The Economist - USA (2021-02-13)

58 International The Economist February 13th 2021

lence while enforcing lockdowns. The gov-

ernment says that “anyone who spreads

false news will be charged in terms of Sec-

tion 31 of the Criminal Code”, according to

Doug Coltart, one of Mr Chin’ono’s lawyers.

But the section of the law criminalising the

dissemination of “falsehoods” had been

struck down in 2014 by the Zimbabwean

constitutional court.

Some of the new laws are temporary.

But their creators appear in no hurry to lift

them. Mr Orban imposed a state of emer-

gency in Hungary in March last year.

Among other measures it made the dis-

semination of “misinformation” punisha-

ble by up to five years in prison. The state

of emergency ended in June, but Mr Or-

ban’s government reimposed it in Novem-

ber as the country faced a second wave of

covid-19 cases.

South Africa also introduced temporary

legislation in March 2020, as part of a pack-

age of measures to limit the spread of co-

vid-19. It stipulated that those publishing

falsehoods about the disease could face

fines or up to six months in prison. Only a

handful of people have been arrested.

Those who have been prosecuted were so-

cial-media users charged with promoting

unscientific nonsense, such as a man who

claimed that covid tests spread the disease.

So far, journalists have been fairly relaxed

about the restrictions, in part because the

government listened to their concerns,

reckons Izak Minnaar, a former broadcast-

er who works on disinformation issues as

part of the country’s National Editors’ Fo-

rum. Fact-checking of contentious social-

media posts is done by an independent

body rather than one run by the govern-

ment, for instance. But the law has set a

precedent for tighter curbs on the press.

“We cannot make it permanent,” says Siya-

vuya Mzantsi, editor of the Cape Times.

Even as free-speech campaigners in

rich democracies offer support to those

fighting censorship in poorer, less free

places, their own governments are provid-

ing the would-be censors with cover, even

inspiration. Germany’s Network Enforce-

ment Law (Netzdg), passed in 2017, is

meant to protect readers from fake news

and hate speech by requiring social-media

platforms to remove material deemed in-

cendiary. More than a dozen countries,

from Russia to Turkey, have copied this

legislation as a way to suppress dissent on-

line. Many of these countries expressly re-

ferred to the German law as justification

for their repressive legislation. Turkey’s al-

lows the government to remove online

content and reduce the bandwidth of so-

cial-media sites so much that they become

unusable. Jacob Mchangama and Joelle

Fiss of Justitia, a Danish think-tank, have

described the Netzdgas “the Digital Berlin

Wall” because it has accidentally become a

“prototype for global online censorship”. 

None so zealous

Converts to the cause of tackling fake news

are often guilty of peddling the stuff them-

selves. Brazilian politicians are in the proc-

ess of passing a law against fake news. But

the president, Jair Bolsonaro, has down-

played the dangers of covid-19 and touted

ineffective pills. Though he was infected in

July last year, he says his background as an

athlete helped him shrug it off. He is cool

on the law because he worries it will affect

his supporters, some of whom are also

quick to spread misinformation. Alexan-

der Lukashenko, the president of Belarus,

has prescribed saunas and hockey as cures

for covid-19. In a survey of 1,406 journalists

conducted by the International Centre for

Journalists, a non-profit organisation in

Washington, 46% said that elected offi-

cials were the source of misinformation

relating to covid-19 that they had encoun-

tered. They also blamed government agen-

cies and networks of trolls linked to vari-

ous states.

These laws are making journalists’ jobs

harder. In Hungary they have made report-

ing more arduous. Sources are less willing

to talk. Atlatszo, an independent news site

established in 2011, has three lawyers who

do a legal check of articles to make sure

that everything complies with the regula-

tion. Mr Orban’s government has become

more secretive. It is more reluctant to an-

swer questions from independent media

outlets. It has established a central “Oper-

ative Unit” to deal with journalists’ inqui-

ries. As a result questions to local hospi-

tals, schools and municipalities are now

handled by national authorities. In Myan-

mar the “True News Information Team” ex-

ists largely to suppress reports about

crimes committed by the army, which

since February 1st has been in charge of the

whole country.

In desperation some have gone into ex-

ile. Belarusian journalists have fled to Po-

land. Many Nicaraguan reporters have

moved to Costa Rica. After Lucia Pineda, a

Nicaraguan journalist, was arrested and

held in prison for six months in 2019, she

moved her news website, 100% Noticias,

there. Gerall Chávez, another Nicaraguan

hack, co-founded a website called Nicara-

gua Actual but works out of Costa Rica, too.

He still worries that his work puts him in

danger. Last summer he received death

threats on Facebook, including a cartoon

showing him being killed. His parents,

who are still in Nicaragua, were sent the

same animation on a usbstick.

Others are censoring themselves. In

countries that have had such laws on the

books for a while, this is already apparent.

Bangladesh’s Digital Security Act, passed in

2018, imposes hefty fines on journalists or

individuals found guilty of “cyberterro-

rism”. It has created a culture of fear, one

journalist explains, which silences report-

ers. The government does not need new

laws to do so. “Our legal system, our judici-

ary is so fragile that...if the government

wants to harass someone, they don’t need

any piece of legislation,” he says.

Such repression is changing how jour-

nalists publish and where people seek

their news. Some media outlets are mov-

ing onto new platforms, such as Telegram,

an online-messaging service. In Belarus

the government responded to big protests

over a contested election in August by

shutting down the internet and arresting

scores of journalists. Between mid-August

and mid-November subscriptions to the

Telegram channel for Tut.by, a news web-

site, grew by 28%.  In Hungary many pub-

lishers are controlled by the government.

During the pandemic they have published

nothing but articles praising the effective-

ness of the state’s response, says Tamás Bo-

doky, the editor of Atlatszo. His site, by

contrast, has reported on controversies

concerning the government’s handling of

the crisis. He reckons that explains the rise

in its average monthly views from around

182,000 in 2019 to over 285,000 in 2020:

“People were actively looking for articles

about the pandemic which were not gov-

ernment propaganda.” No laws can stop

them doing that. 

Brazil

Russia

PuertoRico Algeria

Bolivia

Uzbekistan

Thailand

Cambodia

UAE

Vietnam

Philippines

Jordan

Hungary

Bosnia

Romania Tajikistan

Azerbaijan

New countries on the block

Countries that have passed “fake news” laws*

March-October 2020

Source: International

Press Institute

*Some form of regulation

targeting disinformation