1 Abstract This study uses a comparative case study policy analysis to evaluate whether the media regulation standards that the governments of the United States of America and South Korea used in the past apply to fake news on social media and the Internet today. We first identify the shared conditions based on which the two governments intervened in the free press. Then, we examine media regulation laws regarding these conditions and review court cases in which they were utilized. In each section, we draw similarities and differences between the two governments’ courses of action. The comparative analysis will serve useful in the conclusion, where we assess the applicability of those conditions to fake news on new media platforms in each country and deliberate policy recommendations as well as policy flow between the two countries. Keywords: censorship, defamation, democracy, falsity, fairness, freedom of speech, ​ intention, journalistic truth, news manipulation, objectivity FAKE NEWS AS A THREAT TO THE DEMOCRATIC MEDIA ENVIRONMENT 2 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4
    [Show full text]
  • World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report
    Published in 2018 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7, place de Fontenoy, 7523 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO and University of Oxford, 2018 ISBN 978-92-3-100242-7 Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repos- itory (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The present license applies exclusively to the textual content of the publication. For the use of any material not clearly identi- fied as belonging to UNESCO, prior permission shall be requested from: [email protected] or UNESCO Publishing, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP France. Title: World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report This complete World Trends Report Report (and executive summary in six languages) can be found at en.unesco.org/world- media-trends-2017 The complete study should be cited as follows: UNESCO. 2018. World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development: 2017/2018 Global Report, Paris The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authori- ties, or concerning the delimiation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Hate Speech Ignited Understanding Hate Speech in Myanmar
    Hate Speech Ignited Understanding Hate Speech in Myanmar Hate Speech Ignited Understanding Hate Speech in Myanmar October 2020 About Us This report was written based on the information and data collection, monitoring, analytical insights and experiences with hate speech by civil society organizations working to reduce and/or directly af- fected by hate speech. The research for the report was coordinated by Burma Monitor (Research and Monitoring) and Progressive Voice and written with the assistance of the International Human Rights Clinic at Harvard Law School while it is co-authored by a total 19 organizations. Jointly published by: 1. Action Committee for Democracy Development 2. Athan (Freedom of Expression Activist Organization) 3. Burma Monitor (Research and Monitoring) 4. Generation Wave 5. International Human Rights Clinic at Harvard Law School 6. Kachin Women’s Association Thailand 7. Karen Human Rights Group 8. Mandalay Community Center 9. Myanmar Cultural Research Society 10. Myanmar People Alliance (Shan State) 11. Nyan Lynn Thit Analytica 12. Olive Organization 13. Pace on Peaceful Pluralism 14. Pon Yate 15. Progressive Voice 16. Reliable Organization 17. Synergy - Social Harmony Organization 18. Ta’ang Women’s Organization 19. Thint Myat Lo Thu Myar (Peace Seekers and Multiculturalist Movement) Contact Information Progressive Voice [email protected] www.progressivevoicemyanmar.org Burma Monitor [email protected] International Human Rights Clinic at Harvard Law School [email protected] https://hrp.law.harvard.edu Acknowledgments Firstly and most importantly, we would like to express our deepest appreciation to the activists, human rights defenders, civil society organizations, and commu- nity-based organizations that provided their valuable time, information, data, in- sights, and analysis for this report.
    [Show full text]