Page 140 - Comparing Political Communication Theories, Cases, and Challenge

P1: Irk-Kic-JzL
0521828317agg.xml CY425/Esser 0521828317 May 22, 2004 12:27

Pippa Norris

Limits on the Free Press
Despite liberal ideals, in practice channels of communication can and
often do fail to strengther democracy, for many reasons. Limitations
on the role of the press include explicit attempts at government propa-
ganda; official censorship; legal restrictions on freedom of expression
and publication – like stringent libel laws and official secrecy acts; par-
tisan bias in campaign coverage; oligopolies in commercial ownership;
and more subtle unfairness in the balance of interests and those whose
voices are commonly heard in the public sphere (Sussman 2001). There
are multiple examples.

State control of information, particularly through state regulation

and ownership of radio and television broadcasting, can reinforce
ideological hegemony for autocratic regimes, and this may have
negativeconsequencesforsocialdevelopment(Djankovetal.2001).
In Malaysia and Singapore, for example, regimes have used the press
to stifle internal dissent and forced journalists employed by the
international press to modify or suppress news stories unflattering
to the regime (Rodan 1998, 125–54).
Governments in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia,

among others, commonly place serious restrictions on press free-
dom through official regulations, legal restrictions, and censorship
(e.g., Index on Censorship; The World Press Freedom Council; In-
ternational Press Institute; Inglehart 1998). This practice remains
more difficult in cyberspace, but nevertheless state-controlled mo-
nopolies exert control over access and content through providing
the only Internet service in some nations (Sussman 2000; Kalathil
and Boas 2001).
During elections progovernment bias on television and radio has

failedtoprovidealevelplayingfieldforallpartiesinmanycountries,
exemplified by recent campaigns in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, and
Mozambique (e.g., OSCE 2000).
Statistics collected by media freedom organizations show that each

year dozens of media professionals are killed or injured in the course
of their work. In many parts of the world, journalists face the daily
threat of personal danger from wars, internal conflict, coups, ter-
rorism, and vendettas (e.g., International Federation of Journalists).
In Colombia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Zimbabwe, and Egypt there are
many cases of journalists, broadcasters, and editors experiencing

120