KAF Democracy Report Media and Democracy

Document Sample
KAF Democracy Report Media and Democracy Powered By Docstoc
					    Links:        KAF Democracy Report 2005


4.1. Country performance1
This overall evaluation comes from the arithmetic average of
each indicator rating. The indirect indicators ‘general
conditions’ and ‘legal environment’ were weighted singly
and the next three direct indicators were given double
weighting. For example, because countries with totalitarian
regimes subject all social activities to comprehensive control,
the resulting absence of any civil actors, due to the
repression, should not lead to a positive rating for ‘non-state
The aggregated ratings correspond approximately to an
interval scale. Some variations are noticeable when these
indicator ratings are compared to the single report’s ratings.
The variations are the result of the encoding process. First,
the expert reports were subjected to an independent fourfold
encoding. Second the expert ratings were compared to each
other and made proportional. Afterwards, this process was
repeated with the two results. This procedure was used to
provide quality assurance in order to guarantee the ratings’
validity and reliability. The small number and size of the
variations between the single expert reports and the overall
ratings highlight the advantages of the chosen expert
questionnaire method.
The following overviews are meant to provide a survey of
the states that were examined. In order to provide
information and analysis as close as possibly to the data
received from the authors, the states were dealt with
individually; the data were not summarised nor were
comparisons made within each category group. It would be
possible to compare the states category by category but the

    The authors would like to thank the staff members of the research
    group on governance at the University of Duisburg-Essen (Germany) –
    Daniel Dittrich, Heiko Haffmans, Tina Kreibich and Florian Schartau –
    for their assistance during the encoding process.
The KAF Democracy Report 2005

                results would not be very informative, since every country
                has its own set of social factors, legal framework, and
                political and economic conditions. Given the limited length
                of this report, a comparative section would have simply
                taken up too much space because the report had to include a
                short section on every state in order to fulfil its objective of
                providing succinct information on the freedom of the media
                in the selected countries. Not doing that would have
                jeopardised the coherence of the report. Therefore we
                decided to include a section on the trends in media freedom
                in each state, which concludes the report by giving
                information on general processes and developments.

                4.1.1. Argentina
    General     The literacy rate for Argentina is high and the media
  conditions    landscape is quite diverse. The regional television and radio
                stations are more important than the national ones.
                However, newspapers are the most important source of
                information. Even radio stations gather their news from the
                printed media. Since the advent of democracy, the media in
                Argentina have had a highly significant influence on the
                formation of political opinion. The general media landscape
                is dominated by private media groups. However, the
                Argentine government owns some media networks. Due to
                the fact that the government appoints the senior personnel
                in these media networks, there is a serious risk of turning
                the media into an instrument of state advertising for the
                current administration.
       Legal    Argentina established a working legal environment to
environment     guarantee media freedom, but only in the Buenos Aires
                metropolitan area. In the rural provinces journalists still face
                problems with the local administration or corrupt courts.
                However, there are no reports of state censorship of the
                media. Another problem is the way the media landscape is
                dominated by cartels. A loophole in the legislation has
                allowed this to happen and has not been closed by recent
                administrations, although the media cartels are a menace to
                the quality of media coverage. Furthermore, several
                Argentine administrations have encouraged foreign
                investment in the media, which has aggravated this
    Political   In Argentina no group in society is deliberately excluded
  conditions    from participating in the media, although there appears to be
                disproportionately less coverage of topics such as the rights
                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

of indigenous communities or children rights. When it
comes to self-censorship Argentina’s journalists are divided.
One group is willing to trade restraint in investigations for
commercial favours, but there is also the opposite kind of
journalists who are not willing to remain silent. It has to be
said that given the often complex connections between the
objects of investigation (e.g. families who own regional
papers) and the media business itself, reporters often have to
think of keeping their jobs under economic pressures or
intimidation before deciding to investigate corruption cases.
The mechanisms the government uses to influence the
media are of an indirect kind. The awarding of state
subsidies and the provision of special insider information are
effective instruments for manipulating the press. Internet
access is not hindered in any way by the state but is at the
top of the government’s agenda.
In the past five years there has been a strong worsening of
media freedom, particularly since under President Kirchner
the policy of restricting information has intensified. The
Argentine state owns 28.8 per cent of the biggest paper
supplier in Argentina. Although the government could use
this to put pressure on the dependent media houses it has
almost never been used to influence the content of the
Apparently, direct state subsidies are not considered an issue   Economic
by the private media in Argentina. However, indirect             pressures
measures such as tax exemptions, rebates and flexible
legislation leave journalists and the media prone to self-
censorship. More importantly, official advertising is being
used to directly influence the media. It thus becomes a
means of economic pressure, because of the government’s
‘existing untidy … policy toward the media and the shady
administration of official advertising funds’. Through
disproportionate spending, the government funds those
media outlets it regards as friendly – which are not
necessarily those with the most viewers. This clearly affects
freedom of expression and the citizens’ right to information.
The annual official advertising budget increased significantly
from 2003 to 2004. This combined with the economic
dependence of most media houses on financial assistance has
contributed to greater self-censorship. However, the
Cultural Wealth Preservation Act limits the shareholding
and voting rights on the boards of media companies, which
partly ensures the independence of the media.

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

  Non-state     While the return to democracy in Argentina has reduced the
  repression    non-state repression of journalists, soft or indirect means
                aimed at silencing or controlling the press are observed to
                have strengthened. This applies to the harassment of
                journalists in court, the discretionary use of official
                advertising and the tolerance shown to businesses and media
                belonging to the same conglomerate. In poorer provinces the
                picture is even further obscured by the fact that government
                is closely linked with those who own the media. Hence, a
                democratic gap prevails: non-state repression when it occurs
                does so in the interior of the country against local
                newspapers and broadcasters. Generally, media freedom
                faces only minor restrictions from non-state repression. The
                tendency, however, shows a slight worsening.

                4.1.2. Belarus

    General     The literacy rate in Belarus is nearly 100 per cent. Also the
  conditions    media landscape is quite diverse. Media access is high,
                demonstrated by the fact that nearly every Belarussian owns
                a television. The media itself has a significant influence on
                the formation of political opinion but most of the media are
                directly controlled through the government. Independent
                electronic media simply do not exist; independent print
                media suffer from state repression. The coverage of the state-
                run media can only be described as propaganda.
       Legal    The regime in Minsk has established a legal environment
environment     that allows it to have full control of media coverage in
                Belarus. Direct and indirect censorship, the withdrawal of
                press licences, the selection of the directors-in-chief and the
                strong regulation of the press market are just a few of the
                legal methods of repression on the endless list used by the
                Belarusian state to maintain control over the media.
    Political   There is significant under-reporting of many social groups
  conditions    and topics in Belarus. The media can be described as an
                instrument of pure propaganda for the regime. That there is
                a minority problem in Belarus is denied; social problems and
                the bad economic conditions appear to be non-existent.
                Opposition, democratic or NGO activities and opinions are
                not covered.
                The government does not accept any form of media that is
                not friendly towards the regime, so self-censorship is often
                practised even in non-state media organisations. Illegal state
                repression is common in Belarus. It usually appears before

                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

important political events and is aimed at silencing any
opinion that voices views contrary to the propaganda. State
authorities also observe which media are the most active and
critical and then impose sanctions on them. Access to
independent websites containing critical information is
usually blocked during election days. The government also
has important control over printing facilities and the
distribution of newspapers. This enables state authorities to
often deny printing material and infrastructure to
independent newspapers. Overall, the situation of freedom
of the media in Belarus has very severely worsened over the
last five years.
The government of Belarus runs the entire broadcasting            Economic
sector; hence, it can fully exert its influence over it through   pressures
licences and content control. Stronger media control before
the 2004 referendum disentitled citizens even further of
their right to information. Generally speaking, the economic
situation is very weak. The government impedes non-state
newspapers because it controls the distribution network and
prohibits independent presses from increasing the number of
newspapers they distribute. For the simple reason that the
private media do not receive any state subsidies, the
independent media are left largely dependent on foreign
assistance. In addition to this kind of economic pressure,
moreover, the government has also established various other
means of economically damaging the independent press.
Higher charges for delivery, for example, leads to higher
subscription rates and thus to lower circulation and lower
outreach to citizens.
It is stated that non-state repression in Belarus is rare, but    Non-state
that is because of the comprehensive control by the               repression
government of all areas of social life. Thus the indicator
‘non-state repression’ is not rated. The repression by the
authorities is alarming: court decisions to impose absurdly
high fines on independent papers have only one intention,
namely to ruin them. Moreover, as observed, the means of
repression used by the state against the media and journalists
have become more efficient.

4.1.3. Bolivia
It can be said that Bolivian society is highly ‘mediatised’.      General
Because of the literacy rate and the small market for             conditions
newspapers the print media are not very important. The
media in Bolivia have a highly significant influence on the
The KAF Democracy Report 2005

                formation of political opinion. People trust the media
                because they are clearly dominated by the private sector and
                normally oppose the government.
       Legal    In Bolivia protection against state repression is guaranteed
environment     much less by the courts than by the weakness of the Bolivian
                state. With four administrations in the last five years,
                general conditions are changing quickly, which influences
                the legal environment. Accordingly, press censorship,
                although illegal, can occur, depending on the current
                administration. The attempts by former governments to
                close down several media houses failed because of massive
                resistance, which shows the general strength of the media in
                Bolivia. Journalists can claim their rights in court. In the
                current situation the legal environment can be estimated as
    Political   Bolivia appears to be the fulfilment of all theories about rule
  conditions    by the media. The state itself is weak and the media are a
                dominant player in political life. Opinionated newspapers or
                broadcasters strongly influence the formation of political
                opinion. There are no sectors of the population or no social
                strata whose political concerns are not represented in the
                media or who are deliberately excluded from the right to
                information. Because of the overall weakness of the state
                there is no self-censorship by the media and there is no
                illegal state repression to be feared. Although there was
                some repression from 1997 to 2001 under the Banzer
                administration, when some media houses were cut off from
                state propaganda and advertising, even in the state-owned
                media houses the state has almost no influence on the
                content. Although the media is as free as it can be from the
                influence of the state the question has to be raised whether
                the rather poor quality of the published content has a
                positive effect in a state with a weak government. Given that
                Bolivia is a country with a population that turns more to
                radio and television it could be asked if this part of the media
                lives up to its responsibility to inform and educate.
  Economic      Most of the private media in Bolivia benefit from partial and
   pressures    soft state subsidies from advertising. While the media is not
                exclusively dependent on state funding, the lack of it could
                lead to severe economic disadvantages. However, in 2004 the
                state applied austerity measures and cut back its advertising
                budget by 60 per cent and eliminated, later demoted, the
                Ministry of Communications. A further 40 per cent decrease
                in funding is expected in 2005. However, while being state

                                                    Analysis and Evaluation

subsidised, no private media network appears to be either
unconditionally friendly towards or overly prejudiced
against the government; hence, a state subsidy does not
appear to exert much influence on the independent media.
Nonetheless, the media with the highest circulation or best
rating receive more government advertising – an economic
pressure applied in the ‘principle of efficiency’.
While the media appear to be the most powerful force in            Non-state
Bolivia, social groups made violent attacks on the media           repression
during the 2003 socio-political upheavals. However, in
‘normal’ times, those attacks are very rare and isolated. The
media emerged as the key players, and therefore do not fear
repression. However, there has been a tendency for the
standing of the media to deteriorate.

4.1.4. Cambodia
The literacy rate in Cambodia is low and the media scene is        General
small. In addition access to the media is poor, especially in      conditions
rural areas. As a result the influence of the media on political
opinion is slight. There is virtually no private media sector
in Cambodia. The state-owned media dominate and usually
produce propaganda for the government. The leading
positions are appointed to by the Ministry of Information
hand in hand with the President.
However, Cambodia has made huge steps towards                      Legal
democracy since the end of the Khmer Rouge dictatorship.           environment
The legal framework is adequate, but moderate state
repression still exists. The most negative aspect of
Cambodia’s legal environment and media freedom is the
occasional censorship. Although censorship is illegal in
Cambodia, journalists seldom take legal action against the
government because of the poor chance of success. In such
trials the courts mostly act as puppets of the government.
There are no sections of the population whose political            Political
interests are not covered by the media; this is also true of the   conditions
right of access to information. Self-censorship occurs in the
media, especially in the newspapers that are partisan. The
owners, publishers or editors-in-chief are in most cases
members of the ruling CPP and therefore the newspapers
are an instrument of party propaganda and aimed at the
political opposition. Illegal state repression is a common
phenomenon in Cambodia; most journalists therefore apply
self-censorship. Threats, intimidation or lawsuits are regular

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

               consequences of critical coverage and have to be feared. The
               government does not pose any obstacles to Internet access
               because it is simply irrelevant. Slight improvement can be
               seen in the state–media relationship; this is due to the
               increased professionalism of the journalists and to
               associations and international organisations enhancing this
  Economic     The private media (mostly newspapers) sector in Cambodia
   pressures   is comparatively small. High taxation on paper and other
               imports of printing materials as well as high prices for gas
               and electricity create major disadvantages for media houses.
               While in principle the independent media are not directly
               subsidised through advertisements, they still need this kind
               of support. They therefore voluntarily report in favour of the
               government and the ruling party, which provide them with
               financial and material support. Consequently, this leads to
               self-censorship among journalists. The weak economy
               contributes to this ongoing restriction of the independent
               media – publishers always face the danger of bankruptcy.
 Non-state     The media in Cambodia not only fear state repression but
 repression    also repression by political parties (especially the CPP). The
               parties, it is reported regularly and often, threaten and
               intimidate journalists through their members. Non-state
               repression most often involves violence, crime or
               defamation. While there has been no significant change,
               things have tended to become a little bit easier for journalists
               as their behaviour has become more professional – as a result
               of seminars and training.

               4.1.5. Democratic Republic of Congo
   General     The DR Congo has quite a varied media landscape but in fact
 conditions    access to the media is poor. This is for the simple reason that
               just 5 per cent of the territory of Congo is connected to
               electronic power. The state-owned media dominate the
               market. Along with the fact that the television stations
               publish their allegiance to several political and social groups,
               this indicates why the Congolese media only have slight
               influence on the formation of political opinion. The media,
               especially those that are state-owned, are close to the
               government, sometimes even going so far as producing
               propaganda for the government.
               Though the DR Congo has many political, economic and
               social problems it has a pretty liberal press law. The problem

                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

lies, as in many other Africa countries, with its                 Legal
implementation. The DR Congo is often called a failed state,      environment
which is incorrect in that there is a working Congolese state
in the core provinces. The main disadvantages of the press
law are the people’s lack of knowledge about it, the
weakness of the courts and an administration that actively
works against this liberal law.
Although there are no sectors of the population of the DR         Political
Congo whose political concerns are excluded from media            conditions
coverage, there are groups whose interests are seldom
discussed in the media. This applies especially to
Banymulenge Tutsis in the Kivus and the Pygmies in the
Province of Equateur. Furthermore, there are no sectors of
society which are deliberately excluded from access to
information by the state authorities. Self-censorship does
exist in the Democratic Republic of Congo, although the
direct form of censorship by the Minister of Information is
predominant in the public networks: ‘No statements which
are critical towards the current government will pass…’.
This is combined with other forms of state repression
contrary to the law: state authorities violate the press law
and deprive aggrieved journalists of their right of reply,
correction, etc. There are also cases of outspoken journalists
being summoned before the police and even being
imprisoned. There is no control over the distribution of the
print media, which means that the state cannot use
distribution as an instrument of control and influence. It has
to be said that it is possible to observe a slight improvement
in state repression during the past five years ‘due to the
liberalisation of free speech’.
Due to a generally unfavourable economic environment in           Economic
the DR Congo all the media have to cope with                      pressures
disadvantages. While the state does not subsidise the private
media sector, the Press Law provides for indirect and
financial aid. However, no information is given on the terms
for receiving indirect funding (reduced import taxes on
paper, equipment and films). The lack of modern equipment,
the low circulation rate of newspapers, the low income of
potential consumers as well as the lack of transport facilities
outside the capital lead to the assumption that the
independent media are greatly disadvantaged compared to
the state-owned media, which reach by far the biggest part
of the population.

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

  Non-state     Generally, the media in the DR Congo do not face non-state
  repression    repression. Since the 1990s there has been no pressure from
                non-state groups. It is stated that no intimidation can be
                detected due to the development of a pluralistic media sector
                – ‘concerted intervention by civil society [has become]

                4.1.6. Egypt
    General     Experts estimate that about 50 per cent of the population is
  conditions    literate. There are a large number of radio stations but only
                eight television channels. Nearly all households own a radio
                and 96 per cent have also TV. The influence of the media on
                the formation of political opinions is significant. All local
                television stations, most of the local radio stations and nearly
                all of the print media are in the hands of the state. The
                leading positions in the state-owned media are appointed by
                the Ministry of Information, which is the reason that the
                media in Egypt provide quite government-friendly coverage.

       Legal    As Egypt has been under martial law for more then 20 years,
environment     there is an adverse legal environment for freedom of the
                media. Although there has been a slight improvement in
                press freedom in the last five years, the Egyptian state still
                uses a wide variety of legal methods to control the media.
                Since the frequency of direct censorship is decreasing, self-
                censorship is strongly increasing in the media. This is
                because of the licensing practices of the administration. The
                strict defamation laws also prevent free media coverage.
    Political   In Egypt certain groups in society are excluded from media
  conditions    coverage, such as the Christian minority. There is also a clear
                bias which marginalises the population not living in the
                capital because all daily newspapers are concentrated in
                Cairo. Thus the coverage concentrates more on issues that
                are national and which relate to central government than on
                regional matters. Self-censorship is an essential part of the
                Egyptian media: all state-owned and state-friendly media
                practise it and even foreign publications must be approved
                by the state censors before they can be printed. The issues
                vulnerable to censorship are criticism of the president,
                crucial religious issues, political Islamism, the presidential
                succession and the relationship with Israel. Repression today
                is mostly bureaucratic in nature. There is also a regular
                increase in state action against the media before elections. As
                for Internet access, the Egyptian state blocks Islamist,
                pornographic or other websites seen as offensive to religion.
                                                  Analysis and Evaluation

There is considerable control over the print media by the
government, which basically censors most press or ensures
the press are self-censored. Although the engagement in the
war on terror constitutes an additional reason for the
government to intensify repression the quality of the
repression has not changed in the past five years.
The government’s influence on the private media (mostly         Economic
press; there are only a few private radio and TV networks) is   pressures
considerable in Egypt, and is done ‘more with a stick than
with a carrot’. While the government cannot afford to apply
any direct funding – subsidies are not provided through
advertisements – economic influence is exerted by means of
bureaucratic delays or unexpected tax increases for printing
and distribution. The only way for the private media to
avoid this is by not moving too far from ‘the accepted
guidelines on what can and cannot be published’. The recent
devaluation of the Egyptian pound has created further
disadvantages for private media because they are reliant on
imported paper.
While non-state repression was carried out by religious         Non-state
groups during the 1990s, this is no longer a serious problem    repression
in Egypt. Although rising discontent can be detected over
the media coverage of US and Israeli policy in the Middle
East, there have been no Islamist-inspired attacks on
journalists since the Luxor incident in 1997.

4.1.7. India
The literacy rate in India is unsatisfactory especially for     General
woman. Although the media landscape is relatively diverse,      conditions
state-owned media dominate. Those media are very friendly
to the government, sometimes going as far as providing
government propaganda. Radio is the most accessible
medium with nearly 100 per cent coverage, followed by
television. Print products are usually only published
irregularly and suffer from the high illiteracy rate. The
influence of the media on the formation of political opinion
is significant.
India has an adequate legal framework and strong,               Legal
courageous courts. So freedom of the press is, as far as        environment
possible, guaranteed by the legal environment. The source of
India’s trouble with freedom of the media is the
government, which often tries to exclude journalists from
information and uses a wide variety of methods of legal

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

               repression against hostile media. At the moment India is
               going through a period when cartels are being created.
               Although these media cartels do not have the negative
               influence on media coverage that the cartels in Latin
               America or Russia do, this is a development which is not
               being appropriately faced by the government.
   Political   In India the private media are concentrated only in the
 conditions    cities. The rural population is therefore dependent on the
               state-owned media. For commercial reasons, the private
               media ignore the concerns of economically and socially
               deprived people. Criticism of the state is not often seen in
               the Indian media. Large parts of society (the poor, the
               underprivileged, the deprived and the indigent) are excluded
               by state action from their right to freedom of information.
               The reasons behind this are more structural in origin than
               physical: the lack of rural electrification, a weak
               commitment to literacy programmes and poor educational
               systems are factors that lead to the exclusion. Self-censorship
               is present across the whole range of media in India. The
               topics that are omitted are: national defence, sensitive
               neighbouring states and, in part, the judiciary. The private
               media, however, even exercise self-censorship in business
               matters and some omit critical coverage of powerful
               politicians. Illegal state repression occurs rarely across the
               whole of India but in some states it is often practised. The
               form of state repression is again economic, which means the
               state holds back payments for its advertisements. Political
               manipulation of lawsuits, denial of legal protection against
               physical attack and suppression of media coverage of these
               issues and cases are also quite common. The government
               exercises control of the media through the office of the
               registrar of newspaper, whose licence is needed to import
               newsprint with the concessional customs tariff. This
               instrument is seldom used to influence the content of
               newspapers but there have been attempts to restrict the
               distribution of newspapers that are critical of parties whose
               affiliated unions control the distribution in some states.
               Overall there is no significant change in the quality of state
  Economic     India’s private media (newspapers and TV; radio is mostly
   pressures   state owned) is heavily reliant on state subsidies. Thus,
               because of the fear of going bankrupt, some newspapers tend
               to be in favour of the government. However, the
               government needs the neutral (independent) newspapers
               because of their reach. Moreover, private TV, while in need
                                                    Analysis and Evaluation

of subsidies, is even less dependent. Because the private
media need to be commercially viable, economic restrictions
on their freedom are nonetheless observable.
Journalists in India generally face unrestrained non-state         Non-state
repression from all quarters: advertiser pressure (this is most    repression
common form; those who are unfriendly do not get the
advertisements); pressure from opposition groups; threats of
violence by militant and terrorist organisations to prevent
the media from reporting in a free and unbiased way; and
denial of access to information. Businesses frequently apply
pressure whenever they feel they are not getting the
exposure they want. Political groups use the channel of trade
unions and exert influence by raising unwarranted and
unjustified demands on media management. However, this
happens only rarely. Threats and violence from militant and
terrorist groups, however, occur very often in the state of
Jammu and Kashmir, in large parts of north-eastern India,
and in those parts where Maoist guerrilla groups operate.
They all sometimes deny access to information as well.
Greater competition among media houses, fractured
mandates and growing unrest among terrorist groups
aggravate the current situation.

4.1.8. Indonesia
Compared to other countries of the region Indonesia has an         General
average literacy rate. The media scene is varied and diverse.      conditions
Most Indonesians have access to television and use it as their
primary source of information. The influence of the media,
particularly the electronic media, on the formation of
political opinion is very high. The state-owned media still
represent the government’s view, but the market is clearly
dominated by the private media. There are no reports of
censorship of the media in Indonesia.
The legal environment for media freedom has considerably           Legal
improved since the end of the Soeharto regime. Press               environment
freedom is widely realised. The major problem with the legal
framework is its weakness. Incompetent and corrupt law
enforcers are the reason that many journalists do not take
legal action against repression. Many do not even know
about their rights or are still afraid of state repression, as a
result of their negative experiences in the past.
Marginal groups in Indonesia were not given equal media
coverage until 1998. In particular, the Chinese-Indonesians

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

   Political   did not get much media attention in the Soeharto era. This
 conditions    changed with the democratisation of Indonesia. There are
               also no parts of society that are deliberately restricted from
               their right to information by the state. Self-censorship
               sometimes occurs in the Indonesian media, for example
               during Ramadan, which makes it more a social mechanism
               than state repression. There are attempts at illegal state
               repression but ‘despite the fact that many ex-New Order
               individuals are in strategic positions, the political change in
               favour of freedom of the press is difficult to challenge’. The
               vast majority of the Indonesian people do not have access to
               Internet although there is no major obstacle to it. The
               Internet is a strongly growing market but as yet the
               equipment is too expensive for most Indonesians. Overall it
               can be said that there has been a strong improvement in the
               last five years concerning the role of the state in freedom of
               the press. State repression has become very rare and there is
               no monitoring of the distribution of papers or of distribution
               systems although non-state repression carried out by
               paramilitary or the youth organisations of political parties
               still happens.
  Economic     Generally, the private media in Indonesia do not receive
   pressures   state subsidies. This is, however, different during elections:
               the government and, predominantly, the political parties
               spent huge amounts on advertising during the 2004 election
               campaigns. However, government spending is small
               compared to that of private companies. The government, it
               appears, is ‘still not familiar enough with modern
               communications approaches including advertising’. Hence,
               the media has the tendency to follow ‘market demand’
               rather than providing public education – its main function.
               Profits dominate over education and, thus, restrict the media
               economically. The monopolistic tendency of the media has
               not yet converted the media into a propaganda tool of the
               owner’s interest, but has to be watched carefully by the
               independent press council and the Indonesian broadcasting
 Non-state     Non-state repression in Indonesia is on the rise. Beatings,
 repression    terror, intimidation and harassment as well as physical
               damage to offices and property are rising in numbers. The
               perpetrators are most often the paramilitary organs of
               political parties, gangsters and youth organisations.
               Separatist rebels of the Free Aceh Movement are also
               involved. The number of occurrences has increased;
               however, the intensity or form of non-state repression has
                                                      Analysis and Evaluation

changed for the better. The filing of legal action is replacing
physical repression.

4.1.9. Jordan
Jordan enjoys a relatively high literacy rate for the region.        General
There are no private television or radio stations in Jordan.         conditions
The government appoints individuals to the leading
positions in the state-owned media in a process which is less
than transparent. The state-owned media are very friendly
towards the government, sometimes even working as a
propaganda tool. As a result of the small size of the country,
people can get access to television and radio stations in
neighbouring countries, which to a large extent improves
the quantity and quality of media coverage. The media in
Jordan have a large influence on the formation of political
Since the death of King Hussein II and the accession of his          Legal
heir Abdullah II, Jordan has been taking huge steps towards          environment
freedom of the media. As far as possible, Abdullah has
abolished his father’s restrictive press. Nonetheless the legal
environment has not been removed of all restrictions. The
state owns most of the media and has achieved a quasi-
monopoly of information. However, the improvements
which have been made in the legal environment are
impressive. Today, even moderate criticism of the
government is allowed.
Specific groups in Jordan are not systematically excluded by         Political
the media, but there are certain groups that cannot express          conditions
their opinions for social reasons, such as ‘the poor, the
unemployed, and the disadvantaged in general’. Providing
access to information is a government obligation, although
in practice bureaucratic hurdles are commonly erected to
prevent access. Journalists apply self-censorship, for fear that
those in charge (editors, etc.) will reject an article or that the
administration will consider them as members of the
opposition. The topics that are susceptible to censorship
include anything about the activities of the royal family,
security matters, minority issues, the country’s political
alliances, sexuality and religious issues. Although there is
some political influence, journalists in Jordan do not have to
fear extra-legal forms of repression from the state. As for
access to the Internet, the government has not built any
barriers: the Jordanian state encourages the spread of
Internet technology and with the decline of Internet prices
The KAF Democracy Report 2005

               more citizens are gaining access to the World Wide Web.
               The government does not have any control over the print
               media; it does not monitor their production and distribution.
               Furthermore, these sectors are completely privatised, even
               for the government’s publications. Overall, the relationship
               between the state and the media has improved considerably
               over the past five years. Under the new King, there has been
               a strong increase in freedom of expression and other
               democratic values.
  Economic     As Jordan owns the TV and radio stations and controls the
   pressures   leading newspapers, state subsidies to the independent press
               are marginal. However, the main dailies have to publish the
               government’s advertisements or else face adverse
               consequences. The considerable financial resources required
               to establish a newspaper and the high costs of printing and
               distribution constitute major obstacles for some papers and
               make it difficult for them to survive. As there is not much
               political advertising, except during elections, the
               government’s economic leverage over the private media is
               regarded as not being very strong.
 Non-state     While there are no specific groups that exert an influence
 repression    over the media in Jordan, non-state repression is noticeable
               whenever issues of religion or reconciliation with Israel are
               touched upon. Defamation of journalists and attacks on
               newspapers happen rarely, however; issues are usually
               resolved informally or in court. However, the media is not
               completely free of non-state repression: in almost a
               contradiction in terms, the Journalists Association puts
               pressure on journalists. Membership is obligatory for those
               who want to practise the profession, so if members do not
               act according to the JA’s rules or policies they face the loss of
               their membership and the official right to work. However,
               things have improved in Jordan and repression now seldom

               4.1.10. Mexico
   General     The illiteracy rate in Mexico appears to be quite high for the
 conditions    Americas, but this due to internal regional imbalances. The
               media scene in Mexico is very diverse. Therefore, the media
               has a highly significant influence on the formation of
               political opinion. The media market is dominated by private
               media networks, which are very critical of the government.
               However 80 per cent of the media in Mexico are owned by

                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

just two companies, which are beginning to ‘negotiate
“political favours” to pursue their interests’.
In Mexico the legal environment for media freedom is not         Legal
much more than a conglomeration of a few vague laws.             environment
Although journalists consider these laws to be very
inadequate, they are able to create an environment which
guarantees a high degree of press freedom. As a result of the
problematic legal environment, the major difficulty in
Mexico is the creation of media cartels, which is comparable
to Argentina. The influence of these cartels on the quality
and content of media coverage is to a great extent
There are several groups that are excluded from media            Political
coverage: indigenous communities, workers’ organisations,        conditions
social organisations and the radical left. One reason for this
is that programmes covering these groups generate low
ratings. In order to get sufficient advertising deals TV
stations have to have good ratings; if a topic is not going to
generate good ratings it will not be covered. Solutions for
overcoming the non-representation of large groups of
Mexican society are hindered by the legal requirements to
operate community radios. Considerable financial and
technological resources are needed to operate a station. As a
result, only those with enough resources are able to
broadcast, thus leading to the establishment of illegal
stations. The main opposition to reform comes from the
private media sector, which is not willing to accept further
competition. There is self-censorship in Mexico, again for
economic reasons. Newspapers are dependent on advertising
and therefore avoid publishing information that could be
inconvenient to the authorities. Journalists tend to avoid
harming the interests of the owner and putting their jobs at
risk by publishing critical information. This happens more
often in newspapers than in radio.
Illegal state repression rarely happens nowadays in Mexico
and a major improvement can be noticed, although in some
regions the situation has worsened. A positive development
can also be seen in the moral curiosity of society about the
influence of the government on the media. The government
has no control over production and distribution of the
printed press.
Economic pressure from the government on the freedom of          Economic
the private media in Mexico is generally low. While almost       pressures
all the media could not subsist without government and
The KAF Democracy Report 2005

               party (during elections) advertisements, there appears to be
               little intervention to promote friendly coverage of the
               government. However, the picture is mixed when taking
               into account that those advertisements primarily benefit the
               largest private media groups. Moreover, unemployment is
               still high among journalists, which apparently forces them to
               refrain from reporting or publishing information
               unfavourable to the government.
  Non-state    State repression appears to be marginal compared to what
  repression   can be labelled the downside of media freedom in Mexico:
               non-state repression not only happens frequently, it is also
               characterised by the utmost brutality. The cause of this is
               drug trafficking. Investigative journalists who report on the
               sensitive issue of drug trafficking receive serious threats and
               even run the risk of being assassinated. The murders of
               journalists have increased, and their cases will probably
               never be solved. While investigative journalism is a clear
               sign of freedom of the media, the kind and quantity of non-
               state repression is alarming; therefore, in this regard the
               media in Mexico (especially in the northern regions) are not

               4.1.11. Nigeria

    General    The literacy rate for Nigeria is low, even for an African
  conditions   country. However the media landscape, both electronic and
               printed, is diverse, with most of the media being state
               owned. Ten to 15 per cent of the population have access to
               the World Wide Web, which is quite large and is due to the
               presence of a large number of Internet cafés. The influence
               of the media on political opinion is highly significant. The
               President or regional governor appoints to the leading
               positions in the media. There is no doubt that the
               ‘information’ provided by the media can be regarded as
               propaganda for the government. To get access to the
               government’s press conferences, journalists have to be
               accredited. This accreditation is often withdrawn when a
               media house falls out of favour with the government.
       Legal   Nigeria has a relatively liberal press law. Though the
environment    constitution generally allows for media coverage of public
               officials or state secrets to be restricted there is no law that
               does this. Nevertheless, there is censorship in Nigeria and in
               many cases the current administration is more restrictive
               then the former (military) government. Furthermore, the
               state can control the licensing of media through the ‘press
                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

council’, which plays a decisive (adverse) role in the
administration of the Nigerian press and is not independent.
In Nigeria there are no social groups whose interests the         Political
media are not allowed to cover. Although prisoners are            conditions
denied access to the mass media the rest of the population is
not denied their right to information. Self-censorship is very
common in Nigeria’s media, especially in electronic
broadcasting, which is constantly monitored by the National
Broadcasting Commission, although at a lower level, self-
censorship is also found among the press. If a print journalist
wants to keep his job, he always has to bear in mind the
economic interests of the corporation he works for and the
political standpoint of his CEO. Even then, there are still the
papers’ editors, who keep a close eye on what is published
and what is not. Issues most vulnerable to censorship are
state security, law and order and the abuse of power by
politicians or the military.
Even under a civilian regime journalists still have good
reason to fear state repression, including physical attacks and
even illegal detention. There are fewer of the occurrences
than under military rule but they are still a ‘cause for
concern’. It can therefore be said that there is a slight
improvement in the state repression of journalists. There is
no governmental agency that controls the production and
distribution of the print media, so the government cannot
use it as an instrument of influence.
The private media in Nigeria are only marginally subsidised       Economic
by the state. It seems that they depend more on private           pressures
funding. However, this does not mean that the private media
are not vulnerable to economic pressure. The big political
parties as well as big businesses exert their influence behind
the scenes; their interests prevent the media from reporting
or publishing unfavourable information about them.
Non-state repression in Nigeria is generally rare. However, it    Non-state
sometimes occurs with attacks carried out by Islamic              repression
fundamentalist groups, ethnic militias and other political
groups. At any rate, non-state repression is seen by
journalists as having little effect on the freedom of the
media. If it occurs it is downright brutal, which has
disqualified Nigeria from having a higher rating in this

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

                4.1.12. Russia

    General     Russia has high literacy standards and a varied media scene.
  conditions    Access to radio and television is nearly 100 per cent. The
                major problem in Russia is the hegemony of the state-owned
                media over press coverage and the formation of opinion. The
                leading positions in TV stations and newspapers are
                appointed to by governmental officials. Needless to say, the
                state media are very friendly towards the government.
       Legal    There has been a slight worsening of the legal environment
environment     in Russia. Since September 11th and the Russian fight against
                Islamist terror as a result of the Chechen wars the media
                have become much more loyal to the state. Above all the
                rising press empires show a strong connection to the current
                administration. Media coverage of anti-terror warfare or
                military subjects is restricted. Irrespective of this, the actual
                legal environment has not changed and most of the
                problems over media freedom result from illegal or financial
    Political   In Russia all sectors of the population are covered by the
  conditions    media. There is, however, a clear bias in the media’s
                disproportionate concentration on Moscow to the
                disadvantage of the provinces. It is possible that the Russian
                people do not see improvements in freedom of speech and
                the right to information as being as important as economic
                improvements. Self-censorship occurs on daily basis in the
                Russian media: ‘The pro-government media manipulate
                public voices according to the prevailing political situation.’
                Since the state controls most of the media houses it is not
                easy to differentiate between the direct and indirect
                influence of the state and whether the editor is acting pro-
                actively or under the direct command of a state official. The
                most influential broadcasting channels show a clear
                preference for official state policy. Due to the frequently
                selective implementation of the law, lawsuits against state
                measures are not very successful. Internet access is not
                hindered by the Russian government but it must be said that
                most Russians do not have access to the Internet, especially
                in the provinces. The production of newspapers is controlled
                by monopolies (state and private) and a large amount of a
                nationwide newspaper company’s money is spent on the
                federal mail service. Over the last five years there has been
                no direct repression of the press but the government has
                planned and executed a policy of concentrating the media in

                                                    Analysis and Evaluation

the hands of the state and state-affiliated groups. The state of
media freedom therefore worsened slightly.
While the Russian constitution guarantees equal rights and         Economic
opportunities to all enterprises, the opposite appears to be       pressures
the reality. Private media have to pay higher prices for
electricity, postal service and utilities, and access to
information is restricted because the state-operated media
are granted preferential access. However, while current state
subsidies benefit those publications loyal to the federal and
regional governments, as of January 2005 subsidies,
according to new legislation, were due to be cancelled,
which means a serious loss of funding for the private press.
The independent newspapers are further hindered by the
need to find their own means for circulating their papers.
The state-controlled TV is the main source of information
for the majority of the population. Economic pressure is the
main issue for freedom of the media in Russia, since it is
practically monopolised by the state. Further pressure stems
from the government’s efforts to ‘educate’ the public on ‘the
need for state interference in the information arena’; hence,
the state makes the public distrust the private media. Media
freedom is, moreover, hampered by the temporary
suspension of disloyal media as well as the size of the
audience the media houses generally achieve: the higher the
circulation of a media house the greater the preferential
treatment it receives from the state agencies. Recently, this
has been boosted by the emergence of businesses that regard
themselves as ‘partner of the government and the foundation
of the nation’. Another critical point is debt. Government
leverage over the private media has become more important.
As the media are dependent on loans, the state greatly
restricts private outlets by demanding that they pay back
their loans, while not requiring the same of the state media.
Media organisations are punished differently for identical
violations of law and there is no continuity of legislation
from region to region.
Non-state repression is a common feature in the Russian            Non-state
media. Pressure, violence, attacks and acts of terror carried      repression
out by organised crime, extreme political, religious, and
separatist groups and organisations rank among the largest
number for all of Europe; and while there has been no
serious change in the level of the repression, the prospects
are not too bright.

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

                4.1.13. South Africa
    General     Compared to other African countries South Africa enjoys a
  conditions    wide range of local and national media. As a result of the
                apartheid legacy the literacy rate is not very high. As
                acquiring a television or Internet access is quite expensive
                and technical preconditions like electric power are not
                available in rural areas, radio is the main source of
                information. The influence of the media on the formation of
                political opinion is significant.
       Legal    Although the media laws are nearly the same as they were
environment     under the apartheid regime, the courts in South Africa,
                bound by South Africa’s new constitution, generally
                interpret the law in favour of the media, which guarantees
                freedom of the media from a judicial point of view.
    Political   After the abolition of apartheid and the establishment of a
  conditions    democratic government, the media also had to redefine their
                role. There are journalists who support the government’s
                policies and there are those who play a critical role towards
                it and there is the press that is not opinionated and is just
                performing the task of informing the public. There is a
                strong self-consciousness evident among South African
                journalists, who see themselves as independent and
                professional, although from another perspective, the media
                is often seen by state authorities as being white controlled
                and too critical; crucial issues are the AIDS policy and the
                relationship with Zimbabwe.
                Concerning the Internet, access is mainly limited to the
                white middle class. No politically aligned association or
                person is allowed to own a licence and the direct influence
                that can bring. Obstacles to Internet access are only of
                economic origin.
  Economic      While some funding comes from the Department of
   pressures    Communication, this appears not to have an influence on
                the content of media publications and reports in South
                Africa. The private media are not restricted by the
                government in their editorial content, which puts the
                country in a comparatively unusual position regarding
                freedom of the media in the countries covered by this report.
                However, concern grows stronger that journalism is only
                market driven and is thus prone to the ‘dumbing-down’ of
                content. Journalists lament that ‘editing content is now often
                subservient to commercial agendas, and democratic

                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

considerations come second’. Nonetheless, the media can be
labelled as free of economic pressure from the state.
Free speech is a cherished right in South Africa, although       Non-state
there are occasional cases of non-state repression. These are,   repression
however, not politically motivated but rather a result of
social frictions. Racial identity, xenophobia against
foreigners from other African countries, economic standing
of classes, and gender lead to self-censorship, which is not
conducive to democracy.

4.1.14. Tunisia
The literacy rate in Tunisia is about 74 per cent.               General
Additionally, the media scene is not very diverse. The           conditions
number of people who have access to newspapers has been
decreasing since 1996. The assessment of Tunisia shows the
clear hegemony of the state-owned media. The media are far
more an instrument of government propaganda than a
source of information.
The country has one of the most restrictive press laws in the    Legal
world. Journalists are prevented from doing their work by        environment
the constitution as well as the ordinary law. The state
controls the media through licensing and censorship. As for
current development, there has been a slight improvement
in the situation as a result of international pressure.
The state uses major repression against the media. Action by     Political
state authorities against journalists is very frequent and the   conditions
line between state and non-state repression cannot always be
drawn. Common practice for non-state political
organisations close to the ruling powers is for them to make
use of repression to maintain the status quo. Marginal groups
such as Islamist groups are vigorously attacked by the
government and so not covered by the media.
Self-censorship is an exercise performed on a daily basis by
Tunisian journalists. The reason for this is the all pervasive
self-restraint of the media in favour of the government. That
is because the ones in charge – even in private media houses
– are often controlled by ‘someone close to the powers that
be’. Thus journalists themselves censor the articles that are
very likely to be censored anyway. The state repression
features physical and non-physical attacks not only on the
domestic media but also on the international media. The
Tunisian government has complete control over Internet

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

               access. It controls the companies offering the service
               through the Agence Tunisienne d’Internet (ATIE), which
               leads to total government control over the protocols and the
               allocation of accounts. The same can be said of all the audio-
               visual media, which are completely under state control.
               Government organisations also control the production and
               distribution of the print media. The situation in Tunisia has
               been slightly aggravated, with the repression occurring in a
               wavelike manner, especially intensifying before decisive
               political events such as the referendum in 2002. The
               engagement of the Tunisian government in the fight against
               terrorism played an important role in the worsening
  Economic     The private media sector (press) in Tunisia is not only small,
   pressures   but also heavily dependent on the state’s money. The ATIE
               distributes the state’s advertising budget, controls the
               accreditation of local and foreign journalists and acts as the
               principal propaganda instrument of the government. Media
               not in line with the government are not granted any
               subsidies, so many newspapers have gone bankrupt. Along
               with the greatly restrictive allocation of funding, state
               authorities can also ban the distribution of critical
 Non-state     In Tunisia non-state repression is not very different from
 repression    that carried out by the government. The major perpetrators
               of non-state repression are political organisations closely
               linked with the ruling RCD or the family of the president.
               The situation gets continuously worse, including the
               tendency to harass journalists. This more subtle repression is
               a direct consequence of the system of fear and control which
               prevails in Tunisia. And since the country has become an
               ally in the fight against terrorism and international criticism
               has been silenced, the tendency for things to get worse is
               even stronger.

               4.2. Conclusions and perspectives
               On the basis of the data from these 14 selected countries, six
               general conclusions can be generated about the status quo
               and the prospects for media freedom:

               International cooperation matters
               In eight of the 14 countries examined, freedom of the media
               has improved over the last five years. The experts doing the
                                                   Analysis and Evaluation

survey ascribe this development mainly to international
scrutiny and political cooperation. Especially in countries
which are trying to open up to the international community,
state repression has declined. The first step has frequently
been the modification of the legal framework. Although
liberal media laws do not automatically lead to free media
coverage in practice, they are a fundamental precondition
for positive developments. Furthermore, unclear legal
situations and a lack of knowledge about the legal
framework are reasons for self-censorship. In contrast to this
positive trend, totalitarian regimes accept international
isolation as the price of maintaining their power. Significant
progress cannot be expected as long as these regimes are in
power. Probably because of its political and economic
interests, the international community seems to accept state
repression against journalists and media companies. But
successful     political   cooperation    needs    favourable
international and national frameworks to tap its full

Political repression is not continuous
Political repression of the media comes in waves. As
elections approach or during political crises the amount and
intensity of state repression increases, often staying on the
same level for some time after the event. Repressive regimes
often monitor the media at these times and repress the most
active elements. Thus it is evident that to international
election monitoring has to be added election campaign

All - powerful as well as weak state authorities can
threaten the freedom of the media
Non-state repression and economic pressure pose an
increasing threat to media freedom. If state authorities are
not able to maintain their monopoly on the use of force or to
implement the laws, non-state violence, economic
monopolies and cartels intensify. In such cases improving
the bureaucratic infrastructure of a country simultaneously
leads to an improvement in free media coverage. In other
cases where the state authorities are strong, media
monopolies are also frequently loyal to the government. This
kind of vicious circle is a ‘division of labour’ that cannot be
easily overcome. A possible way of doing so is to support
small and independent newspapers or radio stations.

The KAF Democracy Report 2005

           Economic Development and education do not guarantee
           media freedom
           In this sample2 the correlation between a higher level of
           economic development (measured as GDP) and freedom of
           the media is not very strong (Pearson Correlation: 0.284).
           The correlation between the level of media freedom and
           literacy levels is even weaker (Pearson Correlation: 0.1857).
           That could be due to the fact that (in the view of
           authoritarian regimes) the need for repression and
           restriction depends on the opportunities (education and
           technical access) for using media coverage as a tool for
           manipulating the public. When literacy levels are low and
           the reach of the media is narrow, the cost of control and
           intervention can be reduced. On the other hand, economic
           and educational levels that generate high media prevalence
           (radio or TV, or large numbers of readers) make it possible to
           stabilise power by using the media as propaganda
           instruments. The lack of alternative sources of information
           opens up opportunities to shape long-term values and
           dispositions. As economic prosperity increases so do the
           need and advantages of restricting and repressing the media.
           In addition, the existence of very different sources of non-
           state repression (from organised crime in South America to
           religious fundamentalism in the Middle East and Asia) does
           not correlate with the state of economic development. In
           this sample non-state repression is even negatively
           correlated with low GDPs (Pearson Correlation: -0.321).
           Thus the increasing volume and intensity of non-state
           repression cannot be automatically ascribed to the level of
           economic development. Questions of political culture and
           conflict modulation are more influential than economic

           An efficient private media sector guarantees pluralism
           State-owned media are subject to strong political influence
           from governments. In transformation states legal
           frameworks that guarantee independent coverage by
           publicly run broadcasting services (like in Germany or the

             For a more extensive comparative study the Research Group Governance
           is about to publish a paper that will focus on the evaluation of freedom of
           the media as a key factor for democratization in the examined countries.
           Using an ordinal scale the paper will rate the countries according to the
           development of freedom of the media. See Dittrich, Daniel: Media freedom
           – a measure for democracy? Duisburg 2006 (forthcoming).
                                                     Analysis and Evaluation

UK) are normally unknown or difficult to implement. Apart
from three exceptions, the state-run media in this sample are
used as propaganda instruments by the ruling class. Only a
high volume of private media outlets offers the opportunity
for building pluralistic opinions. Private monopolies do
indeed have the same consequences as state-run monopolies.
Thus a quality private media sector can only flourish in a
free market economy. Radio should be seen as the key media
when it comes to supporting the private media sector. Radio
is the most frequently used source of information.
Particularly in economically underdeveloped countries with
low literacy rates, independent local radio stations can play
an important role in the democratisation process. It is
relatively inexpensive to use and broadcast, no permanent
electrical power is needed to use it, and it has got a wide

Economic pressures favour self-censorship
Economic pressures are the main source of self-censorship.
In developing countries the economic situation of journalists
is not significantly better than in other sectors of the
economy. Journalists working for an influential media
conglomerate or a state media outlet in an authoritarian
regime have to keep in mind that writing unfavourable
coverage of those in charge could mean losing their jobs.
Therefore journalists in such a situation often restrict
themselves and write pro-government material in order not
to lose their livelihoods.

                               Karl-Rudolf Korte / Timo Grunden
Karl-Rudolf Korte is chairman of the Governance Research Group
and professor of political science at the University of Duisburg-
Essen, where Timo Grunden is a research assistant.