]> 2026-05-04T12:46:43+00:00 Freedom of the Press/Culture and Politics/Depends on governance 0 en 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. (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 2020. (2020). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html Facts and figures about ZDF (2021, April. 20). ZDF. https://www.zdf.de/zdfunternehmen/factsandfigures-100.html Repucci, S. (2019). Freedom and the media 2019. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-and-media/2019/media-freedom-downward-spiral. 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 1273 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1948 1980 1990 1993 1995 2004 2009 2010 2015 2016 2017 2019 2020 2021 2186021.5 2187482.5 2187847.5 2188212.5 2188577.5 2188943.5 2432551.5 2444239.5 2447892.5 2448988.5 2449718.5 2453005.5 2454832.5 2455197.5 2457023.5 2457388.5 2457754.5 2458484.5 2458849.5 2459215.5 Is this right exercised in different ways depending on the political governance regime in place (democracy, autocracy, hybrid regime)? 2023-04-10T11:21:42Z 2460044.9734028 Freedom of the Press/Culture and Politics/Depends on governance Page name 102 en Page name