![Extraordinary Laws
• 30 countries have instituted laws related to COVID-19 that restrict
freedoms of expressions
• 28 countries have censored independent reporting
• 45 countries have arrested online critics
• 13 countries have imposed internet shutdowns during the pandemic
Note. From Censored section of Green Illusions by Ozzie Zehner [Photograph], by Mutant669, 2012, Wikimedia
(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Censored_section_of_Green_Illusions_by_Ozzie_Zehner.jpg). CC BY 2.0.]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to COVID19 and Censorship.pptx
Similar to COVID19 and Censorship.pptx (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
COVID19 and Censorship.pptx
- 2. Extraordinary Laws • 30 countries have instituted laws related to COVID-19 that restrict freedoms of expressions • 28 countries have censored independent reporting • 45 countries have arrested online critics • 13 countries have imposed internet shutdowns during the pandemic Note. From Censored section of Green Illusions by Ozzie Zehner [Photograph], by Mutant669, 2012, Wikimedia (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Censored_section_of_Green_Illusions_by_Ozzie_Zehner.jpg). CC BY 2.0.
- 3. Silence Political Dissidents • Social media posts are used to track and persecute political dissidents • Prosecution is not limited to areas prone to other authoritarian behavior India is a democratic country, but has come under criticism for its censorship of healthcare workers Other democratic societies are following suit and adopting strict authoritarian means to control information and silence dissidents Note. From Demo Freiheit statt Angst [Photograph], by Jurgen Brocke, 2008, Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/29909773@N08/3916073013/). CC by 2.0.
- 4. Restrictive Access to Information • Preventing the access to information • Restricted access to government officials • Restricted access to doctors Note. From Restricted Access-2 [Photograph], by Cory Upshaw, 2014, Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/125672768@N05/15741345645). CC by 2.0.
- 5. Note: From The problem with Censorship is XXXXXXXXX [Photograph], by Cory Doctorow, 2015, Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/37996580417@N01/16182961310). CC by 2.0.
- 6. References • Abazi, V. (2020). Truth distancing? Whistleblowing as remedy to censorship during COVID-19. European Journal of Risk Regulation. 11(2), 375-381. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2020.49 • Berwick, A., Kinosian, S. & Ramirez, M. (2020 March, 25). As coronavirus hits Venezuela, Maduro further quashes dissent. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-venezuela-insight/as-coronavirus-hits-venezuela-maduro-further-quashes- dissent-idUSKBN21C1TA • Brocke, J. (2008). Demo Freiheit statt Angst [Photograph]. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/29909773@N08/3916073013/ • Cendic, K., Gosztonyi, G. (2020). Freedom of expression in times of COVID-19: Chilling effect in Hungary and Serbia. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs. 6(2), 14-29. https://www.doi.org/10.47305/JLIA2060014c • Committee to Protect Journalists (2020, June 15). Internal CDC memo forbids staff from speaking with Voice of America. https://cpj.org/2020/06/internal-cdc-memo-forbids-staff-from-speaking-with-voice-of-america/ • Doctorow, C. (2015, January 15). The problem with censorship is XXXXXXXXX, Budapest, Hungary [Photograph]. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/37996580417@N01/16182961310 • Mutant669. (2012). Censored section of Green Illusions by Ozzie Zehner [Photograph]. Wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Censored_section_of_Green_Illusions_by_Ozzie_Zehner.jpg • Sarkar, S. (2020, April 13). Indian doctors face censorship, attacks as they fight coronavirus. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/4/13/indian-doctors-face-censorship-attacks-as-they-fight-coronavirus • Sherman, J. (2020, August 25). Government information crackdowns in the Covid-19 Pandemic. Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1059&context=research • Upshaw, C. (2014). Access Denied-2 [Photograph]. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/125672768@N05/15741345645
Editor's Notes
- In late December of 2019, Dr. Li Wenliang sent an message of warning to his colleagues about a sickness he saw that closely resembled SARS in Wuhan, China. Out of concern for his colleagues he told them to be careful and to wear protective equipment when seeing patients. Within days, Dr. Li was contacted by the Chinese government and reprimanded for sending false information and for causing panic in the general public. In less than 3 months, the sickness Dr. Li identified and warned his colleagues about would be classified as a world-wide threat and throw the world into a state of unprecedented panic. The time between Dr. Li’s initial warning, and the World Health Organization’s declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic is heavily marked by the Chinese government’s attempts to control information about the spread of COVID-19. The Chinese government put their already extensive censorship mechanisms into overdrive to suppress people’s cries for assistance as their cities were overrun with infected people. Since then, China has faced increased criticism about it’s use of censorship in the early days of COVID-19. Afterall, it’s possible that if China had been open and transparent about the severity of this virus and it’s impacts the rest of the world may have had a better chance to prepare for it’s arrival. But how have other countries used censorship in the wake of COVID-19? It doesn’t appear that other countries have been increasingly transparent with information since COVID-19 has spread across the globe. Quite the opposite, it seems that more governments are adopting censorship policies that mirror many of China’s own policies. This presentation will examine the trend and means by which governments have used the COVID-19 crisis and censorship to further expand their authoritarian powers.
- Dr. Li’s warning was sent to a small group of colleagues, but somehow ended up in the hands of the Chinese government. Instead of listening to the concerns of the doctor, Li was charged with a crime and sent home. But….what was his crime? Officially he was charged with “making false comments” – which was a crime the Chinese government recanted after COVID-19 claimed his life. However, many governments around the world have strengthened or adopted new policies in the face of COVID19 that allow them to control information within their borders, much like China did with Dr. Li. In order to prevent the spread of disinformation, these governments have given themselves the power the unilaterally classify information as harmful, or misleading and impose sanctions against those individuals which range from heavy fines, to imprisonment. Eliza Mackintosh covered a recent report which revealed the dangers that online freedom has been facing since the pandemic began (2020). Here we can see a brief summary of the number of countries who have responded to the pandemic with some form of censorship. These policies that have been put into effect during the pandemic can easily be seen as a way to control information. Not only are these governments directly persecuting journalists and critics, their willingness to act in this manner serves as a deterrent to other journalists who may feel the need to self-censor in order to preserve their safety.
- The ambiguity behind “harmful” or “misleading” information has allowed governments the ability to silence people and organizations that are critical of their state’s ability to face the COVID19 pandemic headfirst. In addition to targeting traditional and digital media outlets, governments are increasingly using social media to target people who have criticized their government’s handling of the pandemic. In Venezuela, a local journalist, Melquidas Avila, was forced into hiding after a poll on his Facebook questioned “Is our local hospital ready for COVID19?”. His poll earned the attention and ire of his local governor, who ordered the state army to apprehend him at once (Berwick et al., 2020). Avila is still in hiding to this day. While Venezuela is officially a federal republic, it has been identified to have it’s own authoritarian leanings in the past. However, Avila’s situation is not unique to just faux-democratic countries. Even democratic governments have taken to using social media to identify people who are critical of their response to COVID-19 and persecute them. In India, Dr. Indrahil Khan was arrested by local police after he shared a picture on Twitter of doctor’s who were forced to improvise personal protective equipment. The doctor was detained, and only released after he made a public post that stood behind the Indian government and their support of their healthcare workers.
- Governments are not just seeking out and silencing people who speak out against them. Many governments are actively denying public access to information. Journalists around the world have been reporting increased hostility from local officials when trying to obtain interviews with key officials or medical staff. In an extreme case of information control, the Serbian government formed a Crisis Staff which is the only entity in the country that is allowed to share any information regarding the pandemic, effectively muzzling an entire nation’s group of journalists (Cendic & Gosztonyi, 2020). In fact, in the United States the Center for Disease Control (CDC) forbade its employees from granting interviews with the news outlet Voices of America. This revelation was ironically made through a Freedom of Information Act request and showed the world that the CDC refused to answer VoA’s requests out of fear of upsetting the United State’s White House.
- The problem with censorship is <redacted> is a fitting ending to the research I’ve done on this subject. But in all honesty, the problem with censorship is very clear. Information is key to everything – it’s key to our survival. Without knowing the threats we face, how are we supposed to be prepared to fight them? While many of these powers are being exercised as emergency powers, how positive can we be that once the pandemic threat has ended so too will this war on information? Will our governments continue to attack our healthcare workers for trying to expose the squalid conditions they are being forced to work in? Or should we continue to bully journalists who are upholding the responsibility to keep the public informed? The COVID-19 pandemic may not be the cause of the global slip away from information freedom, but it has certainly accelerated it in many cases. Countries that already had authoritarian leanings were able to embrace key concepts from other authoritarian examples in the name of public interests. Most concerningly, however, is the slide faced by democratic and constitutional counties. Under the “State of Emergency” countries have used the pandemic to expand the power of their executive branch to control information, censor media outlets and persecute their own people under unclear and ambiguous charges. Ultimately, censorship isn’t done for people’s protection – censorship is an attack on people’s freedom and a means to control people.