Freedom of the Press/Culture and Politics/Depends on governance - Revision history

Jkochan1 at 11:21, 10 April 2023

2023-04-10T11:21:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:21, 10 April 2023
Line 21:		Line 21:
	References:		References:

	Abramowitz, M. (~~[[Probable year::~~ 2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press ~~[[Probable year::~~ 2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/~~[[Probable year::~~ 2020]]- 02/~~FOTP_[[Probable year:: 2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1~~.pdf		Abramowitz, M. (2017, Apr.). Freedom of the press 2017. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/FOTP_2017_booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf
	~~Facts and figures [[Probable year:: 2020]]. ([[Probable year:: 2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html~~
	~~Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year:: 2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html~~

	~~Repucci, S~~. (~~[[Probable year:: 2019]]~~) . ~~Freedom and the media [[Probable year:: 2019]]. Freedom House~~. https://~~freedomhouse~~.~~org~~/~~report~~/~~freedom-and-media/[[Probable year:: 2019]]/ media-freedom-downward~~-~~spiral~~.		Facts and figures 2020. (2020). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html

	~~Stier~~, S. ~~([[Probable year:: 2015]]~~) . ~~Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom~~. ~~Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year:: 1273]]- [[Probable year:: 1295]].~~ https://dx.~~doi~~.~~org~~/~~10.[[Probable year:: 1080]]~~/ ~~13510347.[[Probable year:: 2014]]~~. ~~964643~~		Facts and figures about ZDF (2021, April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html

	Whitten-Woodring, J. (~~[[Probable year::~~ 2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.~~[[Probable year::~~ 1111]]/ j.~~[[Probable year::~~ 1468]]- ~~[[Probable year::~~ 2478]]. ~~[[Probable year::~~ 2009]]. 00548.x		Repucci, S. (2019). Freedom and the media 2019. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/2019/media-freedom-downward-spiral.
	ZDF. (~~[[Probable year::~~ 2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, ~~[[Probable year::~~ 2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF
			Stier, S. (2015). Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), 1273-1295. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2014.964643

			Whitten-Woodring, J. (2009). Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00548.x

			ZDF. (2021, Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF
	}}		}}

Jkochan1 at 11:17, 10 April 2023

2023-04-10T11:17:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:17, 10 April 2023
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Generally, free press happens accidentally; this was the case in Mexico and Uganda. In the [[Probable year:: 1980]]s , Uganda media began asserting independence against the US in a partisan way against the new government, prompting a “media war” (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). In the mid-[[Probable year:: 1980]]s , the Moseveni government came into power. This government was liked better by the media, but when the new Moseveni government began human rights violations, the media still reported it. Moseveni tried to shut them down, but the media retained their independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). Under Mexican autocratic rule in the [[Probable year:: 1990]]s , the media began to criticize the government and assert independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). This trend accelerated in the late [[Probable year:: 1990]]s with more aggressive media tactics, with journalists putting themselves at risk (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). On the other hand, Stier ([[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) acknowledges that long-lasting, autocratic regimes, such as monarchies, have the benefit of being prosperous and well-liked. These characteristics, along with a strong military presence, limit the chance of being overthrown and can lead to more press freedoms (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) . Accordingly, autocratic characteristics that are associated with fewer media freedoms are communism and one-party systems (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1281]]) .		Generally, free press happens accidentally; this was the case in Mexico and Uganda. In the [[Probable year:: 1980]]s , Uganda media began asserting independence against the US in a partisan way against the new government, prompting a “media war” (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). In the mid-[[Probable year:: 1980]]s , the Moseveni government came into power. This government was liked better by the media, but when the new Moseveni government began human rights violations, the media still reported it. Moseveni tried to shut them down, but the media retained their independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). Under Mexican autocratic rule in the [[Probable year:: 1990]]s , the media began to criticize the government and assert independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). This trend accelerated in the late [[Probable year:: 1990]]s with more aggressive media tactics, with journalists putting themselves at risk (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). On the other hand, Stier ([[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) acknowledges that long-lasting, autocratic regimes, such as monarchies, have the benefit of being prosperous and well-liked. These characteristics, along with a strong military presence, limit the chance of being overthrown and can lead to more press freedoms (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) . Accordingly, autocratic characteristics that are associated with fewer media freedoms are communism and one-party systems (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1281]]) .

	References		References:

	Abramowitz, M. ([[Probable year:: 2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press [[Probable year:: 2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/[[Probable year:: 2020]]- 02/FOTP_[[Probable year:: 2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf		Abramowitz, M. ([[Probable year:: 2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press [[Probable year:: 2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/[[Probable year:: 2020]]- 02/FOTP_[[Probable year:: 2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf
	Facts and figures [[Probable year:: 2020]]. ([[Probable year:: 2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html		Facts and figures [[Probable year:: 2020]]. ([[Probable year:: 2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html
	Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year:: 2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html		Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year:: 2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html

	Repucci, S. ([[Probable year:: 2019]]) . Freedom and the media [[Probable year:: 2019]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/[[Probable year:: 2019]]/ media-freedom-downward-spiral.		Repucci, S. ([[Probable year:: 2019]]) . Freedom and the media [[Probable year:: 2019]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/[[Probable year:: 2019]]/ media-freedom-downward-spiral.

	Stier, S. ([[Probable year:: 2015]]) . Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year:: 1273]]- [[Probable year:: 1295]]. https://dx.doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1080]]/ 13510347.[[Probable year:: 2014]]. 964643		Stier, S. ([[Probable year:: 2015]]) . Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year:: 1273]]- [[Probable year:: 1295]]. https://dx.doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1080]]/ 13510347.[[Probable year:: 2014]]. 964643

	Whitten-Woodring, J. ([[Probable year:: 2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1111]]/ j.[[Probable year:: 1468]]- [[Probable year:: 2478]]. [[Probable year:: 2009]]. 00548.x		Whitten-Woodring, J. ([[Probable year:: 2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1111]]/ j.[[Probable year:: 1468]]- [[Probable year:: 2478]]. [[Probable year:: 2009]]. 00548.x
	ZDF. ([[Probable year:: 2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, [[Probable year:: 2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF		ZDF. ([[Probable year:: 2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, [[Probable year:: 2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF


	}}		}}

Import-sysop: transformed

2022-12-28T22:19:09Z

transformed

Import-sysop: transformed

2022-11-25T19:53:46Z

transformed

New page

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of the Press
|section=Culture and Politics
|question=Depends on governance
|questionHeading=Is this right exercised in different ways depending on the political governance regime in place (democracy, autocracy, hybrid regime)?
|pageLevel=Question
|contents=Freedom House called freedom of the press “a cornerstone of global democracy” and others have deemed it crucial (Abramowitz, [[Probable year::2017]], 2; Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 595). But does that mean regime affects how this right is exercised? Regime affects the institutions and framework around the media and freedom of the press (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1273]]) . Democracy, government legitimacy, and free press are generally connected as there are easier ways to criticize, advocate for change, and hold leaders accountable (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 596). Research backs this up. In a study of states from [[Probable year::1948]]- [[Probable year::1995]], 82% of democracies had free press and 88% of autocracies had controlled press; The correlation between free or controlled media and regime type is 0.74, a moderately strong score (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 602, 619). A [[Probable year::1993]]- [[Probable year::2010]] study found a correlation between these variables as well (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1273]]) . Most argue that this is due to the increased legitimacy, transparency, and accountability – all things necessary in a healthy democracy. There were notable exceptions in these trends: Mexico, Uganda, and Turkey.

Democracies

Turkey, a multi-party democracy for almost 70 years, ranked highly on Freedom House’s democracy scale from [[Probable year::1993]]- [[Probable year::2004]], has heavily censored media since a [[Probable year::2016]] coup attempt (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) . News outlets have closed, the internet has become restrictive and government-censored, and traditional media platforms have become unavailable (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) . There is still local press, but accessibility has declined, requiring the use of workarounds, such as VPNs and social media rather than traditional local news sources, such as newspapers (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) .

In Germany, board members of news outlet ZDF were supportive of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, but their Editor-in-Chief was not (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1277]]) . ZDF is Germany’s national public broadcaster and is “a leading source of information,” providing a comprehensive view of the state (Facts and figures about ZDF, [[Probable year::2021]]) . The board did not renew his contract, likely because he was critical of the government and a talented investigator, leading him to uncover instances that were not politically advantageous for the CDU. This claim that an Editor-in-Chief did not have a contract renewed for holding different political views isn’t great for the free press narrative, especially when nearly half of the council works for the government (Facts and figures [[Probable year::2020]], [[Probable year::2020]]) .

Autocracies

Autocracies control media to ensure the survival of the regime. Thus, there are two prevailing media policies in autocratic states with controlled press: prevent discussion regarding the exercise of power and strictly control opposition organizations and efforts (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1277]]) . Under these policies, controlled media can also help promote the government’s rule and agenda (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). There are, however, instances of strategic censorship, in which autocracies allow minimal elements of media freedom. These policies have a similar goal as one-party states holding elections – achieving a look of democracy (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1278]]) . When this control is relinquished too quickly, it can have unintended consequences. In a well-known instance, Mikhail Gorbachev implemented freer press and expression in the Soviet Union in the late [[Probable year::1980]]s with his glasnost policy (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1279]]) . Under the communist autocracy in place and with significantly fewer media regulations, this new freedom aided a rapid decline within the state as government mismanagement became revealed (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1279]]) .

Generally, free press happens accidentally; this was the case in Mexico and Uganda. In the [[Probable year::1980]]s , Uganda media began asserting independence against the US in a partisan way against the new government, prompting a “media war” (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). In the mid-[[Probable year::1980]]s , the Moseveni government came into power. This government was liked better by the media, but when the new Moseveni government began human rights violations, the media still reported it. Moseveni tried to shut them down, but the media retained their independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). Under Mexican autocratic rule in the [[Probable year::1990]]s , the media began to criticize the government and assert independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 614). This trend accelerated in the late [[Probable year::1990]]s with more aggressive media tactics, with journalists putting themselves at risk (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 614). On the other hand, Stier ([[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1280]]) acknowledges that long-lasting, autocratic regimes, such as monarchies, have the benefit of being prosperous and well-liked. These characteristics, along with a strong military presence, limit the chance of being overthrown and can lead to more press freedoms (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1280]]) . Accordingly, autocratic characteristics that are associated with fewer media freedoms are communism and one-party systems (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1281]]) .

References

Abramowitz, M. ([[Probable year::2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press [[Probable year::2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/[[Probable year::2020]]- 02/FOTP_[[Probable year::2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf
Facts and figures [[Probable year::2020]]. ([[Probable year::2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html
Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year::2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html
Repucci, S. ([[Probable year::2019]]) . Freedom and the media [[Probable year::2019]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/[[Probable year::2019]]/ media-freedom-downward-spiral.
Stier, S. ([[Probable year::2015]]) . Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year::1273]]- [[Probable year::1295]]. https://dx.doi.org/10.[[Probable year::1080]]/ 13510347.[[Probable year::2014]]. 964643
Whitten-Woodring, J. ([[Probable year::2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.[[Probable year::1111]]/ j.[[Probable year::1468]]- [[Probable year::2478]]. [[Probable year::2009]]. 00548.x
ZDF. ([[Probable year::2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, [[Probable year::2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF

}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:19, 28 December 2022
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\|questionHeading=Is this right exercised in different ways depending on the political governance regime in place (democracy, autocracy, hybrid regime)?		\|questionHeading=Is this right exercised in different ways depending on the political governance regime in place (democracy, autocracy, hybrid regime)?
	\|pageLevel=Question		\|pageLevel=Question
	\|contents=Freedom House called freedom of the press “a cornerstone of global democracy” and others have deemed it crucial (Abramowitz, [[Probable year::2017]], 2; Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 595). But does that mean regime affects how this right is exercised? Regime affects the institutions and framework around the media and freedom of the press (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1273]]) . Democracy, government legitimacy, and free press are generally connected as there are easier ways to criticize, advocate for change, and hold leaders accountable (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 596). Research backs this up. In a study of states from [[Probable year::1948]]- [[Probable year::1995]], 82% of democracies had free press and 88% of autocracies had controlled press; The correlation between free or controlled media and regime type is 0.74, a moderately strong score (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 602, 619). A [[Probable year::1993]]- [[Probable year::2010]] study found a correlation between these variables as well (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1273]]) . Most argue that this is due to the increased legitimacy, transparency, and accountability – all things necessary in a healthy democracy. There were notable exceptions in these trends: Mexico, Uganda, and Turkey.		\|contents=Freedom House called freedom of the press “a cornerstone of global democracy” and others have deemed it crucial (Abramowitz, [[Probable year:: 2017]], 2; Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 595). But does that mean regime affects how this right is exercised? Regime affects the institutions and framework around the media and freedom of the press (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1273]]) . Democracy, government legitimacy, and free press are generally connected as there are easier ways to criticize, advocate for change, and hold leaders accountable (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 596). Research backs this up. In a study of states from [[Probable year:: 1948]]- [[Probable year:: 1995]], 82% of democracies had free press and 88% of autocracies had controlled press; The correlation between free or controlled media and regime type is 0.74, a moderately strong score (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 602, 619). A [[Probable year:: 1993]]- [[Probable year:: 2010]] study found a correlation between these variables as well (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1273]]) . Most argue that this is due to the increased legitimacy, transparency, and accountability – all things necessary in a healthy democracy. There were notable exceptions in these trends: Mexico, Uganda, and Turkey.

	Democracies		Democracies

	Turkey, a multi-party democracy for almost 70 years, ranked highly on Freedom House’s democracy scale from [[Probable year::1993]]- [[Probable year::2004]], has heavily censored media since a [[Probable year::2016]] coup attempt (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) . News outlets have closed, the internet has become restrictive and government-censored, and traditional media platforms have become unavailable (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) . There is still local press, but accessibility has declined, requiring the use of workarounds, such as VPNs and social media rather than traditional local news sources, such as newspapers (Repucci, [[Probable year::2019]]) .		Turkey, a multi-party democracy for almost 70 years, ranked highly on Freedom House’s democracy scale from [[Probable year:: 1993]]- [[Probable year:: 2004]], has heavily censored media since a [[Probable year:: 2016]] coup attempt (Repucci, [[Probable year:: 2019]]) . News outlets have closed, the internet has become restrictive and government-censored, and traditional media platforms have become unavailable (Repucci, [[Probable year:: 2019]]) . There is still local press, but accessibility has declined, requiring the use of workarounds, such as VPNs and social media rather than traditional local news sources, such as newspapers (Repucci, [[Probable year:: 2019]]) .

	In Germany, board members of news outlet ZDF were supportive of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, but their Editor-in-Chief was not (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1277]]) . ZDF is Germany’s national public broadcaster and is “a leading source of information,” providing a comprehensive view of the state (Facts and figures about ZDF, [[Probable year::2021]]) . The board did not renew his contract, likely because he was critical of the government and a talented investigator, leading him to uncover instances that were not politically advantageous for the CDU. This claim that an Editor-in-Chief did not have a contract renewed for holding different political views isn’t great for the free press narrative, especially when nearly half of the council works for the government (Facts and figures [[Probable year::2020]], [[Probable year::2020]]) .		In Germany, board members of news outlet ZDF were supportive of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, but their Editor-in-Chief was not (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1277]]) . ZDF is Germany’s national public broadcaster and is “a leading source of information,” providing a comprehensive view of the state (Facts and figures about ZDF, [[Probable year:: 2021]]) . The board did not renew his contract, likely because he was critical of the government and a talented investigator, leading him to uncover instances that were not politically advantageous for the CDU. This claim that an Editor-in-Chief did not have a contract renewed for holding different political views isn’t great for the free press narrative, especially when nearly half of the council works for the government (Facts and figures [[Probable year:: 2020]], [[Probable year:: 2020]]) .

	Autocracies		Autocracies

	Autocracies control media to ensure the survival of the regime. Thus, there are two prevailing media policies in autocratic states with controlled press: prevent discussion regarding the exercise of power and strictly control opposition organizations and efforts (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1277]]) . Under these policies, controlled media can also help promote the government’s rule and agenda (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). There are, however, instances of strategic censorship, in which autocracies allow minimal elements of media freedom. These policies have a similar goal as one-party states holding elections – achieving a look of democracy (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1278]]) . When this control is relinquished too quickly, it can have unintended consequences. In a well-known instance, Mikhail Gorbachev implemented freer press and expression in the Soviet Union in the late [[Probable year::1980]]s with his glasnost policy (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1279]]) . Under the communist autocracy in place and with significantly fewer media regulations, this new freedom aided a rapid decline within the state as government mismanagement became revealed (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1279]]) .		Autocracies control media to ensure the survival of the regime. Thus, there are two prevailing media policies in autocratic states with controlled press: prevent discussion regarding the exercise of power and strictly control opposition organizations and efforts (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1277]]) . Under these policies, controlled media can also help promote the government’s rule and agenda (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). There are, however, instances of strategic censorship, in which autocracies allow minimal elements of media freedom. These policies have a similar goal as one-party states holding elections – achieving a look of democracy (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1278]]) . When this control is relinquished too quickly, it can have unintended consequences. In a well-known instance, Mikhail Gorbachev implemented freer press and expression in the Soviet Union in the late [[Probable year:: 1980]]s with his glasnost policy (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1279]]) . Under the communist autocracy in place and with significantly fewer media regulations, this new freedom aided a rapid decline within the state as government mismanagement became revealed (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1279]]) .

	Generally, free press happens accidentally; this was the case in Mexico and Uganda. In the [[Probable year::1980]]s , Uganda media began asserting independence against the US in a partisan way against the new government, prompting a “media war” (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). In the mid-[[Probable year::1980]]s , the Moseveni government came into power. This government was liked better by the media, but when the new Moseveni government began human rights violations, the media still reported it. Moseveni tried to shut them down, but the media retained their independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 601). Under Mexican autocratic rule in the [[Probable year::1990]]s , the media began to criticize the government and assert independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 614). This trend accelerated in the late [[Probable year::1990]]s with more aggressive media tactics, with journalists putting themselves at risk (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year::2009]], 614). On the other hand, Stier ([[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1280]]) acknowledges that long-lasting, autocratic regimes, such as monarchies, have the benefit of being prosperous and well-liked. These characteristics, along with a strong military presence, limit the chance of being overthrown and can lead to more press freedoms (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1280]]) . Accordingly, autocratic characteristics that are associated with fewer media freedoms are communism and one-party systems (Stier, [[Probable year::2015]], [[Probable year::1281]]) .		Generally, free press happens accidentally; this was the case in Mexico and Uganda. In the [[Probable year:: 1980]]s , Uganda media began asserting independence against the US in a partisan way against the new government, prompting a “media war” (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). In the mid-[[Probable year:: 1980]]s , the Moseveni government came into power. This government was liked better by the media, but when the new Moseveni government began human rights violations, the media still reported it. Moseveni tried to shut them down, but the media retained their independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 601). Under Mexican autocratic rule in the [[Probable year:: 1990]]s , the media began to criticize the government and assert independence (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). This trend accelerated in the late [[Probable year:: 1990]]s with more aggressive media tactics, with journalists putting themselves at risk (Whitten-Woodring, [[Probable year:: 2009]], 614). On the other hand, Stier ([[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) acknowledges that long-lasting, autocratic regimes, such as monarchies, have the benefit of being prosperous and well-liked. These characteristics, along with a strong military presence, limit the chance of being overthrown and can lead to more press freedoms (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1280]]) . Accordingly, autocratic characteristics that are associated with fewer media freedoms are communism and one-party systems (Stier, [[Probable year:: 2015]], [[Probable year:: 1281]]) .

	References		References

	Abramowitz, M. ([[Probable year::2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press [[Probable year::2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/[[Probable year::2020]]- 02/FOTP_[[Probable year::2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf		Abramowitz, M. ([[Probable year:: 2017]], Apr.). Freedom of the press [[Probable year:: 2017]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/[[Probable year:: 2020]]- 02/FOTP_[[Probable year:: 2017]]_ booklet_FINAL_April28_1.pdf
	Facts and figures [[Probable year::2020]]. ([[Probable year::2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html		Facts and figures [[Probable year:: 2020]]. ([[Probable year:: 2020]]) . ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html
	Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year::2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html		Facts and figures about ZDF ([[Probable year:: 2021]], April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html
	Repucci, S. ([[Probable year::2019]]) . Freedom and the media [[Probable year::2019]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/[[Probable year::2019]]/ media-freedom-downward-spiral.		Repucci, S. ([[Probable year:: 2019]]) . Freedom and the media [[Probable year:: 2019]]. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/[[Probable year:: 2019]]/ media-freedom-downward-spiral.
	Stier, S. ([[Probable year::2015]]) . Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year::1273]]- [[Probable year::1295]]. https://dx.doi.org/10.[[Probable year::1080]]/ 13510347.[[Probable year::2014]]. 964643		Stier, S. ([[Probable year:: 2015]]) . Democracy, autocracy and the news: the impact of regime type on media freedom. Democratization, 22(7), [[Probable year:: 1273]]- [[Probable year:: 1295]]. https://dx.doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1080]]/ 13510347.[[Probable year:: 2014]]. 964643
	Whitten-Woodring, J. ([[Probable year::2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.[[Probable year::1111]]/ j.[[Probable year::1468]]- [[Probable year::2478]]. [[Probable year::2009]]. 00548.x		Whitten-Woodring, J. ([[Probable year:: 2009]]) . Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly 53, 595-625. https://doi.org/10.[[Probable year:: 1111]]/ j.[[Probable year:: 1468]]- [[Probable year:: 2478]]. [[Probable year:: 2009]]. 00548.x
	ZDF. ([[Probable year::2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, [[Probable year::2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF		ZDF. ([[Probable year:: 2021]], Aug. 21). Wikipedia. Retrieved Sept. 7, [[Probable year:: 2021]], from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF


	}}		}}