« Previous |
1 - 10 of 13
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. The Misleading Panic over Misinformation
- Author:
- David Inserra
- Publication Date:
- 06-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Misinformation is widely viewed as one of the most serious challenges facing modern societies. Together with the related terms “disinformation” and “malinformation,” nearly every present-day issue involves claims of misinformation. As a result, a host of actors have dedicated significant amounts of resources to the problem of incorrect or misleading information, especially online.
- Topic:
- Regulation, Freedom of Expression, and Misinformation
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
3. Institutions and governance in Mozambique :A bird’s eye view based on existing databases
- Author:
- Ines A. Ferreira
- Publication Date:
- 01-2024
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- United Nations University
- Abstract:
- Using publicly available databases and drawing on a wide range of indicators, this paper reviews the institutional performance of Mozambique across seven broad categories: rule of law and judicial independence; voice and freedom of expression/association; political participation; accountability and transparency; political instability and violence, and external relations; state legitimacy and political leadership; and governance and state capacity. Overall, the selected indicators point to similar trends within each dimension and suggest limited progress during the last decades. Still, it is fundamental that these insights and the scores presented by the indicators are put into context, and that we understand the historical path of Mozambique, the internal and external factors at play, and the fact that it takes time for progress achieved to be reflected in this type of data.
- Topic:
- Governance, Leadership, Freedom of Expression, Rule of Law, Accountability, Institutions, Judiciary, Instability, and Political Participation
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Mozambique
4. Intentionally vague: How Saudi Arabia and Egypt abuse legal systems to suppress online speech
- Author:
- Dina Sadek, Layla Mashkoor, Iain Robertson, and Andy Carvin
- Publication Date:
- 06-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- Egypt and Saudi Arabia are weaponizing vaguely written domestic media, cybercrime, and counterterrorism laws to target and suppress dissent, opposition, and vulnerable groups. Political leaders in Egypt and Saudi Arabia often claim that their countries’ judicial systems enjoy independence and a lack of interference, a narrative intended to distance the states from the real and overzealous targeting and prosecution of critics. Such claims can be debunked and dismissed, as the Egyptian and Saudi governments have had direct involvement in establishing and implementing laws that are utilized to target journalists and human rights defenders. Egypt and Saudi Arabia were selected as case studies for this report because of their status as among the most frequently documented offenders in the region when it comes to exploiting ambiguously written laws to target and prosecute journalists, critics, activists, human rights defenders, and even apolitical citizens. The two countries have consolidated power domestically, permitting them to utilize and bend their domestic legal systems to exert control over the online information space. Punishments for those targeted can involve draconian prison sentences, travel bans, and fines, which result in a chilling effect that consequently stifles online speech and activities, preventing citizens from discussing political, social, and economic issues. Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia enacted media, cybercrime, and counterterrorism laws with ambiguous language and unclear definitions of legal terms, allowing for flexible interpretations of phrases such as “false information,” “morality,” or “family values and principles.” The laws in both countries also loosely define critical terms like “terrorism,” thereby facilitating expansive interpretations of what constitutes a terrorist crime. Further, anti-terror laws now include articles that connect the “dissemination of false information” with terrorist acts. This vague and elastic legal language has enabled the Egyptian and Saudi regimes to prosecute peaceful citizens on arbitrary grounds, sometimes handing out long prison sentences or even death sentences, undermining respect for the rule of law in the two countries. This report explores the development of media, cybercrime, and counterterrorism laws in both countries, and demonstrates through case studies how Saudi Arabia and Egypt weaponize the laws to prosecute opposition figures and control narratives online. This report examines the relationship between criminal charges tied to one’s professional activities or online speech and how those charges can trigger online smear campaigns and harassment. In cases that involve women, gender-based violence is often used to harm a woman’s reputation. Though a direct correlation between judicial charges and online harassment cannot be ascertained, these case studies suggest that dissidents are likely to face online harm following legal persecution, even after they are released.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Internet, Freedom of Expression, Rule of Law, Disinformation, and Digital Policy
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America
5. Digital Platforms in Southeast Asia: Governance and Innovation
- Author:
- Faizal Bin Yahya
- Publication Date:
- 06-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as part of Southeast Asia has its digital economy and digital society objectives detailed in the ASEAN Digital Masterplan 2025 (ADM 2025) and has over the years built a regulatory framework. For example, in 2016, at the Asian Telecommunications and Information Technology Ministers Meeting, the Framework on Personal Data Protection was adopted to “strengthen the protection of personal data in ASEAN.” ASEAN has also changed how it deals with Internet governance, choosing to address it as a digital and digitization issue rather than just a matter involving info-communication technologies. To enable this, ASEAN expanded the scope of its ASEAN Telecommunications and Information Technology Ministers Meeting (TELMIN) to become the ASEAN Digital Ministers Meeting (ADGMIN) in October 2019. In 2021, as the digital economy continued to expand in the region, the ADGMIN adopted the ASEAN Data Management Framework to establish common frameworks and appropriate data protection measures. Going forward it has also considered developing regional guidelines beyond the scope of Internet governance, such as those for artificial intelligence (AI) governance and ethics. This briefing examines how ASEAN member states, despite their diversity and different levels of digital transformation, are working towards implementing policy measures to regulate digital platforms on a national and regional basis for social and economic stability. However, while improving governance for cybersecurity cooperation and content regulation, these policies should also enable progress on innovation and freedom of expression.
- Topic:
- Governance, Social Media, Freedom of Expression, Innovation, ASEAN, Disinformation, and Digital Platforms
- Political Geography:
- Southeast Asia
6. Banning YouTube in Russia: Just a Matter of Time
- Author:
- Philipp Dietrich
- Publication Date:
- 04-2024
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- YouTube is the last bastion of free expression and information in Russia, with over 93 million users. A ban on the platform would hurt democratic principles and freedom of speech in the country – and it is not a question of if but when. To prevent the further isolation of Russian society, democratic policymakers must act swiftly by urging Google to cooperate and to bolster YouTube’s infrastructure, as well as by reviewing sanctions.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Governance, Social Media, Freedom of Expression, YouTube, and Freedom of Information
- Political Geography:
- Russia
7. Presumptively Antisemitic: Islamophobic Tropes in the Palestine-Israel Discourse
- Author:
- Race and Rights (CSRR) Center for Security
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
- Abstract:
- A bastion of free speech, individual liberty, and equality. This is the mantra our government repeats across the world and teaches nationwide in American schools. Rarely stated, however, are the varying limitations imposed on persons seeking to exercise such rights according to their identity. Protection of fundamental rights is at its zenith when exercised by white, Judeo-Christian communities, while exceptions are frequently invoked when racial or ethnic minorities exercise the same rights to challenge policies and laws harmful to their communities. Members of the majority engaged in dissent are treated as patriots with different political views. Minorities who dissent are treated as security and cultural threats deserving of social stigma at best or criminalization at worst.1 This racialized double standard is most acute for Muslim or Arab Americans when they exercise their free speech rights to criticize the U.S. government’s failure to hold Israel accountable for its systematic violations of Palestinians’ human rights. Often repeated statements in support of Israel across U.S. administrations stand as a reminder of Israel’s central place in U.S. foreign policy. A most recent example occurred in Jerusalem on July 14, 2022 when President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid issued a joint statement declaring: “The United States and Israel reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between our two countries and the enduring commitment of the United States to Israel’s security. Our countries further reaffirm that the strategic U.S.-Israel partnership is based on a bedrock of shared values, shared interests, and true friendship.”2 Among the countless analyses expounding on the strong bond between the U.S. and Israel in policy terms, few examine the relationship between Islamophobia and U.S. policy on Palestine-Israel.3 Specifically, when Muslims and Arabs in America defend the rights of Palestinians or criticize Israeli state policy, they are often baselessly presumed to be motivated by a hatred for Jews rather than support for human rights, freedom, and consistent enforcement of international law. The resulting harm occurs at the individual and systemic level. Systemically, informed and critical debate about U.S. foreign policy is hampered by censorship campaigns targeting college students, faculty, human rights organizations, journalists, and elected officials.4 Individually, Muslim and Arab Americans are defamed and effectively excluded from critical public debates pertaining to U.S. policies executed in their names and with their tax funds. Should Arabs and Muslims exercise their constitutional rights of free speech and assembly in defense of Palestinian human rights, they frequently become targets of aggressive intimidation, harassment, and blacklisting campaigns5 in their workplaces, towns, and universities.6 This report examines how Islamophobia shapes American foreign policy in the three following ways: 1) restricting open debate about unconditional U.S. support for Israel notwithstanding documented and systematic violations of international law by the Israeli government,7 2) perpetuating racist tropes that Muslims and Arabs innately hate Jews, and 3) discrediting the Palestinian people from realizing their full civil, political, national, and human rights. Such racialized foreign and domestic policy was brought into sharp relief in 2022, with the response in the United States and Europe to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. As Americans in and out of government united in supporting the political, civil, and national rights and defense of Ukraine and Ukrainians, the approach in Washington to similar Palestinian interests ranges, with a few exceptions, from qualified, muted neutrality to outright hostile opposition.8 Such double standards prompt multiple questions that reveal how race and racism infect foreign policy and the treatment of minority communities who espouse unpopular views or dissent from the political orthodoxy, including the defense of human rights for all. What role does Islamophobia play in the formation of policies that restrict Palestinians from the same right of self-determination that are celebrated for Ukrainians and Israelis? How does Islamophobia silence and punish Muslim and Arab Americans who defend Palestinians’ rights in universities, the media, the public square, and online? This report explores these questions by addressing three key components of Islamophobia and related (though not identical) anti-Palestinian racism. First, Islamophobia adversely shapes public discourse on Palestine in the United States, currently and predating the “War on Terror.” Racist stereotypes of Muslims as savage are deployed to promote discriminatory policies against Palestinians. Second, an ecosystem of Zionist institutions and prominent individuals perpetuate Islamophobia to promote the policies and goals of Israel in its theft and occupation of Palestinian territory, decades of dispossession and marginalization of the Palestinian people, and denial of the rights of Palestinian refugees. Finally, Islamophobia is juxtaposed against antisemitism, portraying Muslims globally and domestically as agents of antisemitism; attempting to create a competition, or even a zero-sum scenario between Muslims and Jews–rather than allowing principled opposition to both antisemitism and Islamophobia to unite joint social justice struggles. As a result, legitimate efforts to combat antisemitism are disingenuously co-opted to undermine Palestinian aspirations for self-determination and human rights, as well as to defame Muslim and Arab human rights defenders as inherently antisemitic. Palestinian aspirations are often portrayed by the media and Zionist organizations as a cover for a uniquely Arab and Muslim antisemitism. Related is the tendency to pathologize Palestinians and all aspects of their political, cultural and social lives. This both stigmatizes the very idea of civil, national, and human rights of Palestinians and attempts to censor Arab and Muslim Americans’ political activism. Discrediting any criticism of Israeli state practices violating Palestinian human rights as antisemitism overlooks the growing number of Jews and Muslims working together to promote Palestinian rights.9 Concerns of American supporters of Israel, including Jewish Americans who have a deeply personal stake in the well-being of the Jewish people of Israel, and American supporters of Palestinians, who have an equally deep and personal stake in the well-being of the Palestinian people in Palestine, are not equally considered when crafting American policy in the region. Islamophobia, though far from being the sole reason for U.S. policy exceptionalizing Palestine, is a substantial factor. In turn, Muslims or Arabs (who are often mistaken as all Muslim) who criticize America’s unconditional support for Israeli state practices, regardless of the human rights implications, are immediately ostracized as antisemitic. The consequent harm is twofold: Palestinians’ lives and rights are discounted, and Muslim and Arab Americans are denied meaningful participation in public discourse on U.S. foreign policy and the ability to exercise their free speech rights.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, Minorities, Freedom of Expression, Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism, Discourse, Racism, Self-Determination, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims
- Political Geography:
- Israel, Palestine, and United States of America
8. Creative Freedom and Censorship: A Comparative Analysis of Regulatory Framework for Ott Contents in the UK, India, and China
- Author:
- Siddharth Kanojia
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- The emergence of over-the-top (OTT) services has lately revolutionized the way people consume media content. These services have emerged as a significant disruptor in the media industry in recent years. With the advent of OTT platforms, various concerns have arisen over the censorship and regulation of content on these platforms. Accordingly, this paper has examined the current trends in censorship and regulation of OTT content through the perusal of various legal and regulatory frameworks in the United Kingdom, India, and China. It has probed into cases of censorship and examined various aspects of civil and political liberties. The analysis has revealed a persuasive connection between the degree of freedom of expression and creative freedom dispensed in each region. Lastly, the paper has provided recommendations for policymakers and other stakeholders on balancing the need for freedom of expression and access to information with responsible content management and regulation.
- Topic:
- Regulation, Freedom of Expression, and Censorship
- Political Geography:
- China, United Kingdom, and India
9. Situation Analysis Paper: Hate Speech and its Implications on Civil Peace and Social Harmony
- Author:
- Yahya Qaoud and Da'd Mahmoud
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pal-Think For Strategic Studies
- Abstract:
- The paper presents a set of recommendations to reduce hate-based violence and promote civil peace without prejudice to the freedom of opinion and expression by enacting deterrent laws and procedures at the official and unofficial levels to raise awareness about hate speech and its dangers.
- Topic:
- Civil Society, Freedom of Expression, Violence, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Palestine
10. Artists killed in Latin America for exercising their freedom of artistic expression
- Author:
- Cecilia Noce and Diana Arévalo
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (CADAL)
- Abstract:
- This is an executive summary of the original report produced in Spanish that focuses only on violence against artists, like targeted killings related to the exercise of their right to freedom of expression and artistic creativity in Latin America. In 2021, CADAL recorded 378 attacks on freedom of artistic expression, of which 23 were murders. Artists and cultural workers who participated in protests in Colombia and Cuba were harassed, detained, and repressed. Musicians and cultural leaders were also involved in the violence between organized crime groups in countries such as Mexico and Brazil.
- Topic:
- Arts, Culture, Freedom of Expression, Protests, Targeted Killing, and Organized Crime
- Political Geography:
- Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Latin America, and Mexico