The John Peter Zenger Award for Freedom of the Press and the People's Right to Know, 1990, Terry A. Anderson / To Report It You Must Be There by Mort Rosenblum, The Associated Press / Tucson, Arizona, April 24, 1991

The John Peter Zenger Award for Freedom of the Press and the People's Right to Know, 1969 / The Editor's Right to Decide, An Address by J. Edward Murray, Managing Editor, The Arizona Republic

The John Peter Zenger Award for Freedom of the Press and the People's Right to Know, 1988 / The Meek Shall Not Inherit by Jean H. Otto, The Rocky Mountain News / Scottsdale, Arizona, November 11, 1988

The John Peter Zenger Award for Freedom of the Press and the People's Right to Know, 1978 / Beware a Homogenized Press, An Address by Robert H. Estabrook

The John Peter Zenger Award, 1959 / Men in the Dark, An Address by Herbert Brucker, Editor, Hartford Courant

The John Peter Zenger Award for Freedom of the Press and the People's Right to Know, 1976 / The Investigative Reporter and The Democratic Process, An Address by J. Edward Murray, Daily Camera, Boulder, Colorado, At the Presentation of the Posthumous Award to Donald F. Bolles, Arizona Republic / January 22, 1977

published_or_final_version / Asian Studies / Master / Master of Arts

The role of secularism in government is an important question following the events of the Arab Spring. This report aims to look at how Turkey and India's political systems evolved in the 20th and 21st century against the backdrop of constitutional secularism. Moreover, this report explores some of the consequences of secular principles on economic and societal progress. Turkey, with a stance that separates religion and state, has had numerous problems between secular and religious groups. This strife has led to multiple coups and cycles of progress and political turmoil. The military sees its duty as guarding the secular principles of Turkey -- a problem for politicians perceived as overly religious. In India, which has a concept of secularism that requires government consideration and protection for all religions, what has evolved is a political system that pits a party devoted to secularism against a party that advocates a more Hindu national identity. In both Turkey and India, some social and economic interests are drowned out by more vocal religious political groups. While both these countries have different interpretations of secularism, the current atmosphere in both countries fosters civil unrest and, at times, violence. On a societal level the rhetoric only serves to divide people. So long as this rhetoric and atmosphere exists, there is a limit to economic progress, societal stability, and international influence. This last aspect is especially important for these two countries, which have broad historical reach. In Turkey, previous restrictions on religion have been repealed by the current government in order to follow more democratic principles, however, many also see this as the first step towards a politically Islamic Turkey. In India, the religious rhetoric concerns the religious minority groups. India is a country with relatively high governmental restriction and very high societal hostility towards religion. Much of this hostility manifests as public violence. The emergence and predicted victory of a more Hindu political party only fuels the public debate over secularism. The challenge is to balance secularism with freedom of religion, and perhaps accept an evolving stance that reflects each policy's limit. / text

Wu, Shujun. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2011. / Includes bibliographical references (leave 31). / Abstracts in English and Chinese.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2006. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 214-225).