World Press Freedom Day - Part III What Governments and Others Are Doing to protect journalists, media integrity and diversity
 |
| -Image generated entirely by Microsoft Copilot |
In his World Press Freedom Day address, UN Human Rights Commissioner
Volker Türk warned about
increasing media repression and the risks to press freedom posed by Artificial
Intelligence,
“AI-based algorithms often dictate what we see, shaping our opinions and perceptions of reality. Politicians use AI to weaponize disinformation and advance their own agendas. States are also using AI tools to monitor journalists and their sources online, violating their right to privacy. This has a chilling effect on media workers everywhere…….
“(He) called ‘on states to ensure that journalists are protected from attacks, hate campaigns, surveillance, and both physical and legal harassment. He emphasized the importance of transparency in data usage, content curation, and algorithm design. Moreover, he urged states to update media concentration laws to reflect the growing power of AI and tech platforms and to promote a diverse media landscape that supports independent journalism.” Read more here.
What Governments are doing and not doing
So far, only the European Union has introduced comprehensive laws to protect journalists and their sources, media diversity and against misinformation and disinformation.
Its new European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) which came into force
in May 2024 is the strongest action to
date to ensure the free flow of information and to prevent misuse of the media.
Though some elements are already in operation, it will be fully implemented by
August 2025. Some of the key points follow:
1. Protections for journalists include-
· Protection from editorial interference
· Freedom from surveillance and spyware
· Protection of sources
· Prevention of the use of abusive law suits against public participation (SLAPP)
· A rapid deployment fund to help journalists under threat
2. Protection of media outlets
· Protection of editorial independence for both public and private media
· Transparency of ownership and tracking of media concentration across countries
· Support for local and regional publications and small start ups
3. Action against Misinformation, Disinformation and Propaganda
· Large online media platforms must justify removal of content and prevent algorithmic manipulation which spreads misinformation
· AI generated content must be labelled and AI generated news may not be used to spread misinformation
· Freedom from political interference in both public and private media
· Oversight will be provided by an independent body -The European Board for Media Services, which will monitor compliance and enforce regulations against disinformation
4. Protection for Consumers
· Under the provisions of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of 2018, users' data must be kept secure, may not be used without explicit consent, must be able to be viewed, corrected and deleted, by the user.
· Broader EU privacy laws protect users from unauthorised data collection and makes spyware illegal.
The GDPR has served as model for other countries and states including California, Brazil, Japan and South Korea.
California’s Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA, 2018) and its amendments (CIPRA) passed in 2023 is not as powerful as the GDPR, but include the right to know what data is being used for, the right to opt out of data sale and sharing of personal information and the right to request deletion of personal information.
Other Countries
Nordic countries such as Sweden, Norway and Denmark consistently rank highest in the Press Freedom Index because they have a long tradition of Press Freedom. Sweden for example, had the world’s first Press Freedom Law in 1766 ensuring freedom from political interference. Sources are protected and access to public information is deemed a cornerstone of its democracy. There is independent oversight and an ombudsman to handle complaints. Media concentration has started to become a problem in Sweden though new proposals for government support should help small local news services.
While there have been no deaths or physical threats to journalists within Sweden, online threats have increased. In
consequence, it passed anti – harassment laws in 2003 to provide greater
protection for journalists and stronger penalties for perpetrators. Although no
journalists have been killed in Sweden, Swedish journalists have been threatened
and gaoled in other countries such as Eritrea. Iceland unfortunately lags somewhat behind, due to pressure from its fishing industry.
Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms which includes freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, allows journalists to pursue their work without fear of censorship or punitive action. They are also exempt from libel laws, provided a matter is in the public interest and they abide by accuracy and fairness principles. Confidential sources and whistleblowers are protected under the Journalistic Source Protection Act (2017) and its Public Servants Disclosure Act (PSDPA) 0f 2005, which encourages whistleblowers to report wrongdoing in the public sector without fear and there is strong support from civil society in awareness raising and implementation. [Australians can only wish, particularly those who are currently in gaol or facing prosecution!] There are concerns however, that with the rise of AI technology, increased government surveillance and data collection, journalists may be hampered in their duties as "guardians of truth in a world of misinformation."
In the UK print media is self -regulating but agrees to abide by the Editor’s Code of Practice to ensure fairness and accuracy in reporting and has an Independent Press Standards Organisation to deal with complaints. Its Office of Communications (0fcom) deals with Radio and Television broadcasting as well as digital communication.
The UK's Online Safety Bill which received Royal Assent in October 2023 is primarily concerned with e-safety – that is, age -appropriate communication, age verification and removal of illegal content, and places much of the responsibility for this on large digital platforms, but it has been slow to respond to other threats such as “Deep Fakes.”
Australia follows a similar path. It’s Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is also primarily concerned with accuracy and fairness – that is, opposing views of an argument must be presented or when criticising a person or organisation – giving them a right to reply. However, it is not proactive but only responds to complaints by the public. Although Australia has the Public Interest Disclosure Act (2014) which was to allow individuals to report wrongdoing without reprisals, it is undermined by "harassment, surveillance and legal intimidation which may come from political figures, corporate entities and even members of the public."
With advances in digital technology which allow for increased surveillance in the name of national security, public trust in the media and institutions is diminished at the expense of democracy and the public good. Media concentration also remains a problem in Australia, giving proprietors undue power.
As of May 2023, the Australian government is following in Finland’s footsteps by introducing Media Literacy Programs in schools.
While broadcast news in the USA is obliged follow the Fairness Doctrine, Cable TV Channel FOX News, was exempted in 1987 at the behest of Rupert Murdoch on the grounds that there was now such a wealth of media to choose from, it was no longer necessary to enforce this provision. Given the many closures and amalgamations of media outlets in recent years - six corporations control most of the media, that may no longer be the case. At least 21 states have passed legislation or are developing courses or undertaking comprehensive education reforms with respect to media and digital literacy including California, Delaware and New Jersey.
In some places - Argentina for example, journalists and whistleblowers are supposedly protected by law, but enforcement is lax and justice through the courts is expensive and difficult. For the far more complex challenges which other countries face, see the links at the end of the main article here.
Countering Misinformation, Disinformation and "Deepfakes"
To this end the USA has passed its Deepfakes Accountability Act of 2023 which includes legal recourse and criminal penalties for misusing AI to commit fraud, non -consensual use of intimate images and for its use in any activity which would constitute electoral interference in domestic or foreign politics. The Act also requires all artificially generated content to be labelled as such. Click here for full details.
Its National Security Agency has also developed guidelines to help businesses and other organisations identify, defend against and respond to Deep Fake threats and is working with the FBI and The Cybersecurity Infrastructure Agency to develop counter measures.
Tech Industry Responses
Aware that trust in media and particularly online media is declining, a coalition of technology and media companies are creating technical standards which will enable anyone to see the source and history of any content. Project Origin is a Mircosoft - BBC led collaboration to tackle misinformation and in a nice bit of irony, big digital companies
such as Meta, Google, Adobe and Microsoft are using AI to develop real time detection
methods with respect to manipulated content. These
include building watermarks into AI generated content and techniques to detect and remove harmful Deep Fakes and content
which appears to be the result of manipulating algorithms.
Unfortunately misuse of technology evolves even faster than methods to detect it, so we must remain vigilant.
Countering Media Concentration and loss of Diversity
Getting a Share of Online Advertising Revenue
Hoping to tap some of this revenue to keep traditional media alive, Australia developed its News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code in 2021 to ensure that journalists and publishers who wrote and published the news which found its way to online platforms were compensated. Each platform was allowed to negotiate its own terms.
Some 30 voluntary agreements were struck by Google and Meta with individual news outlets which brought some $US 140 million into the Australian media world and initially halted the decline in local and regional news outlets as well as supporting a small number of independent news sources. It also inspired other countries such as Canada, the UK, Brazil and South Africa to begin developing their own codes. Google agreed to a sum of $AU 100 million over 5 years, but Facebook. fearing that a global precedent was being set, retaliated by publishing less Australian news and as of 2024 when the initial agreement expired, stopped publishing Australian news and declined to pay again.
Further criticism came from inside Australia – that there was little transparency and most of the money – went to major media players such as Rupert Murdoch's News Limited– those who already dominated the media in Australia, and were in the most powerful position, while very little flowed to independent outlets.
When Canada sought to implement its Online News Act in 2023, it included transparency requirements, ensured a greater spread of funds to include more diverse media and called for the regulator to report on arrangements and the distribution of funds. Google secured a 5 -year exemption from the Act by voluntarily paying $111 million annually to media organisations. When Brazil and South Africa began to consider passing similar laws, Google also offered a voluntary agreement to avoid such laws being passed. The UK is still developing its code and wants to have less monopoly, greater quality and quantity of publishers not just “money flows from one large company to another.”
When Poland tried to introduce its own media code, Meta punished it in the same way that it did Australia, by limiting the visibility of Polish news on its platforms. Poland may now invoke anti -trust law to take Meta to court.
In May 2024, Taiwan halted passage of its own media bill for fear of tariff retaliation by the USA. However, Google launched the Taiwan News Digital Co -Prosperity Fund and pledged to provide $NT300 million ($US 9.37 m) annually over three years to overhaul local the local media landscape including designing new funding models Indonesia has just passed its own law.
Unfortunately, the unequal power relationship between giant global media platforms and even the biggest newspaper conglomerates, much less the small independent ones, does not make for very fair or equal bargains. As news via online platforms keeps growing, even most governments have little power to stop them, redistribute their wealth or change the way they operate, unless they combine their efforts as the EU has done, including with respect to enforcement.
[If you were wondering why California was more successful in
passing its own bargaining code, it helps to know that it is the world's 4th largest economy and also just happens to be the home of Silicon Valley, birthplace of much
of the world's IT industry].
To counter the ever growing power of the digital giants and stop them absorbing all other media, will require not just political will but international agreements. Much the same applies with respect to the runaway experiment that is AI. Several US states - Texas, Colorado and New Mexico, have now passed laws covering safety and responsible use.
New Threats
Spyware and surveillance has already been used against journalists and investigative reporters - see Italy for example. The latest threat, particularly in the USA is that AI will be used to record, integrate and analyse all the records which were previously deliberately siloed in different parts of government agencies. The risks to journalists, whistleblowers, editors and anyone critical of government are inestimable, but its not as if anyone is going to stop using either Social Media or AI, because to stand still is to be left behind. So how can we head off some of their darker sides? Enter another player which we should be paying much more attention to.
The Role of Civil Society
Fortunately there are a number of groups around the world who are aware of the risks of the technologies we use so blithely. They not only seek to alert us all to the possible dangers but advocate on our behalf. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) for example, is working on the data privacy and surveillance issues. Access Now, is also concerned with spyware and unauthorised government snooping. Our job is to listen to them, support their activities in any way we can – donate, volunteer, share their information, sign petitions and call on our governments to act.
The next post will be about becoming media literate ourselves.
Organisations which support Press Freedom
INTERNATIONAL
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) – Defends digital rights, privacy, and free expression online.
The AI Alliance -Is about developing AI collaboratively, transparently, and with a focus on safety, ethics, and the greater good
Access Now – Advocates for digital security and privacy, especially for vulnerable communities around the world. It provides technical support, advocacy, grants, and events on issues such as internet shutdowns, freedom of expression, surveillance, and artificial intelligence. Very good for finding out what other countries are doing with regard to common issues
Privacy International– Works to challenge government surveillance and protect personal data. Technology must empower and enable us, and not exploit our data for profit or power
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) – Supports press freedom and fights against misinformation and censorship.
Media Freedom Coalition - A coalition of countries working towards media freedom and the safety of journalists and media workers
AUSTRALIA
Digital Rights Watch – Advocates for privacy, encryption, and digital security in Australia
Electronic Frontier Australia – Focuses on internet freedom and privacy protections
Australian Privacy Foundation – Works to strengthen privacy laws and prevent mass surveillance.
Public Interest Journalism Initiative (PIJI) – Supports Public Interest Journalism in Australia, Diversity and Neutrality of news and information
UNITED STATES
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) – Promotes digital rights and online privacy.
Freedom of the Press Foundation – Supports investigative journalism and whistleblower protections.
Fight for the Future – Campaigns against government surveillance and internet censorship.
This post has been written with help from Microsoft Copilot, but all sources have been checked and verified at the time of writing.
Comments