De La Salle University - Manila

Ramon V. Del Rosario College of Business

Management and Organization Department

Press Freedom in the Philippines

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Course Requirements in
Business Law
BNG520M

3rd Term, Academic Year 2018-2019

Submitted by:

Mapa, Riz Angeline

Platon, Eszalyn

Submitted to:

Atty. Antonio Ligon

August 19, 2019

I. Background of the Issue

Case in Point: What is Press freedom and what does it entail? How free is freedom of speech?
What is censorship? What is the situation in the Philippines compared to other countries?

II. History

Freedom of the press stems from the 1700s, when the Swedish government passed its first law
on freedom of the press and freedom of information. Sweden’s Press Act of 1766 states that “all
citizens have the right to freely seek information, organize demonstrations, form political parties
and practice their religion.” They removed censorship on printed publications, except academic
and theological writings.

This became the pioneer for more laws on press freedom throughout the time, which has been
adapted by different constitutions and different countries.

Notably, the United States has also codified press freedom in their First Amendment written in
December 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. In the First Amendment, it prohibits the Congress to
make any laws infringing freedom on speech or the press, to wit:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting

the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a
redress of grievances."

In the Philippines. Press freedom is declared as a constitutional right under Article III, Section 4
of the 1987 Constitution which states that”

“No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, of the press,
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for
redress of grievances.”

Press Freedom has not been defined explicitly in the Constitution but it has been regarded as a
universal human right. It was also interpreted as the “right to circulate opinions in print without
censorship by the government”

III. Evolution of Press in the Philippines

Spanish Colonial Rule (1521-1898)

The first printing and publishing press started when the Spaniards came to the Philippines who
started to mass produce and distribute religious texts in their mission to convert and preach
Catholicism to the Filipinos. The first publication in the Philippines was the Doctrina Christiana,
printed in 1593.

In 1811, Del Superior Govierno, the first newspaper in the Philippines was published with the
Spanish Governor as the editor. There was strict censorship, especially those sourced from
abroad. In 1846, La Esperanza was published which focused on the non-controversial issues
such as science and history. Lastly, Diario de Manila also emerged as the best-edited
newspaper which was eventually banned by the Spanish government after 38 years of
publication because it instigates rebellion in the country.

Free press in the Philippines was rooted in Europe, through the Spaniards during its regime.
European publications are mostly nationalistic, which are intended to “raise the level of
consciousness with respect with respect to oppressive conditions prevailing in the country,
then.” (Braid & Tuazon 2008) Since it was the Filipino wealthy middle class who have access in
higher and Western education, newspapers and publications have an elitist origin where articles
were mainly written and published by the “ilustrados.” These ilustrados would soon change the
press landscape, thus the emergence of the “reformists” who wrote controversial pieces to
expose the oppressive colonial rule, while the Spanish government strongly condemned and
banned its publication.

One of the most popular and controversial publications was the La Solidaridad which has
become the groundwork of the Filipino reformists during the Propaganda movement in 1889. It
was published in Spain by members of the movement such as the famous artists and writers
Mariano Ponce, Graciano Lopez Jaena, Jose Rizal, Marcelo H. Del Pilar, among others. La
Solidaridad denounced the Spanish colonial regime to defend progress and extol liberal ideas,
as written by Jaena in its initial editorial. It also aims to “discuss all problems relating to the
general interest of the nation and seek solutions to other problems in high level and democratic
manner.” (Teodoro Agoncillo)

Spaniards have forbidden the publication, and had to punish the writers and publishers from
insurrection and through preclusion from the Church and society.

However, This has sparked more consciousness for the masses with other publications such as
Kalayaan (1898), which has become one of the most important forces that put forth the
Katipunan. Kalayaan has become the organ of the Katipunan edited by Emilio Jacinto. This was
said to grow members from 300 to 30,000. With contribution from its leader, Andres Bonifacio,
they adopted the libertarian ideas in circulation, which instilled “solidarity and independence”
from the cruelty and country’s regression brought by the Spaniards.
American Era (1898-1946)

Free press has become more institutionalized by the Americans where more publications were
established such as t​h​e Manila Times (1898), The Bounding Billow and Official Gazette (1898),
Manila Daily Bulletin (1900), and Philippine Free Press (1908). It was written by Americans and
the contents were pro-American as well. It was until 1920 where Manuel L. Quezon, organizer
of “The Philippine Herald” came out to be the first nationalistic paper under this rule. Similar with
the Spaniards, Americans also suppressed pro-Filipino newspapers and issued suspension and
deportation to the writers. Few of the most popular papers which were controversial were the El
Nuevo Dia or New Day (1990) which was founded by Sergio Osmena, which was suspended
twice and threatened their staff of deportation. The most famous piece was the El Renacimiento
in 1908 which released Aves Rapina or Birds of Prey which said to condemn the American
government through this editorial piece.

The first newspaper which used the local vernacular which is Tagalog was the Sakdal by
Benigno Ramos. It gained popularity among the masses, especially his coverage on the capture
of Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo. He grew popular alongside the newspaper and even gained him a
seat in the 1934 elections. The newspaper called for the immediate and complete
independence. However, he staged an uprising after the elections and was captured in Laguna.
The Americans exiled him in Japan.

Press under the US rule is bureaucratic, and must come from the editors hands which are
usually Americans. Articles were regulated, nationalistic writers were threatened of deportation,
and newspaper publications were suspended. But the suppression of press led to Filipinos
exploring other modes of expression. This time is the rise of using talinhaga or symbolism- the
expression through zarzuelas or plays to keep the independence burning. Two of the famous
zarzuelas written were the “Tanikalang Ginto” (1902) by Juan Abad where Abad was fined USD
2,000 when it first played in Batangas, but Supreme Court later reversed the decision) and the
Kahapon Ngayon at Bukas (1903) by Aurelio Tolentino where he was sentenced to life
imprisonment but later reduced to years. Both were said to tackle triumph of the motherland and
anti-imperialist in nature.

The writers were indicted under the Sedition Act 292 under the American government enacted
on November 4, 1901 which states:

“An act defining the crimes of treason, insurrection, sedition, conspiracies to commit
such crimes, seditious utterances, whether written or spoken, the formation of secret
political societies, the administering or taking of oaths to commit crimes, or to prevent the
discovering of the same, and the violation of oaths of allegiance, and prescribing the
punishment therefor.”

Films, Broadcasting, and Censorship were also introduced in this era. In 1904, first two movies
in the Philippines were produced by Americans. There were also zarzuelas which mostly
showcased Filipino nationalism in the Spanish regime. In 1922, broadcasting was introduced to
the Philippines. During World War 2, there are four radio stations which focused on
entertainment or advertisement.

Censorship was formalized and organized into a board in 1929. Movie censorship was
introduced which created Board of Censorship for Moving Pictures (now Movie and Television
Review and Classification Board or MTRCB (1985)) which "prohibit the exhibition of films
perceived as immoral and contrary to law and good customs or injurious to the prestige of the
government or people of the Philippine islands" (De Vega 1975). In 1939, Philippine movie
industry ranked 5th in the world in film production which were adult themed and contained
realistic plots.

This era was also the commencement of communication education in the Philippines which was
said to be first in Asia. The First Communication School in United States was founded at the
University of Missouri in the early 1920s. In 1919 the University of the Philippines developed
and offered first journalism courses in the country. The University of Sto. Tomas in 1936
established a journalism major in its Faculty and Philosophy and Letters, specifically the
Bachelor in Literature major in Journalism. This makes the Philippines the first in Asia to offer a
formal degree in journalism/ communication.

Japanese era (1941-1945)

The Japanese era was the advent of World War II where all publications suspended except
those used by Japanese. Only the Manila Tribune, Taliba, and La Vanguardia were allowed. All
publications were placed under the Osaka Mainichi Publishing Company. There was also the
creation of the Board of Information established to “control, direct, supervise, and coordinate all
information and publicity of the Japanese-sponsored government.”

Notably, this era also was the time where the first and only Filipino, Gen. Carlos P. Romulo was
awarded by the Pulitzer Prize for Correspondence with the Philippine Herald in 1942 who then
became a Filipino diplomat and got involved in the United Nations.

Post War Era (1945-1972)

The Post-War era was also the “Golden Age of Philippine Journalism” where it was said that
journalism in the Philippines was the most free in Asia. Among the most famous writers and
editors were Mauro Mendez, Arsenio Lacson, Modesto Farolan, Leon Guerrero, J.V. Cruz,
Antonio Escoda, Armando Malay, S.P. Lopez, Jose Bautista.

However, it also caused controversy when the period was also said to cater to large business
enterprises and political groups. It was then called a “manipulated press” engineered to promote
their interests. The Manipulated Press was further explained in Pineda-Ofreneo’s book, “The
Manipulated Press” which documented concrete instances of the predominance of the
publishers' interest over the right of free expression of the journalists.

Among the wealthy clans who owned mass media were the Lopezes who owned Manila
Chronicles, a
Shipping company, and 30 radio stations and television channels. The Sorianos owned The
Herald, dairy, softdrinks, airlines, affiliated with radio-TV network. The Weekly Graphic was
owned by the Aranetas who also possessed sugar and real estate. The Evening News was
owned by the Elizaldes who also are into rope, insurance, broadcasting. Lastly, Bulletin and
Liwayway were owned by the Menzi family who has farm plantations. Relative to this, it is
apparent that Press Freedom would only be attained when favorable to the interest of the
publisher’s owner.

In Pineda-Ofreneo’s book, among those evidencing press freedom stifled was the forced
resignation of Renato Constantino in June 1972 for writing columns in Manila Chronicle where
he wrote against Meralco. It was also documented when Nick Joaquin left Asia-Philippine
Leader for writing columns inimical to the Iligan Integrated Steel Mills.

On another hand, media became a real watchdog of the government. It posed serious threats
on journalists who have the instrument to unravel truth which may be In 1966, one of the first in
a series of murder against journalists was the murder of Ermin Garcia Sr., founder of Sunday
Punch in Dagupan City. He was killed by a government official, for an impending expose on the
involvement of an alleged money order racket. (Maslog, 1983)

Marcos (1969-1986)

For more than a decade, pro-Marcos media emerged and became prevalent to perpetuate
himself. Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law in September 21, 1972. He issued a Letter
Instruction No. 1 which ordered the Press and Defense Secretary to: “take over and control all
newspaper, magazines, radio, and television facilities and all other media of communications
wherever they are', so as to prevent their use for propaganda purposes which would tend to
undermine the faith and confidence of the people in our government and aggravate the present
national emergency' ” Editors and journalists were arrested and incarcerated in military prison
camps.The regime criticized media for having: "contributed heavily to national paralysis and
instability that in the end required massive reforms and crisis government." Marcos decreed that
'pending the existence of the threat of subversion, communist or otherwise, the operation of all
newspapers, magazines, radio and television networks shall re- main suspended'.

He also created the Media Advisory Council with Primitivo Mijares (a columnist and his
assistant) as an agency to regulate media that should conform to all decrees and edicts of the
Marcos administration. It laid down guidelines required of media establishments before they
could operate. One of its guidelines is that it should not write anything that would discredit the
government, which in any way would provoke or arouse discontent or distrust in the
government.

During martial law, press was suppressed when 18 newspapers were shut down. Mass media
was said to be at its point of extinction. Filipinos were fed with propaganda bulletins financed by
Marcos’ friends and subordinates. There was also a prevalent journalist self-censorship where
the only thing they had was to write between the lines. Stories on Muslim rebellion were never
published. The Staff of We Forum, an opposition paper, were jailed in 1982.

Marcos sequestered newspapers and made press only available to his cronies. He sequestered
pre-martial law newspapers because of the oligarchic structure which he said “neglected the
essence of press freedom.” However, he made it only available to his crony, and used his
autocratic powers to put telecommunications under his control. An example is when Marcos
imprisoned Eugenio Lopez Jr.in Fort Bonifacio until his escape in October and Marcos used
Lopez’s ABS-CBN radio television network for free.

He controlled media and enforced legal restrictions on free flow of information, libel cases
against journalists, coordinated only through telephone calls, no taboo topics about their family,
and military interference on the press. The restrictions were listed, to wit:

1) legal restrictions on free flow of information through presidential decrees, letters of

instructions, etc., which contain vague words or phrases such as "national security,"
,'best interest of the state,""emergency," etc. which are open to very narrow or broad
interpretations forcing some journalists and editors to practice self- censorship

(2) indiscriminate libel cases against journalists with "crippling" financial penalties

(3) coordination usually through telephone calls by press agencies of the government
with the editorial desks

(4) unwritten guidelines or taboo topics such as no criticisms on Marcos family

(5) military interference through libel suits by military officers and actual dialogues or
interrogation of journalists.

Amidst the suppression, Filipino filmmakers were able to produce films criticizing the
administration and touched on social and political issues. Among the films were: ​Maynila Sa
Mga Kuko ng Liwanag ​(1975) By Lino Brocka, ​Himala ​(1982) by Ishmael Bernal and ​Sister
​ . (1984) by Mike De Leon.
Stella L

Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster sa Pilipinas (KBP) was also organized to provide a

self-regulation in the broadcast industry which set program standards for media. Government
information officers were tasked to launch massive information campaigns to promote Marcos
image but no plantilla positions.

1970s were the emergence of bomba films or sex-oriented movies which was said to appeal to
prurient interest. Critics say that Marcos encouraged these to deviate public attention from the
problems plaguing the country then. Development Communication was also a developed but
said to be a controversial field of study, which flourished. It aimed to advocate and apply
communication resources to communicate the government’s developments.

Alternative press began to emerge in 1980s. There was a crusade of journalists to fight for
press freedom. People also opted for “xerox journalism” which were news clippings mostly from
foreign publications censored, providing an accurate reading of the country’s situation.
Nationalism was also strongly manifested among youth through Campus journalism. Among the
campus publications which wrote political issues and took an activist stand on pressing matters
were the ​Philippine Collegian o​ f the UP-Diliman, A ​ f the Philippine College of
​ ng Malaya o
Commerce (now Polytechnic University of the Philippines), Pandayan of Ateneo de Manila
​ f the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila and Balawis of Mapua
University, Ang ​Hasik o
Institute of Technology (Ofreneo 1984). There were also publications from the underground
communist movement through “Ang Bayan” and “Ang Komunista.” The radical youth group
Kabataang Makabayan published “Kalayaan.

The assasination of Ninoy Aquino signalled the emergence of “Alternative Media. ”Tabloid
newspapers and radio stations defied government instructions and more of these grew in
number and become more popular since it was regarded as more credible than the pro-Marcos
“establishment media.” Aquino’s wake and funeral was supposed to be suppressed by the
government but it did not deter Filipinos. Alternative press and non-mainstream news prevailed.
People began boycotting Marcos press and booed media persons linking with Malacanang.
According to Magsanoc (1988), “alternative press will go down in history as the only free press
in a time of lies, one that showed there can be no alternative to the truth.” Communication
symbols such as yellow ribbons, yellow dress, confetti were employed. It symbolized the
awakening of the Filipinos for change and reform despite the suppression of the press until the
Dictator was ousted.

Fifth Republic (1987-Present)

In 1987, Press Freedom was enshrined in the constitution under Article III, Section 4 of the 1987
Constitution which states that:
“No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, of the press, or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of
grievances.”
Under the Estrada Administration, information travelled with speed through the SMS, which
was an accessory to his eventual ousting during the height of his impeachment. (Coronel, 2001)
Joseph Estrada called for boycotts against news publishers (i.e. Manila Times and Philippine
Daily Inquirer) At the height According to Coronel (2001), “Although the traditional media-
newspapers, radio and television were covering events freely and aggressively, they could not
keep pace with the speed with which information travelled through the SMS. Moreover, they
were not as interactive as the SMS was, nor did they have the capacity to link individual users to
each other. Throughout the crisis, activists used SMS because it was secure: Text messages
sent via mobile phones are difficult to trace.”

New media platforms for news thrived such as the use of social media, e-mails, and other forms
of electronic web media.

In 2009, the most devastating incident for journalists and press freedom is said to be the
Ampatuan Massacre, which killed 58 people in Maguindanao. 32, which are journalists were on
their way to the Commission on Elections to cover an election-related event to witness the filing
of Certificate of Candidacy of the Buluan Vice Mayor Esmael Mangudadatu, but they were
gunned down by unknown gunmen. Until now, justice has not yet been served.

The most recent case involving Press Freedom is the Duterte Administration vs. Rappler where
it recently made headlines after the Securities and Exchange Commission ordered its closuer
over its alleged foreign ownership. In January 11, 2019, SEC ruled to revoke th Certtificate of
Incorporation of Rappler Inc., and Rappler Holdings Corp. This was said to be purely political in
motive, since Rappler is known to be critical of the administration.

Freedom of Speech and Censorship (Licensing): Other countries

Norway

In the 2019 World Press Freedom Index, Norway has been ranked number 1 out of 182
countries (including the Philippines) which indicates the level of freedom available to journalist.
Their Constitution (The Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway) laid the groundwork for their
press freedom. Christian Adolph Diriks formulated Article 100 concerning freedom of speech:
“There shall be liberty of the Press. No person may be punished for any writing,
whatever its contents, which he has caused to be printed or published, unless he wilfully
and manifestly has either himself shown or incited others to disobedience to the laws,
contempt of religion, morality or the constitutional powers, or resistance to their orders,
or has made false and defamatory accusations against anyone. Everyone shall be free
to speak his mind frankly on the administration of the State and on any other subject
whatsoever.
As of today, their media is not subjected to any censorship or political pressure. Violence
against journalists are very rare and their government are continuously crafting safeguards to
protect them.

South Korea

South Korea ranked 44 in the 2019 World Press Freedom Index, making them number one
among Asia. The election of Moon Jae-in as their new president made it a lot better for the
journalist and the media compared to the previous administration of Park Geun-hye. Though
there are still a lot to work on with regards to broadcasters independence and on the laws in the
National Security (NSL) grounds, their ranking in the WPF Index shows their continuous effort to
improve the protection of their freedom.

Censorship in South Korea mostly involve limitation of anti-state activities and prohibiting
citizens of anything related to North Korea. In terms of the Arts, they are one of those few
countries who fully prohibit pornography, thus Music, Film and the Internet are fully ensured that
they abide by the nationwide censorship of the government.

China and North Korea

Amongst the Asian countries, these two were ranked 177 and 179, respectively, in the 2019
World Press Freedom Index making them the worst in Asia in terms of press freedom. With
their restrictions and policies, it is almost synonymous to NO freedom of speech at all.

North Korea being a totalitarian regime since 2012, under Kim Jon-un, has kept the citizens
under their complete control. All media outlets, may it be local and foreign, continues to be
under their scrutiny especially the information available to the latter. Their official local news
media, Central Korean News Agency, serves as the government mouthpiece and harsh
punishments are awaiting those who try to access uncensored information or sharing
information from considered enemies of the state. There have been reports though that citizens
who belong to the party elite access secretive newspaper, Chango Sinmun, which contains
stories from America, Russia, China and Japan. Meanwhile, average citizens are reported to
get uncensored news either illegally tuning into foreign radios or relies on word of mouth.

China, on the other hand, is not different from North Korea’s situation. The country’s public and
even the privately-owned media are both under the Communist Party’s close control

Freedom of Speech and Censorship (Licensing): In the Philippines

Freedom of Speech in our country is stipulated in the 1987 Philippine Constitution Article III - Bill
of Rights Section 4 which says:
 “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press,
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of
grievances.”

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The human’s experience of the World War II became the reason of United Nation
General Assembly’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10
1948. The voting process was participated by 58 countries including the Philippines, who was
one of the 48 countries who voted in favor of the Declaration. Part of the Preamble and Article
19 were the items pertaining to freedom of speech:

Preamble: “​Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace
in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts
which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which
human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want
has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people​”

Article 19: “​ ​Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right
includes freedom to hold opinions with- out interference and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.​”

These and other articles of the Declaration, generally became the foundation of International
Human Rights Law. This is also being used around the world as their guide to define the
fundamental freedom and rights of each individual.

IV.​ ​Cases

Near versus Minnesota

This case helped the Supreme Court define freedom of the press and the concept of prior
restraint. When Minneapolis newspaper editor Jay Near attacked local officials by claiming in
print that they were associated with gangsters, Minnesota officials obtained an injunction to
keep Near from publishing his paper under state law. The law said that anyone who published a
"malicious, scandalous and defamatory" newspaper article was a nuisance and could be
stopped from publishing such information.

The Supreme Court had to determine if the Minnesota law restricted freedom of the press. The
Court ruled that the law kept certain information from being published - a concept called prior
restraint -- and violated the First Amendment. This case helped establish the principle that the
government can't censor or prohibit a publication in advance, with a few exceptions, even
though the communication might be actionable in a future proceeding.

Bradenburg versus Ohio

This established the Imminent Lawless Action test used to determine when speech protected
under the First Amendment can be lawfully restricted. In Brandenburg, the Court held that hate
speech is protected under the First Amendment as long as it does not provoke violence.

Clarence Brandenburg, a KKK leader in Ohio, allowed a television station to broadcast the KKK
rally he was a part of. During the rally, Brandenburg gave a speech targeting the government
and people of color. Because of an Ohio statute that criminalized syndicalism, Brandenburg was
fined and sentenced to one to ten years in prison.

After filing an appeal and being dismissed by the lower courts, the case then reached the
Supreme Court. In a per curiam decision, the Court established that Brandenburg did not incite
or produce imminent lawless action and therefore, the Ohio statute was a violation of
Brandenburg's First Amendment rights.

VI.​ ​Conclusion/Observation

-Ideas, and words are the most powerful weapon in a society. It could incite mass movements.
-Press freedom is the cornerstone of our democracy.
-Checks and balances
-Manipulated Press
-Prevalence of fake news and the reversal of “alternative media” during the Marcos’ era today
-How free is freedom of speech?

VII. References

Braid, Florangel Rosario, and Ramon R Tuazon. “Communication Media in the Philippines:
1521-1986.” ​Philippine Studies​, vol. 47, no. 3, 27 June 2008, pp. 291–318.,
www.philippinestudies.net/files/journals/1/articles/1711/public/1711-1810-1-PB.pdf.

Coronel, S. S. (2001). The Media, The Market, and Democracy: The Case of the Philippines.
The Public,8(​ 2), 109-126. Retrieved from
https://www.mom-rsf.org/uploads/tx_lfrogmom/documents/19-167_import.pdf.

E. San Juan Jr. (1978) Marcos and the media, Index on Censorship, 7:3, 39-47, DOI:
10.1080/03064227808532787

Ables, H. A. (2003). ​Mass communication and Philippine society.​ Diliman, Quezon City:
University of the Philippines Press.
Mangahas, F. (1969). Philippine Journalism Yesterday and Today. In L. V. Teodoro & M. Q. De
Jesus (Eds.), ​The Filipino press and media, democracy, and development: the book on the
press and media / Ang pamahayagan at midya, demokrasya, at kaunlaran sa Pilipinas
(Pamana: The UP Anthology of Filipino Socio-Political Thought Since 1872, pp. 66-70). Quezon
City: University of the Philippines Press.

Pienda-Ofreneo, R. (1986). ​The Manipulated Press: A History of Philippine Journalism Since

1945. ​Manila: Solar Publishing Corporation.

Yabes, L.Y. (1952). The Philippine Press and Its Democratic Tradition. In L. V. Teodoro & M. Q.
De Jesus (Eds.), The Filipino press and media, democracy, and development: the book on the
press and media / Ang pamahayagan at midya, demokrasya, at kaunlaran sa Pilipinas
(Pamana: The UP Anthology of Filipino Socio-Political Thought Since 1872, pp. 75-81). Quezon
City: University of the Philippines Press.

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/01/19/1779048/timeline-how-rappler-case-developed#
Ycuu7HIOJdyCv2k3.99

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/11/23/1871089/media-groups-mark-ninth-year-ampatu
an-massacre#0QgzBSrqLEzgzga4.99

Editors, H. (2017, December 07). Freedom of the Press. Retrieved from

https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/freedom-of-the-press#section_1

The Swedish Press Act: 250 years of freedom of the press. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.government.se/articles/2016/06/the-swedish-press-act-250-years-of-freedom-of-the
-press/

https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/brandenburg-v-ohio/

https://www.government.se/articles/2016/06/the-swedish-press-act-250-years-of-freedom-of-the
-press/

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Freedom-of-the-Press-Act-of-1766

​https://time.com/5580170/first-amendment-press-freedom-history/

https://rsf.org/en/ranking#

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl-nat/6fa4d35e5e3025394125673e00508143/eee956c813a2da0e
c1256a870049de0c/%24FILE/Constitution.pdf
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/north-korean-censorship_b_58fe78afe4b086ce58981445

http://www.beaconforfreedom.org/liste.html?tid=415&art_id=552

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/42061/2/Won_Soon.pdf

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/south-korea-is-censoring-the-internet-by-snoo
ping-on-sni-traffic/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/china+censorship

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/media-censorship-china

https://money.howstuffworks.com/10-supreme-court-cases-journalists1.htm

http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/23/Brandenburg-v-Ohio