09 Jan 18 | Media Freedom, News and features, Russia
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”97381″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Often referred to as the only independent radio station in Russia, Echo Moskvy has for some time been subjected to state pressure, but 2017 was particularly bad with one radio host almost killed, two journalists in exile and several more detained or menaced in the course of their work.
On 23 October, a 48-year-old man broke into Echo Moskvy’s office in the centre of Moscow and stabbed Tatiana Felgengauer, the long-time host and one of the editor-in-chief’s deputies, several times in the neck. Felgengauer was hospitalised in a critical condition and underwent several operations. She has yet to return to work and is still in recovery.
Felgengauer’s attacker, Boris Grits, was sent for a psychiatric evaluation. During an interrogation by police, he said the host had been harassing him for several years using telepathy. However, the efficiency of the attack left some doubt as to whether his madness was real or just a cover for a well-planned assault.
“It’s obvious to me that he was well prepared. He knew when and where to look for me and very confidently disabled the guard at the first security post,” Felgengauer told Mapping Media Freedom. “This man knew what he was doing.”
Earlier in October Felgengauer featured heavily in a defamatory new report entitled Echo of State Department shown on the state-run national TV channel Rossiya-24. The report claimed that Echo Moskvy co-operates with foreign NGOs, whose presence in Russia was significantly cut after the adoption of the law on “foreign agents”.
The report cited a meeting between Felgengauer, another popular host Alexandr Pluschev and the editor-in-chief of Orenburg department Maxim Kurnikov, along with representatives from Reporters Without Borders and the Robert Bosch Stiftung Foundation in September 2017. It also stated that Ekho Moskvy gives airtime to opposition politicians and accused the radio station of “selling information weapons” to the Associated Press, The Wall Street Journal, Sky News and others. This was in relation to the station’s separate news agency that co-operates with Russian and international media organisations. The journalists reacted to the report on Twitter, making fun of the factual errors.
“If you have seen these videos, you would have noticed how outrageously unprofessional they are,” Felgengauer says. “Any person who watches them, even if he or she doesn’t like Echo Moskvy and is a fan of Putin, would not be able to take such badly done work seriously. I’m not taking it seriously either. For me, it was just a reason to laugh.”
But the defamation campaign against the radio station is no joke. Another report was shown on the state-owned First Channel in July. It claimed that Echo Moskvy and other media outlets were financed by the US Congress through the Broadcasting Board of Governors. The state-owned company Gazprom-media, which owns Echo Moskvy, issued an official statement saying this report was false. In March, the pro-Kremlin tabloid Life also claimed that Echo Moskvy was being checked following the suspicion it is a “foreign agent”. The report was denied by the Ministry of Justice.
“In recent years an image of the enemy has been formed very actively: the enemy comes from outside Russia. It’s a classic trick, hundreds of years old,” Felgengauer says. “And even if an enemy is inside the country, he is somehow working for the external enemy, which is why any person who is out of favour is accused of working for the state department.”
Such reports are part of the broader campaign against foreign media that started in 2014 with a law limiting foreign ownership of Russian media and peaked this year, in late November, when Vladimir Putin signed a new law deeming media outlets that receive funding from overseas as foreign agents and restricting their activity in Russia.
Echo Moskvy was also affected by the law on foreign capital. According to new amendments to the media law that came into force in January 2016, foreign shares in Russian media must not exceed 20%. Alexey Vendiktov, the editor-in-chief of Echo Moskvy, said in an interview with Novaya Gazeta that American EM Holding used to hold 15.92% of the company’s shares, which was in line with the law. But in February 2017 Russian media regulator Roskomnadzor apparently found a new interpretation of the law when it asked EM Holding to withdraw all funding from the station.
“According to them, a foreign company cannot be the co-owner of a media outlet in the Russian Federation,” editor-in-chief Alexey Venediktov said in an interview with the RNS agency. In March 2017 the radio station changed its structure to allow a complete withdrawal of EM Holding’s capital. However, this did not halt accusations from the press in September and October that they were working for foreign powers.
“State media’s role is propaganda,” Sergey Buntman, a deputy editor-in-chief of the radio station, told Mapping Media Freedom. “Russia is like a fortress under siege; everybody is against Russia and there are lots of external and internal enemies – that’s how they are creating the atmosphere which is, in my opinion, extremely aggressive and intolerant.”
Many Echo Moskvy journalists experienced this aggression first hand. In April, radio host Olga Bychkova was insulted on air by a guest, the famous Soviet, Ukrainian, Russian and Estonian writer Mikhail Veller, who threw a cup at her while swearing. In May three radical activists of the far-left movement Drugaya Rossiya (Another Russia) at the Open Dialogs forum in St. Petersburg doused Venediktov with whisky for “betraying Russia”. In July in Orenburg, editor-in-chief of local branch Echo Moskvy, Maxim Kurnikov, was assaulted while reporting on a meeting of opposition volunteers. Reporter Alexandr Pluschev was detained on 26 March, and Andrey Poznyakov on 12 June. Both were covering anti-corruption protests in Moscow for Echo Moskvy.
“It’s all connected to the state of media and human rights and the general situation in the country, which deteriorated throughout 2017,” says Buntman. “Since 2013, the pressure on independent media has progressively gotten worse. The situation is clearly not going to become better this year.”
In September 2017, Yulia Latynina, a prominent columnist and contributor to Echo Moskvy and the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, fled Russia after several instances of intimidation. “I have left Russia in connection to threats to my life,” the journalist wrote on Twitter on 10 September. The latest incident took place on 3 September next to Latynina’s parents’ house in the village of Peredelkino, southwest of Moscow, when her car was set on fire. In July 2017, her car and her parents’ house had been sprayed with noxious gas. Neither incident has been properly investigated.
“There is no progress in the investigation at all,” Latynina tells Mapping Media Freedom, six months after the attack on her house. “It is especially outrageous because I was not the only one who suffered in this case. The reagent that our house was sprayed with turned out to be not only horribly stinky but also dangerous to health. Since that incident, my mother started having problems with her lungs. My parents, 77 and 79 years-old, as well as five our neighbours, including two elderly people and two children, suffered as well.”
The lack of police response came as no surprise to Latynina. When an attacker poured faeces on her in 2016, an investigator not only declined to open a criminal case due to “absence of the event of a crime”, but was considering opening a criminal case against the columnist for “false denunciation”.
“The false denunciation was that I reported the crime that had never happened,” Latynina says. “However, after some consideration, he decided not to do it.”
Latynina believes that the attacks were orchestrated and covered up by the FSB. “I can’t prove it, so I’ll just say that in my opinion those attacks are connected to the same structures, that control ‘trolls from Olgino’ tied with ‘Kremlin chef’ Evgeny Prigozhin,” says Latynina referring to her publications on the infamous “troll factory” that reportedly used social media networks to spread propaganda and fake news among Russian users and later, during the 2016 US election campaign, among American users too.
Latynina explains the recent rise in violence against journalists as being influenced by the upcoming presidential election in March 2018, when Vladimir Putin will run for the post again.
“First of all, the proximity of the upcoming elections. Secondly, there’s the steady toughening of the regime; it goes from mild to full dictatorship,” Latynina says. “Before 2014, the regime was based on two main factors: oil money and television. There was enough oil money for everybody, and it was considered that television can brainwash the nation. Now there is no money and people tend to stop watching television. Vremya [the main news programme on Channel One ] is watched by 5 million people, whose average age is 65. [Opposition politician Alexey] Navalny’s movie about Dimon [the investigation of prime-minister Dmitry Medvedev’s links to shady charity funds that own luxurious property and yachts] was watched on Youtube by 25 million people.”
After the attack on Felgengauer, another prominent Echo Moskvy host, Ksenia Larina, also left Russia. “I have decided to have Ksenia Larina evacuated,” Venediktov said in an interview to Dozhd TV. “She will leave the country for at least half a year until her security is guaranteed, because the next blow from a knife to someone’s throat could come after Solovyov’s show, and he would be the instigator. I have no other means to protect my journalists.”
Following the attack, Dmitry Muratov, the editor-in-chief of Novaya Gazeta, said that he planned to arm his journalists, but both Felgengauer and Latynina agree that it would not help.
“The security of journalists can be provided only by one condition: it is the state complying with its own laws,” Latynina says.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Mapping Media Freedom” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Since 24 May 2014, Mapping Media Freedom’s team of correspondents and partners have recorded and verified more than 3,700 violations against journalists and media outlets.
Index campaigns to protect journalists and media freedom. You can help us by submitting reports to Mapping Media Freedom.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.
Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”2″ element_width=”12″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1515515222007-25189b3c-742c-7″ taxonomies=”7349″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
20 Dec 17 | Mapping Media Freedom, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
This year saw 1,035 media freedom violations reported to Index on Censorship’s Mapping Media Freedom, a project that monitors media freedom in 42 countries, including all EU member states. To highlight the most pressing concerns for press freedom in Europe, Index’s MMF correspondents discuss the violations that stood out most.
Russia / 197 verified reports in 2017
“In November Russia adopted a new restrictive law against foreign media. It allows recognising foreign media as foreign agents, which makes them subjects of numerous additional checks and obliges them to mark the content as produced by a foreign agent. The vague and ambiguous wording means it applies to many outlets – from established media to email newsletters. Which media will be recognised as foreign agents will be decided by Russian Ministry of justice. However, US media such as Voice of America or Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty have already received warnings about possible restrictions on their work in Russia.” — Ekaterina Buchneva
Turkey / 132 verified reports in 2017
“Although 155 journalists are currently imprisoned in Turkey — almost all of them on trumped-up charges — the trial of journalist Nedim Türfent, who reported on security operations in Turkey’s Kurdish regions, is by far the worst violation as open experiences of torture at the hands of police officers were recounted by at least a dozen people in the case. This violation shows that torture is making a comeback in Turkey.” — Barış Altıntaş
More on Nedim Türfent’s case.
Belarus / 92 verified reports in 2017
“The mass detention of journalists on Freedom Day in March was indicative of the Belarusian authorities’ campaign launched in 2017 on preventing journalists from performing their professional duties. The situation was provoked by mass protests across Belarus against introducing presidential decree on “social parasites”, which imposes a tax on the unemployed amid increasing economic crisis. The authorities have shown their real attitude to freedom of speech through real hunting on independent journalists and bloggers that are blocked from access to information, detained, jailed, and fined.” — Volha Siakovich
Spain / 66 verified reports in 2017
“The referendum on the independence of Catalonia, north-east of Spain, provoked an avalanche of incidents against reporters. On 1 October 2017, on the day of referendum considered illegal by the Spanish Constitutional Court, various journalists were assaulted during police intervention in polling stations. Spanish public television RTVE was biased in favour of Spanish unity while Catalan public television TV3 was biased in favour of the independence. In the aftermath of the referendum, many reporters on the ground suffered insults and assaults usually during street rallies. Unionist protesters used to insult and assault Catalan media. Catalunya Radio glass door was smashed and TV3 car window broken. Catalan protesters chanted “Spanish press manipulators” during Spanish televisions live coverage and Crònica Global website headquarters vandalised with spray paints and posters. The Catalan political question brought a wave of intimidation against journalists, never seen in such numbers and scale in recent years.” — Miho Dobrasin
Italy / 57 verified reports in 2017
“In 2017 Italian journalists experienced a high level of conflict with the judiciary. Journalists are constantly possible targets of law enforcement raids, also in breaching the privacy of journalists’ sources. In July, Il Fatto Quotidiano journalist Marco Lillo’s house was searched because he published a scoop concerning the investigation on people close to Matteo Renzi, prime minister at time time, for a case of corruption at the most important contracting authority in Italy: Consip. Last but not least, Il Sole 24 Ore journalist Nicola Borzi had seized his computer and archives by the law enforcement because he revealed a “secret of State”, without any formal charge against the journalist. These events show how hard is making scoops in Italy. Moreover, journalists are constantly targeted with lawsuits, frequently used as threats against freelancers. Nowadays the big unsolved issue for Italian journalism is at court.” — Lorenzo Bagnoli
France / 54 verified reports in 2017
“In February, presidential candidate Fillon smeared media outlets who covered alleged corruption case. This was an important moment in the treatment of the media in France. When accused of corruption, conservative presidential candidate François Fillon refused to step down and chose to attack the media and journalists. Journalists covering his campaign saw their working conditions deteriorate and had supporters insulting and attacking them.” — Valeria Costa-Kostritsky
Azerbaijan / 47 reports in 2017
“While there on-going violations of press freedom in Azerbaijan such as the jailing of journalists, office raids, bogus charges and other forms of persecution of journalists, I chose the blocking of opposition and independent news websites in March because it is a sign of further deterioration of media freedom in Azerbaijan. If before there were deliberate slowdowns or DDoS attacks, changes in legislation give full authority to the government institutions wanting to shut down or limit access to the flow of independent and alternative news.” — Arzu Geybullayeva
Croatia / 33 verified reports in 2017
“In September, around 20 members of the Autochthonous Croatian Party of Rights (A-HSP), a far-right political party, which is led by Drazen Keleminec, burned a copy of weekly newspaper Novosti, regional broadcaster N1 reported. This is another example where nationalistic and conservative narratives are endangering media freedom. In this particular case a right-wing political party is targeting the others, in this case the others is an ethnically and linguistically minority weekly, describing them as enemies of the state. The widespread narrative that has resulted in several severe media freedom infringements in this EU country.” — Ilcho Cvetanoski
Macedonia / 27 verified reports in 2017
“During the April’s storming of the Assembly building in the capital Skopje, 23 media workers were physically assaulted, threatened or barred from reporting at the scene. This case perfectly exemplifies what happens when political elites intentionally demonize and dehumanize media workers that are critically observing theirs work by describing them as traitors and foreign mercenaries. In the eyes of the common people, they instantly became a legitimate target. This is a widespread trend in Southeast Europe.” — Ilcho Cvetanoski
Bosnia and Herzegovina / 21 verified reports in 2017
“The case of Dragan Bursac is one of the many cases in Southeast Europe where journalists/media workers are threatened/attacked for challenging the mainstream nationalistic narrative. Namely, he was critical on the fact that a military leader, accused of committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), is celebrated as a hero by the politicians and media.” — Ilcho Cvetanoski
Germany / 20 verified reports in 2017
“It is extremely concerning that journalists were assaulted and intimidated when reporting on protests in Hamburg. Journalists are there to do their job and it is important that they are able to tell the world what is happening at protests such as the ones in Hamburg.” – Joy Hyvarinen
Hungary / 20 verified reports in 2017
“There is an important change of tactics regarding censorship and defaming independent media in Hungary: instead of attacking the outlets critical to the government, the vast pro-government media started smearing individual journalists, trying to intimidate and discredit the few critical voices who are left in Hungary.” — Zoltan Sipos
Romania / 16 verified reports in 2017
“The national news agency AGERPRES might lose its independence after a draft law enabling the political majority to dismiss the director-general was passed by the chamber of deputies in Romania. If passed in the senate as well, such a provision would have the same impact as on the management of the Romanian Radio Broadcasting Corporation (SRR) and the Romanian National Television Corporation (SRTV): following each election, the SRR and SRTV administration boards can be dismissed before the end of their mandates to reflect the new political forces.” — Zoltan Sipos
United Kingdom / 17 verified reports in 2017
“In the United Kingdom, after the Grenfell tower fire, which claimed 71 deaths, Kensington and Chelsea council tried to ban journalists from attending their first council meeting. Five media organisations had to challenge this legally to gain access. This was a very important case illustrating how difficult it was to gain access and to expect accountability from the organisation which ran the council block.” — Valeria Costa-Kostritsky
Sweden / 15 verified reports in 2017
“The systematic campaign to smear and misrepresent journalists by Granskning Sverige was symptomatic of a wider attack on the legitimacy of liberal and left media by Sweden’s far-right movement, but the campaign detailed by the reporters at the Eskilstuna-kuriren newspaper was orchestrated and unlike anything seen before in the country.” — Dominic Hinde
Greece / 13 verified reports in 2017
“In February 2017, two journalists were harassed by far-right wing protesters, preventing refugee children from attending classes. This is very important, because it shows that although Greece’s economic and refugee crisis seem to have calmed down in the last year, the support for far-right wing organisations doesn’t show any sign of shrinking. This also concerns journalists in Greece, whose safety is in danger every day.” — Christina Vasilaki
The Netherlands / 12 verified reports in 2017
“The Netherlands is considered to be one of the countries where media freedom is widely protected. However, cases like the rape threats levelled at a journalist in May show that media workers are subjected to all sorts of threats. In this case it were rape threats by a popular right-wing weblog. This creates an atmosphere in which it’s conceived normal to use comments and social media to discredit and threaten a journalist. It also highlights the dangers and risks that female journalists face.” — Mitra Nazar
Bulgaria / 11 verified reports in 2017
“In November, it became known that members of an organised crime group from Vratsa planned to murder Zov News website publisher Georgi Ezekiev. The increase of violent incidents and serious threats towards journalists in 2017 is alarming in Bulgaria, a country that already has the worst press freedom status in the European Union.” — Zoltan Sipos
Serbia / 11 verified reports in 2017
“Serbia’s free media had a dark year with many incidents, threats and violence coming towards them. In May, journalists were assaulted during clashes at the presidential inauguration. This is just one of many cases, but it clearly demonstrates just how critical the state of the media is because they happened during the presidential inauguration. The assaults were committed by supporters of the government with a lot of police around. The impunity these assaulters meet is worrying for the lack of condemnation by authorities and the message they clearly want to send to critical journalists.” — Mitra Nazar
Malta / 8 verified reports in 2017
“The most worrying incident regards the murder of anti-corruption, investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia. While this murder gripped the attention of international media and European authorities including the European Commission and Parliament, it is still shocking for every journalist that in a democratic, EU country, journalists’ lives could be in danger because they are doing their job, exposing high-level corruption in political, business and criminal elites.” — Christina Vasilaki
Kosovo / 6 verified reports in 2017|
“Kosovo’s media have been shaken up by two attacks on Insajderi investigative journalists. Insajderi is home to the best investigative journalists in the country, covering corruption and crime topics that nobody else dares to touch. Journalist Parim Olluri was beaten up outside his home in Pristina on 16 August. He needed medical assistance in a hospital. Nobody has been held responsible for the attack. Two months later, his colleague Vehbi Kajtazi was hit on the head in a cafe in downtown Pristina on 13 October. One person was arrested on the spot. We are talking about two violent incidents to Insajderi journalists within a period of three months. This shows that Kosovo’s journalists continue to face violence, even in very public places like cafe’s and neighbourhoods they live. For this reason there are just a few brave journalists who dare to touch sensitive topics, which is a worrying sign for the future of journalism and truth finding in the youngest country in Europe.” — Mitra Nazar
Montenegro / 6 verified reports in 2017
“Attack on journalist’s property is one of most common ways of intimidation. This is not only case for Montenegro, but also for all other countries in the region. What is striking is that intentional setting on fire of journalist’s vehicles is one of most common ways of limitation of media freedom in Montenegro. In recent years there have been several burnt vehicle in this small EU candidate country.” — Ilcho Cvetanoski
Portugal / 5 verified reports in 2017
“Similarly to what’s happening in other countries, Portugal has seen a rise of questioning towards journalism, those who work in the media industry and their work. Besides motivating a new and stimulating debate between journalists and their readers/viewers/listeners, this has also opened the gates to instances of abuse, cyberbullying and slander. The most significant example of that is that of Público’s journalist Margarida Gomes, whose work ethic was put in question by Facebook groups and public officials, who both used false information regarding her personal life to denigrate her work.” — João de Almeida Dias
Latvia / 3 verified reports in 2017
“In Latvia it was a quiet year for press freedom. However, the sudden and swift dismissal of Sigita Roķe, the head of public service Latvian Radio for alleged economic irregularities was seen as a pretext for dismissing her for efforts to disengage the radio from sponsorship agreements with the city of Ventspils, whose politically influential mayor has is on trial for money laundering and corruption. The dismissal raised questions about the political neutrality of Latvia’s media watchdog, the National Electronic Mass Media Council.” — Juris Kaza
Ireland / 3 verified reports in 2017
“Compared to the long list of countries in Europe where it is getting progressively dangerous for reporters to do their work, the situation in Ireland is relatively benign. There are renewed concerns over source protection, and the strict libel regime. However, the most serious concern is regarding media ownership. Index on Censorship published a detailed report on this in August 2017. One significant media takeover – Independent News and Media buying up Celtic Media – fell through after the Government ordered a statutory investigation following objections.” — Flor Mac Carthy
Estonia / 3 verified reports in 2017
“In March, journalists for Estonia’s largest daily in circulation Postimees, sent a letter to the owners and managers to complain about interference with editorial freedom. This event is a disturbing example of the interference attempts from media owners and advertisement department that had grown to the level that journalists of a daily, that prides itself with a long history and high-quality content, had to resort to an unprecedented united protest letter to fight it. Interference in journalistic decision making and content from outside or inside sources is in general the worrisome threat.” — Helle Tiikmaa
Belgium / 2 verified reports in 2017
“In Belgium, a journalist who had published a story on surveillance in Bruxelles’ metro was interrogated on her sources by the police, in clear breach of the principle of sources confidentiality. The case also reminds us of the risk for journalists covering surveillance.” — Valeria Costa-Kostritsky
Denmark / 2 verified reports in 2017
“The killing of Kim Wall by the inventor and entrepreneur Peter Madsen was a headline news event around the world. Stabbed to death and dumped at sea whilst interviewing Madsen on board his home-built submarine, her body was recovered after an extensive marine search. Although not typical of any wider trend, her murder was so brutal it raised significant questions about the safety and ethics of female freelancers working alone without support or safeguards.” — Dominic Hinde
Finland / 2 verified reports in 2017
“In March the Finnish government introduced restrictive changes to the functioning of the public broadcasting company Yle, which entailed putting the state-owned company more firmly under politicians’ decision-making power. The proposal was driven by the True Finns, a nationalist party that have repeatedly complained about Yle’s liberal views and non-sceptical approach to ‘multicultural Finland’. In the official briefing, stated the following: “The proposal is to strengthen the role of the Administrative Council so that they can decide on Yle’s journalistic strategy and regulate the permanent expert consultation process”. The council referred is mainly composed of politicians. — Katariina Salomäki
Iceland / 1 verified report in 2017
“Iceland has been rocked by political scandals and collapsing governments twice in the space of a year. In October it came to light that the prime minister had used financial confidentiality legislation to stop the investigative newspaper Stundin from publishing details of his offshore financial dealings in the run-up to the 2008 financial crash. Iceand’s main newspaper Morgunbladid is controlled by another former Prime Minister, also a member of the powerful Icelandic independence party, and Stundin has consistently sought to expose the Icelandic financial and political elite where other titles have remained silent.” — Dominic Hinde[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Mapping Media Freedom” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fmappingmediafreedom.org%2F%23%2F|||”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-times-circle” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
Since 24 May 2014, Mapping Media Freedom’s team of correspondents and partners have recorded and verified more than 3,700 violations against journalists and media outlets.
Index campaigns to protect journalists and media freedom. You can help us by submitting reports to Mapping Media Freedom.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.
Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row]
30 Nov 17 | Campaigns -- Featured
Dear President Juncker,
Dear President Tajani,
Dear Prime Minister Ratas,
Dear Prime Minister Borissov,
Dear Ministers,
Dear MEP Voss,
We write to you to share our respectful but serious concerns that discussions in the Council and European Commission on the Copyright Directive are on the verge of causing irreparable damage to our fundamental rights and freedoms, our economy and competitiveness, our education and research, our innovation and competition, our creativity and our culture.
We refer you to the numerous letters and analyses sent previously from a broad spectrum of European stakeholders and experts for more details (see attached).
On behalf of the signatories,
Caroline De Coc
The over 80 signatories below represent human and digital rights organisations, media freedom organisations, publishers, journalists, libraries, scientific and research institutions, educational institutions including universities, creator representatives, consumers, software developers, start-ups, technology businesses and Internet service providers.
1 Access Info Europe – Europe
2 ActiveWatch – Romania
3 Allied for Startups – Europe
4 ARTICLE 19 – Global
5 Asociación de Internautas – Spain
6 Asociación Española de Startups – Spain
7 Associação D3 – Defesa dos Direitos Digitais (D³) – Portugal
8 Associação Nacional para o Software Livre (ANSOL) – Portugal
9 Association for Progressive Communications (APC) – Global
10 Association for Technology and Internet (ApTI) – Romania
11 Association of European Research Libraries (LIBER) – Europe
12 Association of Publishers of Periodical Publications (AEEPP) – Spain
13 Association of the Defence of Human Rights in Romania (APADOR-CH) – Romania
14 Association of the Internet Industry (eco) – Germany
15 Austrian Startups – Austria
16 Bits of Freedom (BoF) – Netherlands
17 BlueLink Civic Action Network – Bulgaria
18 Brand24 – Poland
19 Bulgarian Helsinki Committee – Bulgaria
20 Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) – Global
21 Centrum Cyfrowe – Poland
22 Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties) – Europe
23 Communia Association – Global
24 Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) – Global
25 Copyright for Creativity (C4C) – Europe
26 Create Refresh Campaign – Europe
27 Creative Commons – Global
28 DIGITALEUROPE – Europe
29 Dutch Association of Public Libraries (VOB) – Netherlands
30 EDiMA – Europe
31 Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) – Global
32 epicenter.works – Austria
33 Estonian Association of Information Technology and Telecommunications (ITL) – Estonia
34 Estonian Startup Leaders Club – Estonia
35 European Bureau of Library, Information & Documentation Associations (EBLIDA) – Europe
36 European Digital Rights (EDRi) – Europe
37 European Innovative Media Publishers – Europe
38 European Internet Services Providers Association (EuroISPA) – Europe
39 European University Association (EUA) – Europe
40 Factory Berlin – Europe
41 Federation of Hellenic Information Technology & Communications Enterprises (SEPE) – Greece
42 France Digitale – France
43 Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU (FKAGEU) – Europe
44 Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) – Europe
45 Frënn vun der Ënn – Luxemburg
46 German Library Association (dbv) – Germany
47 Hermes Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights – Italy
48 Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF) – Global
49 Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (HCLU) – Hungary
50 Index on Censorship – Global
51 Initiative gegen ein Leistungsschutzrecht (IGEL) – Germany
52 International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) – Global
53 ISPA Austria – Austria
54 Italian Coalition for Civil Liberties and Rights (CILD) – Italy
55 Italian Internet Service Providers Association (AIIP) – Italy
56 Justice & Peace – Netherlands
57 Kennisland – Netherlands
58 l’Association des Services Internet Communautaires (ASIC) – France
59 League of European Research Universities (LERU) – Europe
60 Libraries and Archives Copyright Alliance (LACA) – UK
61 Media Development Center – Bulgaria
62 Mind the Bridge – Global
63 Modern Poland Foundation – Poland
64 National Online Printing Association (ANSO) – Italy
65 Netherlands Helsinki Committee (NHC) – Netherlands
66 Open Knowledge International (OKI) – Global
67 Open Rights Group (ORG) – UK
68 OpenMedia – Global
69 Platform for the Defence of Free Expression (PDLI) – Spain
70 Portuguese Association for Free Education (AEL) – Portugal
71 Public Libraries 2020 – Europe
72 Robotex – Estonia
73 Roma Startup – Italy
74 SA&S – Partnership for Copyright & Society – Belgium
75 Science Europe – Europe
76 SentiOne – Poland
77 Silicon Allee – Germany
78 SPARC Europe – Europe
79 Startup Poland – Poland
80 Ubermetrics – Germany
81 Wikimedia Deutschland – Germany
82 Xnet – Spain
83 ZIPSEE – Poland
84 Technology Ireland – Ireland
16 Oct 17 | Campaigns -- Featured, Digital Freedom, Digital Freedom Statements, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Dear President Juncker,
Dear President Tajani,
Dear President Tusk,
Dear Prime Minister Ratas,
Dear Prime Minister Borissov,
Dear Ministers,
Dear MEP Voss, MEP Boni
The undersigned stakeholders represent fundamental rights organisations.
Fundamental rights, justice and the rule of law are intrinsically linked and constitute core values on which the EU is founded. Any attempt to disregard these values undermines the mutual trust between member states required for the EU to function. Any such attempt would also undermine the commitments made by the European Union and national governments to their citizens.
Article 13 of the proposal on Copyright in the Digital Single Market include obligations on internet companies that would be impossible to respect without the imposition of excessive restrictions on citizens’ fundamental rights.
Article 13 introduces new obligations on internet service providers that share and store user-generated content, such as video or photo-sharing platforms or even creative writing websites, including obligations to filter uploads to their services. Article 13 appears to provoke such legal uncertainty that online services will have no other option than to monitor, filter and block EU citizens’ communications if they are to have any chance of staying in business.
Article 13 contradicts existing rules and the case law of the Court of Justice. The Directive of Electronic Commerce (2000/31/EC) regulates the liability for those internet companies that host content on behalf of their users. According to the existing rules, there is an obligation to remove any content that breaches copyright rules, once this has been notified to the provider.
Article 13 would force these companies to actively monitor their users‘ content, which contradicts the ‘no general obligation to monitor’ rules in the Electronic Commerce Directive. The requirement to install a system for filtering electronic communications has twice been rejected by the Court of Justice, in the cases Scarlet Extended (C 70/10) and Netlog/Sabam (C 360/10). Therefore, a legislative provision that requires internet companies to install a filtering system would almost certainly be rejected by the Court of Justice because it would contravene the requirement that a fair balance be struck between the right to intellectual property on the one hand, and the freedom to conduct business and the right to freedom of expression, such as to receive or impart information, on the other.
In particular, the requirement to filter content in this way would violate the freedom of expression set out in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. If internet companies are required to apply filtering mechanisms in order to avoid possible liability, they will. This will lead to excessive filtering and deletion of content and limit the freedom to impart information on the one hand, and the freedom to receive information on the other.
If EU legislation conflicts with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, national constitutional courts are likely to be tempted to disapply it and we can expect such a rule to be annulled by the Court of Justice. This is what happened with the Data Retention Directive (2006/24/EC), when EU legislators ignored compatibility problems with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In 2014, the Court of Justice declared the Data Retention Directive invalid because it violated the Charter.
Taking into consideration these arguments, we ask the relevant policy-makers to delete Article 13.
Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties)
European Digital Rights (EDRi)
Access Info
ActiveWatch
Article 19
Associação D3 – Defesa dos Direitos Digitais
Associação Nacional para o Software Livre (ANSOL)
Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
Association for Technology and Internet (ApTI)
Association of the Defence of Human Rights in Romania (APADOR)
Associazione Antigone
Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC)
Bits of Freedom (BoF)
BlueLink Foundation
Bulgarian Helsinki Committee
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
Centre for Peace Studies
Centrum Cyfrowe
Coalizione Italiana Libertà e Diritti Civili (CILD)
Code for Croatia
COMMUNIA
Culture Action Europe
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
epicenter.works
Estonian Human Rights Centre
Freedom of the Press Foundation
Frënn vun der Ënn
Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
Hermes Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights
Human Rights Monitoring Institute
Human Rights Watch
Human Rights Without Frontiers
Hungarian Civil Liberties Union
Index on Censorship
International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR)
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
Internautas
JUMEN
Justice & Peace
La Quadrature du Net
Media Development Centre
Miklos Haraszti (Former OSCE Media Representative)
Modern Poland Foundation
Netherlands Helsinki Committee
One World Platform
Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI)
Open Rights Group (ORG)
OpenMedia
Panoptykon
Plataforma en Defensa de la Libertad de Información (PDLI)
Reporters without Borders (RSF)
Rights International Spain
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
South East European Network for Professionalization of Media (SEENPM)
Statewatch
The Right to Know Coalition of Nova Scotia (RTKNS)
Xnet
CC: Permanent and Deputy Permanent Representatives of the Members States to the EU
CC: Chairs of the JURI and LIBE Committees in the European Parliament
CC: Shadow Rapporteurs and MEPs in the JURI and LIBE Committees in the European Parliament
CC: Secretariats of the JURI and LIBE Committees in the European Parliament
CC: Secretariat of the Council Working Party on Intellectual Property (Copyright)
CC: Secretariat of the Council Working on Competition
CC: Secretariat of the Council Research Working Party[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1508140671158-363c6122-72fc-4″ taxonomies=”16927″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
