At first glance, the very idea of analysing the freedom of the media and of researching censorship in Switzerland seems absurd. After all, the Federal Constitution explicitly guarantees freedom of the media, and censorship is forbidden. Furthermore, this small, federal, multilingual and multicultural landlocked country in the middle of Europe is universally praised as a model of democracy. Indeed, in a country whose people have a far greater say in government than anywhere else, one could easily assume that the freedom of the media is a foregone conclusion. Yet, in reality, this shining image is more than a little tarnished. The "Prototype for Europe" – as the former Federal President of Germany Richard von Weizsäcker once described Switzerland – experiences the same forms and mechanisms of censorship as any other democratic country. Of course, in Switzerland "undesirable" journalists are not threatened with murder, but critically discerning authors do risk becoming social outcasts. Switzerland prohibits governmental pre-censorship, but the advertising industry has on occasion attempted to shape the content of the media by means of post-publication censorship in the form of boycotts. Switzerland is a constitutional state, yet the paragraphs of its penal and civil codes hang over media workers like the sword of Damocles. Then there are structural problems such as the lack of proper journalistic education. However one looks at it, the freedom of the media in Switzerland is officially, materially and structurally restricted. However, most people remain unconcerned by and indeed unaware of this state of affairs. Thomas Jefferson's reminder that, "to preserve the freedom of the human mind then and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will, and speak as we think, the condition of man will proceed in improvement”*, has long been forgotten in Switzerland. The Swiss appear to be basking in their country’s reputation as a place without media problems. It therefore came as no surprise to us when, both in our quantitative and qualitative research, many of those interviewed were surprised and even irritated at our 2 questions about possible threats to freedom of the media in Switzerland. Some people even felt that they were being personally attacked and responded along the lines that "Instead of fouling our own nest we ought to describe the advantages of our country and our democratic system". Or: "In comparison with Russia or China we are living in a paradise": It seems that only the most critical among the media personnel, media experts and media scientists are willing to pinpoint the problems faced by the contemporary Swiss media. All the others are convinced that we have the best media on earth. This attitude of part indifference, part ignorance and part wishful thinking, was the catalyst for our research on the freedom of the Swiss media and the potential dangers and mechanisms which threaten it. Our findings reveal that all that glitters is not gold and that the Swiss media scene is, in some ways, reminiscent of a Potemkin village. *Jefferson, Thomas, Letter to William Green Mumford, 18 June 1799 (http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/jefferson.htm, consulted 15 June 2006)

Thesis (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the Internet.

2017 has been described as a decisive year for the Republic of Moldova. Following years of economic and political turmoil, it is more urgent than ever before that crucial reforms are not only adopted, but fully implemented – primarily within justice, media and banking sectors. Using a theory of impartial institutions and two central theories of state intervention into media markets, this counterfactual deductive thesis sets out to investigate arguments for and against a system of state subsidies to private media as a tool to increase Quality of Government in Moldova. Through analyses of qualitative interviews with six country experts within relevant fields as well as secondary data, the conclusion of this single case study is primarily confirming previous research indicating on the one hand, that a more social responsible role of the state within Eastern European media markets is a realistic future path, on the other hand that it can hardly be expected soon. Further, the possibility of media to improve Quality of Government is perceived as low – even with sufficient financial resources – due to lack of other prerequisites such as accessibility, accountability and responsiveness; as well as low scores on crucial indicators such as corruption, law and order and quality of bureaucracy. Just like democratic institutions can be destabilizing under wrong circumstances, state subsidies given to wrong beneficiaries within a media market, could undermine democratic legitimacy and accountability. Both findings of previous research – related to state governance on the one hand and media governance on the other – are perceived as particularly relevant in this study of Moldova. However, there have been promising signs lately on economic structural reforms improving the conditions for civil society and media in Moldova, indicating for reevaluating the potential of state support in the future. Further, I recommend greater emphasis put on the distinction between political and non-political owners when examining the effects of media ownership concentration and its effects on governments and societies at large.

This research represents a comparative analysis of the Bulgarian and Romanian European Integration in terms of corruption and media freedom. I argue that, however, both states have multiple common grounds to be analyzed together, as is done in the previous academic research, they take rather different paths after their accession in the European Union regarding their progress in fighting corruption and ensuring free media. I analyze why and how this happens through the theoretical lenses of Constructivism on the matters of identity formation, integration, and spread of values. I will present an overview of the IR academic discourse on the topic, then attempting to fill its lapses in the Analysis section. There, I utilize qualitative content analysis on official reports, issued by the European Commission within these 10 years framework of EU membership in order to investigate the research question. I am to interpret the information from these sources and present the four major aspects of the case, leading to the current situation.

No description available.

The diploma thesis deals with media freedom in the Visegrád Group countries (Czechia, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary) from the perspective of professional journalists. It aims to map how journalists in these four countries perceive freedom in relation to their profession - how they understand the concept of freedom of expression, what threatens freedom of expression or freedom of the media according to them, how free they feel in their profession and what is the trend regarding media freedom in the coming years in their opinion. The theoretical part thoroughly captures the historical development of freedom of expression, its legal protection in constitutional documents and international conventions, the limits of freedom of expression as well as forms of its restriction. It also introduces the most important non-governmental non- profit organizations monitoring media freedom in the world and presents the media environment in each country. The theoretical part also pursues the perception and approach of professional journalists to freedom of expression, media freedom and other journalistic concepts and values. The analytical part then follows a journalistic professional discourse in the form of a qualitative analysis based on semi-structured in-depth interviews with active journalists from the Visegrád...

The thesis presents a contribution to the topic of critical examination of various ways to evaluate and compare the level of press (media) freedom in countries throughout the world. It analyses the process of presentation the conclusions of press freedom indices to the public. The analysis is guided on two levels. First, the form in which the press freedom indices are published is investigated. And second, the media reflection of these publications is examined. The starting-point of this analysis focuses on theoretical view on various definitions of press freedom. First part of the thesis therefore provides the summary of important fields that should not be forgotten by any conceptualization of press freedom. Second chapter deals with the problems connected to evaluations and comparisons of press freedom in general and then in particular concerning the Freedom of the Press index by Freedom House and World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders. In the second part of the thesis, Czech media reflection of the two concerned indices is analyzed. First, the specifics of the Czech media landscape are dealt with. Next, the content analysis is applied that should approach the way Czech media use the data provided by the indices. The thesis then concludes the most serious weaknesses in the process through...

À l’heure où le modèle de l’autorégulation des médias connaît un succès grandissant en Europe, avec la multiplication du nombre de conseils de presse, mais aussi une remise en question fondamentale, suite à l’affaire anglo-saxonne de News of the World, ce travail de recherche tente de définir les bienfaits et les limites du modèle de l’autorégulation en matière de liberté des médias. D’une manière générale, cette recherche tente de montrer dans quelle mesure une responsabilisation collective des journalistes peut soutenir et promouvoir la liberté des journalistes. Pour le comprendre, cette recherche explore les liens entre liberté et responsabilité des médias. Elle montre que si l’État et les cours de justice, en tant que représentants démocratiques, peuvent être les mieux attribués pour définir les responsabilités de journalistes idéalement au service de l’intérêt public, d’autres considèrent qu’il faut laisser aux journalistes le soin de définir leurs responsabilités eux-mêmes pour limiter tant que possible les tentations étatiques de mettre sous contrôle les “chiens de garde” du système démocratique. Cette recherche nous enseigne que le juste équilibre entre régulation et autorégulation des médias dépend alors de la nature du régime politique en place ainsi que des traditions et cultures journalistiques. Elle montre qu’une responsabilisation collective des journalistes par l’autorégulation peut promouvoir et défendre la liberté des médias, lorsque des garde-fous existent pour limiter l’instrumentalisation du système. Elle montre aussi que l’autorégulation ne peut en aucun cas créer les conditions de la liberté des médias. Cette recherche souligne enfin les avantages de l’autorégulation des médias à l’heure du numérique. / At a time when the model of media self-regulation is becoming increasingly popular in Europe, with an increasing number of press councils, but also at a time when the model is being fundamentally questioned following the Anglo-Saxon scandal of the News of the World, this research attempts to define the benefits and limits of media self-regulation for media freedom. In general, this research tries to show how the collective accountability of journalists can support and promote media freedom. In other words, this research explores the relationship between media freedom and accountability. It shows that if the State and the courts, as democratic representatives, can be attributed to better define the responsibilities of journalists ideally serving the public interest, others consider that journalists should rather define their responsibilities themselves in order to limit as much as possible the temptation of state control of the "watchdogs" of the democratic system. This research tells us that the right balance between regulation and self-regulation of the media depends on the nature of the political regime and journalistic cultures and traditions. It shows that a collective journalists’ accountability can promote and defend media freedom when safeguards exist to limit the exploitation of the system. It also shows that media self-regulation can in no way create the conditions for media freedom. Finally, this research highlights the benefits of media self-regulation in the digital era.

This thesis investigates whether institutional journalism should receive special treatment at the hands of the law. Special treatment encompasses the affording of benefits to and the imposition of liabilities on journalistic institutions and the individuals who work for them. The arguments against special treatment are pragmatic and theoretical: pragmatic arguments emphasise, inter alia, the difficulty of providing a definition of journalism, and theoretical arguments emphasise the difficulty in explaining why special treatment can be coherent. The former can be addressed by describing how special treatment is already afforded to institutional journalism, both liabilities and benefits, to individuals and institutions, and showing that some of the problems foreseen by the pragmatic arguments have not proved as difficult as they appear. The arguments that special treatment is incoherent can be addressed by arguing that the credibility and assessability of institutional journalism still provide a prima facie rationale for special treatment irrespective of the rise of public speech on the Internet, when combined with the integral nature of journalism to democracy. Two basic arguments are advanced why this is so. The first, the free speech values argument, is a consequentialist account that holds that special treatment is appropriate when (or because) institutional journalism contributes to free speech values. It is attractive, but presents difficulties, both when considered in the abstract and when applied to the free speech value of democracy. The second, a rights-based argument, based on the notion that freedoms of speech and of the Press are distinguishable, can be based on either on Dworkin’s theory of rights as trumps or Raz’s theory of rights as interests. Raz’s account is preferable, as it complements the free speech values thesis in explaining the coherence of special treatment.