Egypt’s government reportedly shopping for PR firm

A protester holds a portrait of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi during protests in July. (Shawkan / Demotix)

A protester holds a portrait of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi during protests in July. (Shawkan / Demotix)

While the situation in Egypt is complex and unpredictable, there can be little doubt that General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and his men are in charge of a country in deep crisis. On several occasions, they have handled this crisis with violent crackdowns that have attracted widespread, international condemnation. It appears they are now looking for some outside help to polish up their image as protectors of the state.

Industry publication AdAge reported last week that  Egypt’s interim military government is seeking support from western public relations companies.

“The government (…) is in talks with a handful of firms that have strong public-affairs capabilities in the U.S. and Europe, and has issued at least one global RFP out of London, according to people familiar with the matter”, the publication said.

But with PR being a quickly growing industry, and a sea of options out there, it can be difficult to even know where to start browsing. Egypt, however, is not the first country to seek the help and guidance of western PR.

We have put together a list of companies that are not strangers to working for regimes with questionable human rights records.

  • London-based Bell Pottinger, once described as a ‘firm synonymous with this international spin’ has worked with everyone from Bahrain to Belarus, Sri Lanka and Yemen. But a word of advice, their services don’t come cheap. In 2012 it was reported that Bahrain’s royal family have spent £7.5 million on contracts with the firm. On the other hand, whereas American PR firms have to declare their dealings with foreign governments to American authorities, such regulations do not exist in the UK.
  • Where is the first place people go for information on a country, if not the world’s favourite user-generated encyclopedia? With Egypt’s current Wikipedia page not necessarily painting the military government in the best light, it’s helpful to know that Washington-based company Qorvis have reportedly helped clients like Saudi Arabia polish up theirs. For people seeking more in-depth knowledge, the firm has also been known to place favorable reports regarding their clients.
  • Mainstream media is one of the best ways to advertise your country as the new it-holiday destination or a booming business hotspot, or even get a policy point across. A PR firm can help you do that. London-based Ketchum was credited with placing Vladimir Putin’s much read recent New York Times op-ed on Syria. Could they make a ‘23 Ways You Know You Definitely Haven’t Staged A Coup’ Buzzfeed piece a reality?
  • Sometimes, it can be equally important to get stories removed from the media. In that case, Dragon Associates could be an alternative. They were credited with having a critical comment piece about their clients Bahrain removed from the Guardian website, ahead of the country’s controversial Formula One Grand Prix race.
  • There are also options outside the US and the UK – Azerbaijan’s government has worked with Berlin-based Consultum Communications. In 2011, a prestigious gala event in celebration of the 20th anniversary of Azerbaijan’s independence was held in the German capital. Attendees included former Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher and former Economics Minister Michael Glos – both board members of Consultum.
  • Then again, it might be nice to go for someone with historical ties to Egypt, like the PLM Group. The joint venture between the Podesta Group and Livingston Group in 2007 signed a deal with then-president Hosni Mubarak’s government to “provide general, high-level strategic advice relative to the Egyptian image among American decision-makers.”

This article was originally published on 16 Sept 2013

Turkey’s media: A polluted landscape

Journalist Yavuz Baydar has been fired by Turkish daily newspaper Sabah, after articles he wrote criticising the government were censored

Journalist Yavuz Baydar has been fired by Turkish daily newspaper Sabah, after articles he wrote criticising the government were censored

In the latest report, Freedom in the World 2013, Freedom House defines Turkey as ‘partly free’.

Authorities in Ankara – both the government and bureaucrats – refute these claims, although the Ministry of Justice openly admits that there are serious shortcomings when it comes to providing for freedom of expression, both in law and implementation.

Some international organisations, such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), meanwhile, help build the myth that Turkey tops the world rankings for one of the worst ‘oppressive’ states because of the number of jailed journalists there. The Committee to Protect Journalists reports that there are 49 journalists in prison, while Reporters Sans Frontières put the number at 72, if the number of people includes all jailed media professionals. But claims that the country is entirely free or grossly oppressive are both wrong. These extreme views must be taken with a pinch of salt; the truth is somewhere in between.

The complexities of Turkey today make it a unique case, demanding careful examination so that clichés can be dispersed, particularly those deriving from the perception that the country remains a police state, as it was prior to the late 1990s.

Turkey today is exactly as Freedom House says it is: not ‘free’, nor ‘not free’, but ‘partly free’.

In this context, Turkey’s problems are already out in the open.

Thousands of Kurdish activists connected to the Koma Civakên Kurdistan network – affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – as well as around 200 students and 72 other journalists and activists (mainly Kurdish) are in detention.

According to the monitoring site engelliweb.com, internet access is blocked to approximately 9000 websites, mostly on an arbitrary, non-transparent basis.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdog˘an regularly files libel charges against journalists and cartoonists, a move that singles him out because other powerful figures do not engage in similar practices. He has developed a habit of lashing out at the media in public, which has had dire consequences.

The so-called ‘mainstream media’, in other words, the 85 per cent of it controlled by proprietors who are for the most part engaged in vast business activities other than media (and therefore dependent on the government for economic interests), is suffocated and distinctly lacking in freedom and editorial independence.

In big media outlets, fierce censorship and self-censorship are practised on a daily basis.

They are severely crippled in their pursuit of journalism, unable or unwilling to cover corruption and abuse of power or to allow critical voices and dissent to be heard. When it comes to particular topics, such as criticism of the government, corruption or abuse of power, news stories are either filtered or unpublished; direct censorship – the actual blacking out of text – is exercised when material is found to be ‘too sensitive’ for the government’s or newspaper owners’ interests. But at the same time, there is little problem with pluralism and diversity, as opposed to countries like Iran, China, Azerbaijan or Belarus. With more than 40 national dailies (including a few independent newspapers and a vital partisan, antigovernment press), 2500 local papers, 250 private TV channels (of which 18 broadcast news seven days a week, 24 hours a day), 1300 radio stations and more than 150 news websites and online portals, Turkey has a big, competitive sector. Internet access is increasing at a huge rate, with access passing the 50 per cent mark recently. Because of the internet, despite attempts to command control, this is a milieu in which no story or comment is missed.

Anti-terror law and Ergenekon

The state of Turkey’s media freedom has been oversimplified, looking only at the number of journalists incarcerated without distinction, without looking closely at the specifics for those detentions. It’s a remnant of Cold War mentality. ‘Turkey is an undemocratic country’ has become almost like a slogan, concealing far deeper problems that extend throughout many sectors and structures within Turkish society.


This article is from the current edition of Index on Censorship Magazine. | Subscribe


It is true that people are in jail for voicing dissent, among them journalists. Almost all of them are Kurds who, because of the very nature of the Kurdish cause they pursue, combine publishing and self-expression with activism. This means their activity falls inside the boundaries of the utterly problematic Anti-Terror Law, which makes it extremely difficult to distinguish between those who
are members of terrorist groups that commit acts of violence or praise acts of terrorism and those who are simply exercising their right to express opinion. Dissidents, including journalists, have faced detention and prosecution because the law makes it practically impossible to make these important distinctions. The Anti-Terror Law must, at the very least, be revised so that it conforms to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) or, better still, abolished altogether.

Around 10 per cent or so of those jailed are Turkish journalists whose imprisonment relates to the Ergenekon case – a clandestine, undemocratic, politically motivated mafiastyle network that, among other acts over a number of years, plotted a series of coups to oust the government and parliament. Since 2008, dozens of journalists have been arrested in connection with Ergenekon plots, together with hundreds of military officers.

Yet, in these cases, the most obvious clash with ECHR directives has to do with the extremely lengthy detention periods and trial procedure (take, for example, the case of Özkan vs Turkey). Needless to say, Turkey should have determined these periods of incarceration in line with international standards, including EU human rights legislation, releasing journalists while they awaited their trials. But apart from these cases, the European Court of Human Rights has rejected many appeals lodged by the accused, undercutting the assumption held by many that journalists should enjoy immunity even when charged with serious crimes such as conspiracy.

In addition to anti-terror laws, there are dozens of articles – in the Penal Code, in Turkey’s Internet Law, the Press Law and Turkish Radio and Television Law – that restrict freedom of expression and freedom
of the press. Some are implemented on a regular basis and some remain dormant, though still on the books. These punitive measures threaten freedom in Turkey, applying not only to media but also to academia, NGOs, political parties and ordinary citizens across the country.

The rise of independent media and the threat to public interest

Paradoxically, Turkish ‘glasnost’ under the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) over the past decade, with the immense help of the EU accession process, has meant, for the most part, that there are no longer many taboo subjects. National mass hypnosis is over. Tiny but independent news outlets – like the dailies Taraf and Zaman or the weekly Nokta – have helped broaden debate about the country’s murky past, untangle myths about the army being the guardian of the system and expose crimes against humanity.

In a pluralist and hugely diverse environment such as Turkey’s, it would be a lie to claim that news dissemination has been fully blocked. Take the case of the Uludere bombing in 2011, when a group of Kurdish villagers were attacked by Turkish fighter jets as they travelled from Iraq along a well-known smugglers’ route, resulting in 34 deaths. Main media group outlets failed to report on the killings for almost a day, but minor papers and those using social media began reporting on the incident
within minutes of it happening.

It could be argued that Turkey has one of the most independent medias in the world – it is truly a phenomenon.

Many countries in democratic transition after the end of the Cold War have had complex changes in their media environment, particularly in southeastern Europe, the Black Sea region and the North Caucasus. From the late 1980s on, this environment has been marked by the emergence of a new type of media proprietor who often – as in some Balkan countries as well as in Russia – entered the media sector with other businesses in tow, with mafia-like habits and connections, with the aim of money laundering, or with enormous greed. For the most part, these players aimed to use media outlets as a tool for keeping government and bureaucracy in check because they became fearful of what might be reported in this new, thriving media landscape, but these people and companies only had personal business gains in mind. Turkey has been part of this reality, and those coming to it from wellestablished, high-standard media environments in the West either do not understand or do not consider the considerable threats to media freedom to be important.

In some countries, for example, Albania, Serbia and Ukraine, media conglomerate proprietors operate in alliance with the ruling powers, establishing politics-media cooperation in the service of their mutual interests, rather than allowing media to serve the public interests.

This addictive system is the primary source of censorship and self-censorship in the wider region, and the blame for destroying the prospects of good journalism must be shared equally between politicians and media owners. In Turkey, in most cases, proper coverage of corruption and any investigative journalism are completely dead. Because this proprietor prototype is in essence non-transparent, Turkey’s media has never bothered to or been in a position to demand transparency or accountability from those in control of the news. In this context, nowhere in the world is the self-destructive role of media proprietors more visible, more irrational or more aggressive than in Turkey

On 19 October 2011, Prime Minister Erdog˘an assembled media proprietors in Ankara to ask for ‘help’ regarding ‘terror coverage’. It’s a call the media should have rejected, but instead they went beyond even what the prime minister had desired: they openly begged him to tell them exactly how long he thought TV dispatches on funerals connected with terrorism should be and shamelessly offered to set up a ‘censorship committee’ by themselves! If created, it would be tasked with ‘filtering’ news prior to publication, particularly when it pertained to clashes between the military and the PKK and political statements issued by them and other Kurdish activists.

In a more recent case, on 18 March 2013, there were reports that the proprietor of the daily newspaper Milliyet, Erdog˘an Demirören, forced veteran pundit Hasan Cemal to resign after he wrote a column defending the right to publish accurate stories, no matter how ‘disturbing’ they would be for the government or media owners. The article was never published, a breach of the journalist’s contract with his employer. Accused of causing the departure of Cemal, Prime Minister Erdog˘an, in his blunt manner some days later, explained that the very same proprietor had visited him to ask whom he should appoint as editor-in-chief for the newspaper.

The uphill struggle: how to solve Turkey’s media dilemmas?

These episodes speak volumes about how polluted Turkey’s media corporate culture is today. Media professionals – by which I mean real, decent journalists, and not those who either defend the government no matter what, or those who condemn it outright under the false belief that all journalism must be oppositional and not critical – face two rather hopeless challenges.

The first frontline for journalists is the political executive and the legislature. Unless the current government amends all laws in favour of freedom of expression and the press, these problems will keep reappearing. In general, the current parliament is a forum of intolerance for freedom of the press, opinion and dissent. In the mindset of the current parliament, the ‘old Turkey’ still rules.

Secondly, media proprietors represent a real challenge to free speech: most of them have no clue about the role and nature of good journalism.

I have long argued that unless these media owners are challenged, one cannot simply go on blaming everything on the political powers. But how do we challenge media owners? Because this is the key to enhancing freedom and independence in Turkey.

It is an uphill struggle. Journalists in Turkey have been forced to live under the ‘unholy alliance’ between governments and big media owners. It is a vicious cycle and very tough to break. We must persuade owners not to interfere in editorial decisions and let us be; we must encourage them to ct transparently in their businesses. Currently, none of them has the civil courage or the wisdom to be on the side of journalists’ fight for freedom.

We could try to persuade the government to ban media owners from entering public tenders, restrict cross-ownership, support local media and allow high share investments for foreign capital owners, with the aim of giving much more autonomy to the national broadcaster, Turkish Radio and Television.

And, of course, we can pressure the government to ensure union activities and memberships in all media outlets are protected by law.

Although their cases are of course the most urgent, problems regarding media freedom in Turkey will not cease to exist when all the journalists in jail – detained or sentenced – are released and pardoned. Turkey can never be part of the democratic league as long as it insists on suppressing and punishing dissent and free speech. But if we limit our professional struggle to these cases only, and introduce minimal amendments to some of the worst laws, we will continue to affect only the tip of the iceberg. If we do only this, held back by a sector that is bleeding spiritually, ruled by owners who are insensitive to the profession, operating without independence, we will continue to operate in appalling conditions, where newsrooms resemble open air prisons.

Freedom must be coupled with true professional independence.

©Yavuz Baydar

Yavuz Baydar is a columnist for Today’s Zaman and was, until he published a piece criticising media ownership in The New York Times, the news ombudsman for the daily newspaper SABAH


This article is from the current edition of Index on Censorship Magazine. | Subscribe



Turkey Uncensored is an Index on Censorship project to publish a series of articles from censored Turkish writers, artists and translators.

Free expression in the news

INDEX EVENTS
18 July New World (Dis)Order: What do Turkey, Russia and Brazil tell us about freedom and rights?
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, is holding a timely debate on the shifting world order and its impact on rights and freedoms. The event will also launch the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine, including a special report on the multipolar world.
(More information)

AZERBAIJAN
President Aliyev: Creating conditions for free activity of media is one of main directions of state policy
Creating conditions for free activity of media to ensure the political pluralism in Azerbaijan is one of main directions of the state policy, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev said in his letter of appeal to participants of the sixth Congress of Azerbaijani Journalists on July 11.
(Trend)

BELARUS
Praying in Homeless Shelter a Crime
A young Catholic layman, who turned his home into a shelter for homeless people with a prayer room, is being accused of leading an unregistered religious organization. Aleksei Shchedrov, who says he has helped about 100 local people since December 2011, is being investigated on criminal charges under Article 193-1. As a result, he now faces a maximum possible sentence of two years’ imprisonment.
(Canadian Free Press)

BRAZIL
Brazilian writer convicted for fictional story
José Cristian Góes says case brought against him is a “direct attack on free speech. Rafael Spuldar reports
(Index on Censorship)

Brazil May Seek to Speak With Snowden as Spy Charges Spread
Brazil’s government said it may contact fugitive former security contractor Edward Snowden as it probes allegations the U.S. monitored phone calls and e-mail in Latin America’s largest economy.
(Bloomberg)

CANADA
Canada Repeals Restriction on Online “Hate Speech”
Have you heard about this place called Canada? It’s like some weird parallel America where they never had a revolution.
(Reason)

CJFE concerned by arrest of New Brunswick journalist
Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE) is deeply concerned about the RCMP’s arrest under unusual circumstances of New Brunswick-based journalist Miles Howe.
(Press Release)

Censoring Canadian science
Last summer, a rally of over 2,000 researchers, scientists, and students gathered on Parliament Hill to protest a federal trend of scientific censorship that began when the Conservative party took control of the Federal government in 2006. For the protesters, the government had crossed the line with numerous budget cuts to environmental research programs, extensive job cuts to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and numerous restrictions on investigators’ communications with the media.
(McGill Daily)

GHANA
Journalist freed in Ghana amid free speech concerns
A Ghanaian newspaper editor was released Thursday after serving a controversial 10-day jail term ordered by the west African nation’s supreme court for criticising the judges’ handling of a dispute over last year’s presidential election.
(AFP)

GUINEA
Radio Station Director Charged for Libel
Managing Director of Planete FM, Mandian Sidibe, has been charged with libel and placed under judicial review by a Magistrates’ Court in Conakry, the capital, for comments he made during a radio programme.
(All Africa)

INDONESIA
Indonesia Affirms Restrictions to Freedom of Expression
On July 10 and 11, 2013 the UN Human Rights Committee reviewed the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, one of the most important human rights treaties Indonesia has ratified and has the obligation to implement to ensure protection of these rights in Indonesia.
(Scoop)

KENYA
Kenyan Media shock over new Media Bill that removes self-regulation
Media stakeholders are worried after learning that sections of the Media Bill 2013 that guarantee self-regulation of the press have been deleted from the original draft.
(Standard Digital)

NEW ZEALAND
Suicide reporting rules under review
The Government has announced that New Zealand’s 25-year-old censorship of suicide reporting is to be reviewed by the Law Commission. JAMES HOLLINGS talks to two leading experts who think the restrictions should go.
(The Press)

RUSSIA
New Russian video game takes aim at punk band riot
A Russian Orthodox youth group unveiled a video game on Thursday that gives players a chance to “kill” members of the punk band Pussy Riot, whose profanity-laden protest in a Moscow cathedral last year angered the church and offended some believers.
(Reuters)

SRI LANKA
Sri Lanka flirts with press regulation
Is Sri Lanka’s President Rajapaksa, identified as an “enemy of the press”, taking lessons from Leveson, asks Padraig Reidy
(Index on Censorship)

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
Defending press freedom
Although freedom of the press is enshrined in our Constitution, it is a right which nonetheless requires eternal vigilance. This is because powerful persons and groups are continually trying to erode this right, to the detriment of the average citizen.
(Trinidad Express)

TUNISIA
Tunisia’s version of Tamarod
A Tunisian version of the Egyptian Tamarod movement has been collecting signatures against the country’s government and institutions, writes Lasaad Ben Ahmad in Tunis
(Al-Ahram)

TURKEY
Scientific Conflict in Turkey
The Turkish government’s refusal to fund a summer school course on evolution has brought into sharp focus the divisions between political Islam and secular society in Turkey.
(BBC)

UNITED STATES
Porn Producers Say Unprotected Sex Is Free Speech Right
Pornographic movie makers told a judge that a Los Angeles County voter-approved measure requiring adult-film actors to wear condoms violates their constitutional right to free speech.
(Bloomberg)

Hate speech or free speech in Milford
You’ve heard that freedom isn’t free. The “cost” of free speech is that everybody gets it, even people you don’t like.
(Connecticut Post)

Removing the Kahane Google App Isn’t Censorship
In a recent Open Zion column, Zack Parker criticized Google’s decision to take down a Google App containing Kahane quotes, to which the radical settler extremist Baruch Marzel had linked, as censorship. While the objective of preserving free speech is pure, the criticism of the takedown as censorship misunderstands the nature of free speech and the implementation of the criticism would be a severe blow to counter-radicalization efforts.
(The Daily Beast)

Proposed restrictions on Fort Williams artists raise free speech issue in Cape Elizabeth
A public hearing grew tense Monday when a local artist and his wife accused the Town Council of undermining the U.S. Constitution.
(The Forecaster)

My fight for free speech at LSU
I decided in seventh grade that one day I was going to attend Louisiana State University’s law school, and anyone who knows me can tell you that I’ve bled purple and gold ever since. So when I finally got there last fall, I never expected that in a few short months I would be involved in a lawsuit against the school.
(Live Action News)


Previous Free Expression in the News posts
July 11 | July 10 | July 9 | July 8 | July 5 | July 4 | July 3 | July 2 | July 1 | June 28


Free expression in the news

INDEX EVENTS
18 July New World (Dis)Order: What do Turkey, Russia and Brazil tell us about freedom and rights?
Index, in partnership with the European Council on Foreign Relations, is holding a timely debate on the shifting world order and its impact on rights and freedoms. The event will also launch the latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine, including a special report on the multipolar world.
(More information)

CHINA
Censoring the News Before It Happens
Every day in China, hundreds of messages are sent from government offices to website editors around the country that say things like, “Report on the new provincial budget tomorrow, but do not feature it on the front page, make no comparisons to earlier budgets, list no links, and say nothing that might raise questions”; “Downplay stories on Kim Jung-un’s facelift”; and “Allow stories on Deputy Mayor Zhang’s embezzlement but omit the comment boxes.” Why, one might ask, do censors not play it safe and immediately block anything that comes anywhere near offending Beijing? Why the modulation and the fine-tuning?
(New York Review of Books)

EGYPT
Egypt, the military and the media: Worse yet to come?
After the fall of Egypt’s Islamist president this month, security officials shut down media linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. With a history of biased media and an increasingly divided nation, the future Egypt looks grim. Shahira Amin reports
(Index on Censorship)

GLOBAL
Fine words on open government don’t match actions
From America to Azerbaijan, leaders have pledged themselves to a new era of openness and transparency. So why are whistleblowers and journalists still punished, asks Mike Harris
(Index on Censorship)

GHANA
Freedom of Speech and the Supreme Court of Ghana
Not long ago a great Katakyie by the name of Ken Kuranchie was incarcerated for standing for what he believes in i.e. Freedom of Speech! He was summarily convicted by the Supreme Court for daring to question some of the judgments of the Justices and going on to criticize the basis upon which some of the decisions in the august court were made.
(Ghana Web)

INDIA
Is India about to gets its own PRISM?
Two surveillance entities are being set up to monitor Indian citizens’ communications, Mahima Kaul writes
(Index on Censorship)

TUNISIA
Gobvernment should create jobs, not regulate religious behavior
The number of believers in Tunisia seems to increase dramatically during the month of Ramadan and decrease suddenly afterwards. It is as if praying is limited to this particular part of the year, when even those who are normally heavy smokers or drinkers become outraged when they see their fellow sinners engaging in such activities. Official policies seek to reinforce this yearly change in behavior, but the government must realize that instilling religious morals must not take priority over ensuring the welfare of its people.
(Tunisia Live

UNITED KINGDOM
Freedom of speech is not freedom to spin
Free speech does not imply the freedom to mislead. We want our media to be free, but also honest and reliable.
(The Conversation)

UNITED STATES
Arch Insurance Group launches libel insurance for bloggers
Arch Insurance Group is launching a new insurance program that will protect bloggers against libel and copyright infringement lawsuits.
(New York Business Journal)

University of Alabama at center of free speech debate
A pro-abortion rights student organization at the University of Alabama and a civil liberties group have asked the university to re-evaluate its grounds-use policy, arguing that it is contradictory and unconstitutional.
(Tuscaloosa News)

SEC Finally Permits Free Speech for Hedge Funds, VCs, and Entrepreneurs
Today is finally the day that the Securities and Exchange Commission — one year and three months after it was instructed to do so by the bipartisan Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act signed by President Obama — lifted the ban on advertising and communication to and from hedge funds and the private equity and venture capital community. Lifting these archaic rules is a victory for entrepreneurs, all types of investors, and, most importantly, the First Amendment.
(Open Market)

FROM INDEX ON CENSORSHIP MAGAZINE
Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)

Global view: Who has freedom of expression?
Freedom of expression is a universal, fundamental human right. But who actually has access to free expression? Index CEO Kirsty Hughes looks at the evidence.
(Index on Censorship)

The multipolar challenge to free expression
As emerging markets command influence on the international stage, Saul Estrin and Kirsty Hughes look at the impact on economics, politics and human rights.
(Index on Censorship)

News in monochrome: Journalism in India
The media’s infatuation with a single narrative is drowning out the country’s diversity, giving way to sensationalist reporting and “paid for” news. But, says Bharat Bhushan, moves towards regulation could have a chilling effect too
(Index on Censorship)

Censorship: The problem child of Burma’s dictatorship
Writer and artist Htoo Lyin Myo gives his personal account of working under government censorship in Burma
(Index on Censorship)


Previous Free Expression in the News posts
July 10 | July 9 | July 8 | July 5 | July 4 | July 3 | July 2 | July 1 | June 28 | June 27


SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK