 | Parts of this article (those related to Censorship in Bolivia after the overthrow of Morales) need to be updated.(April 2020) |
| Part of a series on |
| Censorship by country |
|---|
 |
| Countries |
| See also |
Censorship in Bolivia can be traced back through years of conflict between Bolivia's indigenous population and the wealthier population of European descent. [1] Until Bolivia democratized in 1982, the media was strictly controlled. [2]
Film and documentary makers in Bolivia and other Latin American countries struggle to make a living creating film, find a large enough audience for their movies, and make their movies impactful yet non-offensive. [3] In Bolivia and Argentina filmmakers have been forced to flee the country as a result of film and censorship laws. [3] In the extreme, documentary film makers in Bolivia have been arrested for defamation in their films. [4]
Within Bolivia, powerful, wealthy families with connections to the country's traditional political groups control the majority, around 80 percent, of radio stations although there are still a handful of stations run by local organizations, government, or other groups. [5] [6] Independent community stations are about four percent of the total number of radio stations. [6] [2] These stations have gained popularity with Morales as an indigenous president, and these stations are overall more popular within indigenous communities. [6] They have a history of serving as a way for marginalized communities to express their identity and dislike of authoriarianism. [6]
Historically, newspapers in Bolivia have been the root and voice of political opposition with the goal of challenging the current and past political leadership. [7] Yet there are many difficulties related to running a newspaper in Bolivia as challenging the political leadership does not lead to high levels of job security and a secure income. Journalists want better working conditions, job training, for media to be free an unrestrained by the government and financial considerations. [8] There is little advertising for newspapers partly due to low literacy levels. [7] While there have been fewer attacks on journalists, there are still many cases that are waiting to work their way through the court system. [2] [9] Gradual improvements in internet access will lead to new environments and opportunities for newspapers and media in Bolivia. [2] [8] [9]
In June 2017, Bolivia joined 16 other countries in rejecting a UN Human Rights Commission resolution affirming the right to a free, uncensored internet". [10] However, the Bolivian state practices little internet censorship. [11]
As a result of historically racist communication between Bolivians of European descent and indigenous Bolivians, Morales created an anti-racism law that prevents against publishing racist media with the goal of protecting indigenous communities. [9] The bill was signed into law on October 8, 2010. Upon its adoption, critics claimed that the law defined "racism" too loosely. The bill was passed during protests by media outlets, who expressed concern over the possibility that the bill could be abused in order to censor or close media outlets that criticize the government. Despite the protests, the bill was passed without amendments. [12]
As of February 2014, no convictions under the anti-racism had been recorded. [13] Due to this lack of convictions, the legislation has been widely criticized by the Bolivian media as being a dead letter. [14]
In the past couple of years, Morales has tweeted and talked about the possibility of regulating social media, but he was faced with strong opposition and proceeded to abandon the plan. [15] The idea of this stemmed from tweets that Morales saw as bullying or threatening to his reputation. [15] The opposition's case was that there were many more possible opportunities for the government to utilize and embrace social media rather than censor it and be afraid of it. [1] They were also afraid that the proposed social media regulation law would resemble the anti-racism bill's vague and broad language. [1]
Mass media in Venezuela comprise the mass and niche news and information communications infrastructure of Venezuela. Thus, the media of Venezuela consist of several different types of communications media: television, radio, newspapers, magazines, cinema, and Internet-based news outlets and websites. Venezuela also has a strong music industry and arts scene.
Telecommunications in Bolivia includes radio, television, fixed and mobile telephones, and the Internet.
Censorship in South Korea is implemented by various laws that were included in the constitution as well as acts passed by the National Assembly over the decades since 1948. These include the National Security Act, whereby the government may limit the expression of ideas that it perceives "praise or incite the activities of anti-state individuals or groups". Censorship was particularly severe during the country's authoritarian era, with freedom of expression being non-existent, which lasted from 1948 to 1993.
Bolivia's constitution and laws technically guarantee a wide range of human rights, but in practice these rights very often fail to be respected and enforced. “The result of perpetual rights violations by the Bolivian government against its people,” according to the Foundation for Sustainable Development, “has fueled a palpable sense of desperation and anger throughout the country.”
The mass media in Georgia refers to mass media outlets based in the Republic of Georgia. Television, magazines, and newspapers are all operated by both state-owned and for-profit corporations which depend on advertising, subscription, and other sales-related revenues. The Constitution of Georgia guarantees freedom of speech. Georgia is the only country in its immediate neighborhood where the press is not deemed unfree. As a country in transition, the Georgian media system is under transformation.
Censorship in Turkey is regulated by domestic and international legislation, the latter taking precedence over domestic law, according to Article 90 of the Constitution of Turkey.
Before the independence from the Soviet Union (USSR) in 1990, Lithuanian print media sector served mainly as a propaganda instrument of the Communist Party of Lithuania (LKP). Alternative and uncontrolled press began to appear in the country starting from 1988, when the Initiative Group of the Reform Movement of Lithuania Sąjūdis was established. After the declaration of independence the government stopped interfering in the media outlets which for the most part were first privatised to their journalists and employees and later to local businessman and companies. Currently media ownership in Lithuania is concentrated among a small number of domestic and foreign companies.
Television, magazines, and newspapers have all been operated by both state-owned and for-profit corporations which depend on advertising, subscription, and other sales-related revenues. Even though the Constitution of Russia guarantees freedom of speech, the press has been plagued by both government censorship and self-censorship.
The print, broadcast and online mass media in Burma has undergone strict censorship and regulation since the 1962 Burmese coup d'état. The constitution provides for freedom of speech and the press; however, the government prohibits the exercise of these rights in practice. Reporters Without Borders ranked Burma 174th out of 178 in its 2010 Press Freedom Index, ahead of just Iran, Turkmenistan, North Korea, and Eritrea. In 2015, Burma moved up to 144th place, ahead of many of its ASEAN neighbours such as Singapore, as a result of political changes in the country.
Censorship in Venezuela refers to all actions which can be considered as suppression in speech in the country. More recently, Reporters Without Borders ranked Venezuela 159th out of 180 countries in its World Press Freedom Index 2023 and classified Venezuela's freedom of information in the "very difficult situation" level.
Ukraine was in 96th place out of 180 countries listed in the 2020 World Press Freedom Index, having returned to top 100 of this list for the first time since 2009, but dropped down one spot to 97th place in 2021, being characterized as being in a "difficult situation".
Mass media regulations are a form of media policy with rules enforced by the jurisdiction of law. Guidelines for media use differ across the world. This regulation, via law, rules or procedures, can have various goals, for example intervention to protect a stated "public interest", or encouraging competition and an effective media market, or establishing common technical standards.
Mass media in Zambia consist of several different types of communications media: television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet-based Web sites. The Ministry of Information, Broadcasting Services and Tourism is in charge of the Zambian News Agency which was founded in 1969. Due to the decolonization of the country, it ultimately allowed the media sector of the country to flourish, and enabled the establishment of multiple different new outlets, as well as established a new news consumption culture that wasn't previously known to Zambia. Furthermore, due to the short-wave capabilities, and international increase in production, demand, and sales of the transistor-radios in the country it made it increasingly more difficult to control the media outlets throughout Zambia by the leaders of the government.
The mass media in Qatar relays information and data in Qatar by means of television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines and the internet. Qatar has established itself as a leading regional figure in mass media over the past decade. Al Jazeera, a global news network which was established in 1996, has become the foundation of the media sector. The country uses media to brand itself and raise its international profile.
Various television networks, newspapers, and radio stations operate within Rwanda. These forms of mass media serve the Rwandan community by disseminating necessary information among the general public. They are regulated by the self-regulatory body.
Corruption in Bolivia is a major problem that has been called an accepted part of life in the country. It can be found at all levels of Bolivian society. Citizens of the country perceive the judiciary, police and public administration generally as the country's most corrupt. Corruption is also widespread among officials who are supposed to control the illegal drug trade and among those working in and with extractive industries.
Laos has one of the most restrictive media environments in the world. In 2020, Reporters Without Borders ranked Laos 172 out of 179 on its annual Press Freedom Index, behind countries such as Cuba and Iran.
Censorship in Nepal consists of suppression on the expression of political opinion, religious aspect, and obscenity. The Constitution of Nepal guarantees the fundamental rights of citizens, including the freedom of expression. The right to freedom of expression includes the freedom of opinion and thought no matter what a source is. As the Constitution has been developed to push forward democracy, inconsistencies of the Constitution reform create different meanings of prohibiting censorship. The 2004, 2009, and 2015 Constitution are infamous with the restrictions of the rights which are obscure and open for misinterpretation compared to the Constitution announced in 1990.
This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in Africa provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in Africa.
Journalism during the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines—a fourteen year period between the declaration of Martial Law in September 1972 until the People Power Revolution in February 1986—was heavily restricted under the dictatorial rule of President Ferdinand Marcos in order to suppress political opposition and prevent criticism of his administration.
