What the US closure of global media means for freedom of speech in Asia

This article first appeared in Volume 54, Issue 2 of our print edition of Index on Censorship, titled Land of the Free?: Trump’s war on speech at home and abroad, published on 21 July 2025. Read more about the issue here.

Kyaw Min Htun, a Burmese editor and reporter, moved from his home in Myanmar to the USA more than 20 years ago, seeking a place where he could finally report freely. For two decades, the USA provided that, allowing him to secure various roles at Radio Free Asia (RFA), which is based in Washington DC. On 15 March, however, that all changed.

Alongside about 75% of his US-based colleagues, Htun was told not to go into work. His job was one of thousands of casualties of president Donald Trump’s sweeping cuts to government-backed initiatives.

“Our hands are tied and we cannot do our jobs,” Htun, who was deputy director of RFA when he was furloughed, told Index.

At the beginning of May, RFA announced it would be terminating the contracts of more than 90% of its US-based staff and shutting down several language services. Days later, this move was delayed due to an administrative stay from the courts.

On 14 March, Trump had signed an executive order to stop federal funding to the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees US-funded international media. It came amid a broader assessment by the State Department of all overseas spending that has so far led to the termination of the country’s support for more than 80% of the global aid projects it had backed.

USAGM financially supports RFA and other media platforms including Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Office of Cuba Broadcasting and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks. Its aim – since its inception with VOA in 1942 to counter Nazi propaganda as a form of soft power – has always been “to inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy”. Collectively, USAGM outlets have created news in 64 languages, reaching 427 million people each week.

In many countries, such outlets are a lifeline, offering a window into what’s happening at home and abroad amid wars and famines, disasters and conflicts.
RFA – which was broadcasting in nine languages in China, Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and North Korea – has been a fixture in Asia’s media landscape since 1996, when it was established to counter propaganda. It has won awards for covering under-reported issues, including the plight of North Korean escapees, the impact of the civil war in Myanmar and the treatment of the Uyghurs.

The Trump administration, however, sees VOA and RFA as “radical propaganda”, and what it calls “anti-Trump content”.

Elon Musk – the tech billionaire and, at the time, a senior adviser to the president – said on his social media platform X that RFA and RFE were made up of “radical left crazy people talking to themselves while torching $1billion [a] year of US taxpayer money”.

While support for some outlets could resume amid several lawsuits that have been lodged against USAGM and the government, many are worried about the ramifications already being felt by journalists, citizens and democracy as a whole in Asia.

The fallout

Aleksandra Bielakowska, director of advocacy and assistance at Reporters Without Borders (RSF), told Index that many of RFA’s regional reporters were journalists working in exile or underground in places such as Cambodia or Myanmar.

Journalists including Mech Dara, who exposed trafficking and scam compounds in Cambodia, and Sai Zaw Thaike, who reported on the mistreatment of inmates inside Myanmar prisons, are being persecuted by their governments. These journalists operate clandestinely to ensure stories from their countries are told, free from state influence.

The funding cut meant RFA had to sever the contracts of most of its local freelancers, exposing them in a region where press freedom is rapidly in decline. Myanmar, China, North Korea and Vietnam are among the top 10 worst countries for journalist safety. Last year, 20 journalists were killed in Asia (up from 12 in 2023) and 30% of global arrests of journalists took place on the continent.

Several efforts are being made to curtail media freedoms in countries across Southeast Asia in particular, said Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

Vietnam is one of the world’s worst jailers of journalists; in Tibet, the Chinese government forbids foreign media from entering; and in Hong Kong, since the adoption of Beijing’s National Security Law in 2020, many outlets have been forced to close and their journalists arrested on national security charges.
Bielakowska said there was currently little protection available for journalists in the region, and the situation could get worse when “authoritarian regimes […] don’t see any opposition from democratic countries”.

Certain authoritarian leaders celebrated the USA’s abandonment of such publications, said Lau. Cambodia’s leader Hun Sen praised Trump on Facebook for combating “fake news”, while Global Times, part of China’s state media, lauded the cuts, claiming “almost every malicious falsehood about China has VOA’s fingerprints all over it”.

“This just tells you actually how impactful that reporting really was,” Lau said, adding that the US cuts had made the work of restricting media freedoms by these governments much easier.

“Press freedom is definitely on the retreat, and what comes in its place is never anything great,” said Rohit Mahajan, chief communications officer at RFA.

A lack of safety globally

Back in the USA, reporters’ jobs are at risk. RFA has put the majority of its staff in its headquarters on leave and VOA has had to furlough 1,300 staff, the majority of whom are journalists.

Washington-based Htun, although among those affected, considers himself lucky. With US citizenship – he sought political asylum in 2005 – he can remain in the country, but many of RFA’s team come from Asia and their US visas are reliant on their work status. For some, the prospect of returning home – potentially to a country such as Cambodia or China where they may have helped to highlight human rights abuses – is a dangerous one.

“With the current administration’s policies, it is very hard to say they are safe even if they apply for asylum here, because they could be denied any time and they could be deported,” said Htun. “This is an unprecedented, man-made disaster.”

Aside from the threat of deportation, the furloughed staff are now not earning and are scrambling to find work. They are among thousands in the capital who have lost their jobs since the wave of executive orders, which have seen other government departments closed or drastically reduced in size.
This means that competition for jobs is fierce, said Htun. The USAGM Employee Association is collating donations to support journalists affected.

Information black holes

Aside from the impact on the safety of journalists, the shuttering of these media platforms, or even just a reduction in their content, impacts the public, limiting information.

It creates a “black hole of information”, said Bielakowska, who added that this would certainly be the case in countries such as Laos and Tibet, which are more closed. In countries with strict authoritarian regimes, VOA and RFA are often the only accessible forms of information other than state-sponsored or heavily-censored media.

This will lead to “a dramatic turning off of a pipeline of accurate and independent news stories about what is happening within authoritarian states”, said Joshua Kurlantzick, senior fellow for Southeast Asia and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. “There isn’t as good a source in Lao, Khmer, Vietnamese, Tibetan as RFA. People will lose touch with the real world.”

Many in Myanmar – where a civil war has raged since 2021 and the military has shut down internet access in parts of the country – rely on shortwave radio for information on the war and wider events, such as the destructive earthquake in March. While the BBC and VOA are available, only a portion of their content focuses on Myanmar whereas 100% of RFA Burma’s content is focused on the country, said Htun. He explained that a content vacuum gave the Myanmar military junta an opportunity to exploit the situation by sharing their own propaganda and misinformation.

Samady Ou, an American-Cambodian activist and youth ambassador for Khmer Movement for Democracy, cannot go home to Cambodia because his democracy work has put a target on his back. He said that there was no reliable media outlet in the country without VOA and RFA.

“Right now, in Cambodia, we don’t have any news medium left that is independent and not pro-government,” he said. “When there’s unjust goings on like land grabs or Chinese big companies coming in taking away land, [Cambodians] have no voice at all.”

US pro-democracy organisation Freedom House ranks Cambodia as “not free” as a result of a “severely repressive environment” driven by the Cambodian People’s Party which “has maintained pressure on the opposition, independent press outlets and demonstrators with intimidation, politically motivated prosecutions and violence”.

Looking ahead

Experts hope the funding cut is only temporary and the USA will see the value in supporting regional media.

Historically, USAGM has always enjoyed strong bipartisan support from Congress across every administration, explained Mahajan, calling these platforms “unique tools in America’s soft power”.

Most USAID funding in Asia has been directed towards peace and security projects, indicating that this has historically been a vested interest for the USA.

“I think there’s a consensus inside of the Congress, even right now, that China and authoritarian regimes are one of the biggest challenges of the USA, and without the right information, freedom of the press and access to reliable information, we’ll have no updates about these countries, and these countries will also manage to spread their model of information inside of Asia, which is a direct threat to the USA itself,” said Bielakowska. Whether the new administration can be convinced of this is yet to be seen.

In the meantime, RFA has filed a lawsuit, claiming the government is unlawfully withholding funds and that only Congress can fund or defund an organisation it has created.

“We are trying to keep RFA afloat as we pursue a legal challenge to the termination of our grant, which we believe is unlawful,” Mahajan said. RFE and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks have also filed lawsuits.

In April, the US District Court for the District of Columbia granted an injunction to restore funding to USAGM, but the government is yet to release the funds. Htun predicts that the legal process will wage on for months to come, potentially escalating to the Supreme Court.

“This drama could take longer than expected – probably two or three more months,” he said.

During that time, journalists will remain out of work and exposed while citizens across Asia will be far less informed.

But there is always a chance that other funders could be found for these media platforms.

“Other states and entities and private organisations could fill some of the gaps in funding for media outlets,” said Kurlantzick, who called on powerful countries in the region to stand up for media freedom by committing more funds.

Lau said it was in the interests of other concerned governments to have access to reliable information, as well as to the private sector operating in some of these countries.

Such is the public support for these media sources that Ou believes the public in Asian countries may also crowdfund to keep them functioning.

In the meantime, Bielakowska is confident that RFA and VOA are used to operating in fragile situations.

“Even with this blow, I still hope that they can continue working on the ground and find ways to support themselves.”

Turkish arrest warrant against Nedim Türfent condemned

International free expression, media freedom, human rights and journalists’ organisations are deeply alarmed by reports that an arrest warrant has been issued for the Kurdish writer, journalist and poet Nedim Türfent on the charge of “Disseminating propaganda in favor of a terrorist organization”. Türfent is currently living in exile in Germany due to the ongoing persecution he has faced by the Turkish authorities. While the arrest warrant was issued on 7 May 2025 by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of Yüksekova district in Hakkari, Türfent was only made aware of it on 25 June. The existence of the warrant was made public by the Dicle Firat Journalists’ Association (DFG) on 27 June.

This is the latest in a litany of threats and judicial harassment aimed at Türfent in recent years. He spent six years and seven months in prison after he was detained in May 2016 in response to his reporting on special police forces’ ill-treatment of Kurdish workers. This came amidst a severe clampdown on public interest journalism, where Kurdish writers and journalists were explicitly targeted. According to PEN International, as a result of his reporting he “began receiving death threats from the police and was the target of an online harassment campaign.” The day after his arrest, he was formally charged with “membership of a terrorist organisation”. Out of the 20 witnesses called during the court hearings, 19 retracted their statements, saying they had been extracted under torture. Türfent spent almost two years in solitary confinement. After spending over 2,400 days behind bars, he was released on 29 November 2022.

As reported by DFG, the basis of the warrant appears to be four news-related posts and retweets Türfent shared on his X account. The charge of “Disseminating propaganda in favor of a terrorist organization”, outlined in Article 7 of Turkey’s Anti-Terror Law (Law no. 3713), has long been used to stifle critical speech or public interest reporting. In 2024, 82 accounts on X, including those used by Kurdish politicians, journalists, publishers and media houses, were blocked by Turkish courts on the basis of this charge, as well as other provisions commonly used to restrict free expression. Other journalists and civil society representatives, including Erol Önderoğlu (Reporters Without Borders representative in Turkey and International Press Institute member), Şebnem Korur Fincancı (Chair of Human Rights Foundation of Turkey) and writer Ahmet Nesin have also been charged under this provision in 2016. While they were acquitted, this verdict was overturned in October 2020.

As Türfent is now based in Germany, the warrant may result in an extradition request. Turkey has long requested the extradition of those in exile, many of whom were targeted for their criticism of the ruling party and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan or for acts of public interest journalism. For instance, in 2017, a year after the failed coup, it was reported that Turkey had requested the extradition of 81 people from Germany. While German courts have previously rejected a number of requests on human rights grounds and in reference to the European Court of Human Rights, we are deeply concerned by the possibility of Türfent being forcibly returned to Turkey. This fear is enhanced by the fact that his visa expires at the end of August 2025.

We, the undersigned, condemn the issuance of this arrest warrant targeting Türfent for acts of protected speech and for his work as a journalist. Speaking to Index on Censorship in 2023 about his persecution, Türfent said: “My journalism was then declared a ‘crime’.” This cannot happen again and we call for the warrant to be retracted without delay. We will continue to monitor the situation.

Signed by:
Index on Censorship
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
Dicle Firat Journalists’ Association (DFG)
English PEN
Human Rights Association (İHD)
Gefangenes Wort
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
European Center for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
PEN Kurd (Kurdish PEN)
PEN Melbourne
Wahrheitskämpfers e. V.
DİSK Basın-İş
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
Stimmen der Solidarität – Mahnwache Köln e.V.
PEN International
Croatian PEN Centre
PEN Norway
PEN America
Vietnamese Abroad PEN Centre
PEN Netherlands
Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD), Turkey
Deutsche Journalistinnen und Journalisten Union (dju) in ver.di
Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte (IGFM)
PEN Català (Catalan PEN)
International Society for Human Rights (ISHR)
San Miguel PEN
PEN Sweden
Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS)
PEN Denmark (Danish PEN)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
IFEX
P24 Platform for Independent Journalism
Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD)
Giuristi Democratici Association – Italy
International Press Institute (IPI)
PEN Esperanto
Research and Development Center for Democracy (CRED)
ARTICLE 19
Articolo 21
PEN Sydney
German Journalists’ Association (DJV)

Who’s the Boss? Trump and Springsteen’s war of words

For many casual listeners, Bruce Springsteen’s song Born in the USA sounds like a glorious patriotic celebration of being American.

Yet listen beyond the upbeat chorus and you discover the dejected life story of a Vietnam veteran who has returned from the war and found it difficult to fit in, readjust to home life and find work.

You can assume that President Donald Trump hadn’t previously picked up on these nuances but now that someone has pointed it out to him, he’s mad as hell.

Born in the USA came out in the middle of 1984 – the year that the eyes of the world were on the country for the Olympics Games in Los Angeles.

It seems that former President Ronald Reagan and his campaign team misinterpreted – either inadvertently or otherwise – the meaning of the song. Reagan name-checked Springsteen on the campaign trail but the rocker later distanced himself from the Republicans.

Springsteen has since used his music to focus on the struggles of the working class and has been more closely aligned with the Democrats, throwing his support behind John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Whether President Trump was aware of the song’s meaning or not, he did not fail to understand the meaning of the comments the Boss made during his current world tour, which opened in Manchester this month.

Introducing his 1999 song Land of Hope and Dreams in Manchester, which he had previously played at the inauguration of Joe Biden, he said: “In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration. Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring!”

If that message wasn’t clear enough for Trump, he carried on ahead of playing the song House of a Thousand Guitars. 

He told the crowd: “The last check on power after the checks and balances of government have failed are the people, you and me.”

“It’s in the union of people around a common set of values now that’s all that stands between a democracy and authoritarianism. At the end of the day, all we’ve got is each other,” he said before launching into a stripped-down version of the song on acoustic guitar and harmonica.

Before launching into his song My City of Ruins, a paean to his home town of Asbury Park In New Jersey, he said that the norms of democracy were being eroded. “There’s some very weird, strange and dangerous shit going on out there right now.” 

“In America, they are persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent,” he said. “This is happening now.”

He went on: “They’re rolling back historic civil rights legislation that has led to a more just and plural society.

“They are abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom. They are defunding American universities that won’t bow down to their ideological demands.

“They are removing residents off American streets and, without due process of law, are deporting them to foreign detention centres and prisons. This is all happening now. 

“A majority of our elected representatives have failed to protect the American people from the abuses of an unfit president and a rogue government. They have no concern or idea for what it means to be deeply American.” 

He signed off with a message of hope: “The America l’ve sung to you about for 50 years is real and, regardless of its faults, is a great country with a great people. So we’ll survive this moment. Now, I have hope, because I believe in the truth of what the great American writer James Baldwin said. He said, ‘In this world, there isn’t as much humanity as one would like, but there’s enough.’ Let’s pray.”

Trump had certainly got the message by this point. He took to his Truth Social platform to call Springsteen “highly overrated”.

“Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy – Just a pushy, obnoxious JERK, who fervently supported Crooked Joe Biden, a mentally incompetent FOOL, and our WORST EVER President, who came close to destroying our Country,” he posted.

He then went on to threaten Springsteen.

“This dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back into the Country…Then we’ll all see how it goes for him!”

So much for the “free speech” that Trump can’t stop talking about.

Volume 53, Issue 4 of the print edition of Index on Censorship looked at how musicians are raising their voices against oppression. Read more about the issue here. The issue was published on 12 December 2024.

Uniting in Budapest to cleanse the image of Hungarian universities

This week, academics from all over Europe are gathering at the Times Higher Education Europe Universities Summit in Budapest.

The conference has the strapline, “Pairing higher education excellence with world-leading research and innovation” and professors and academics including a pro-vice chancellor of Oxford University Anne Trefethen are speaking.

So far, so dull. Except behind the headlines, this appears to be an expensive exercise in academia washing, with Times Higher Education having struck a deal with the Hungarian government to rehabilitate the reputation of Hungary’s universities, with the conference seemingly being a key part of that strategy.

This is a tale of once-respected institutions being captured by power and money. Ancient Hungarian universities taken over by the cronies of an autocratic government that wants to control what is taught and researched, and a respected and once independent UK higher education magazine, bought by a private equity company keen to monopolise on the magazine’s most valuable asset – its global universities ranking list. The biggest losers: those who believe in academic freedom.

Hungary has been under increasingly autocratic rule since the leader of the Fidesz party, Viktor Orbán, became prime minister in 2010. Orbán has spent the past 15 years bringing independent institutions in the country under the control of his party. Public broadcast channels have been turned into propaganda machines and oligarchs with ties to the government have bought up most private media outlets. According to the latest country report from Reporters Without Borders (RSF), those oligarchs now own 80% of the media. 

Orbán and his party have now turned their attention to universities. In 2017, Orbán’s first move was to pass a law (subsequently found to be unlawful under EU legislation) that effectively banned the Central European University from operating in Hungary. The CEU’s main crime was to be independent, a US institution and founded by the financier George Soros.

Orbán then turned his attention to troublesome domestic universities. In 2021, the government transferred 11 state universities and billions of euros of state assets to asset management “foundations” run by loyalists of the Fidesz party. Orbán claimed that this guaranteed the independence of state universities, while most people saw the move as a way of giving Fidesz loyalists a stranglehold on academia. Another slew of universities were later “foundationalised”, meaning they are also now managed and funded by foundations rather than directly by the state, and the small number of public universities remaining in Hungary are now starved of funds. For academic freedom, foundationalisation was disastrous. Hungary’s universities have plummeted to the bottom 20 to 30% of this year’s Academic Freedom Index (along with Chad, Libya, Vietnam and Djibouti).

The takeover and asset stripping of most of Hungary’s state universities by friends of the government set the country on a collision course with the EU. In early 2023, the European Commission excluded 21 of the privatised universities (though not individual academics) from EU Horizon Europe funding for research and innovation, and from Erasmus+ funding for academic mobility, over concerns around corruption and public procurement. Hungary challenged the ruling, but in December 2024, the European Commission upheld its decision. Increasingly isolated and now a pariah in the academic world, the Hungarian government desperately needed help to rehabilitate the image of its universities.

The Times Higher Education (THE) Supplement has an illustrious history. It was founded in 1971 and was a sister paper to the Times Educational Supplement (TES), part of The Times stable. The first editor Brian MacArthur recruited some of the most talented young journalists of their generation including Christopher Hitchens, Peter Hennessy, David Henke and Robin McKie to report on the growing university and polytechnic sector in the UK.

With the early 1990s, came university league tables. By 2019, and several venture capital owners later, THE was carved out from the TES family and taken over by the private equity company Inflexion. Why? Because THE’s Global University Rankings had become big business, influencing everything from university funding and student numbers to UK student visas. There is a lot of money to be made in offering consultancy to universities to help them improve their place in the rankings, or in the words of THE’s website: “we have experienced a growing demand for bespoke, practical insights to help universities and governments alike drive strategic planning and growth across a range of interests in higher education.”

In April 2024, the Hungarian government’s Ministry of Culture and Innovation and THE signed a “groundbreaking deal” . THE, under the leadership of its chief global affairs officer Phil Baty, said it was going to “carry out a detailed analysis of Hungary’s higher education system, analysing its current performance and benchmarking it with successful global education hubs based on THE’s gold standard World University Rankings and review this in light of the ministry’s ambitions”.

Hungary’s Minister of Culture and Innovation Balázs Hankó was more explicit, saying the aspiration was to increase the number of foreign students at Hungarian universities, and have a Hungarian university in the world’s top 100 by 2030. Luckily for Hungary, academic freedom is not one of the measures used in THE’s rankings system.

THE’s deal with Hungary did receive some attention but only on specialist websites such as University World News, which highlight the conflict of interest between running a rankings system and a consultancy to help universities improve their rankings. THE is not the only rankings organisation to do this; QS also run a rankings system and consultancy, but in THE’s case there’s a potential further conflict because the company still publishes an online magazine which is one of the most trusted sources of information in the higher education sector, especially in the UK. Additionally, THE has also recently acquired Inside Higher Ed and Poets&Quants, both large US-based higher education publishers and sources of news.

A research paper by King’s College from 2022, From newspaper supplement to data company: Tracking rhetorical change in the Times Higher Education’s rankings coverage, tracked how over the past 20 years, THE had gradually prioritised being a data company over a journalistic outlet. And what chance is there of THE’s editorial team now running an exposé of Hungary’s university system? Very little, I believe. In fact, in November 2024, THE ran a sympathetic interview with Hungary’s culture minister Hankó without mentioning the contract he had signed with THE’s consultancy arm only months before. However, a cursory search of “Hungary” on THE’s online archive does bring up some past articles that report on and scrutinise the country’s free expression landscape, including a piece from 2017 on the state of higher education in Hungary, and a piece from 2021 on the repercussions of the university privatisation scheme.

Should professors and academics from Oxford and Durham universities and King’s College London be participating in what amounts to an academia-washing exercise by THE and the Hungarian government in Budapest this week? I don’t think so. Ironically, THE columnist Eric Heinze was in two minds about attending a conference about free speech in Hungary back in 2017.

While some in the field believe it is valid for individual universities to buy consultancy services from rankings organisations like THE to help them smooth out problems such as data organisation or ensuring consistent spellings of their name, THE collaborating with authoritarian governments, which have sought to control what their universities can teach, is surely of a different order. What is the point of universities if they are not institutions that can decide their own research and teaching programmes, independent of the government and government appointees?

And surely universities which score badly in the Academic Freedom Index shouldn’t be in the rankings at all. As Donald Trump tries to wrest control of universities in the USA (which regularly top the rankings) and Chinese universities are increasingly shooting up the tables, academic freedom is going to become an increasing issue.

THE is a trusted source of news in higher education, as is the US equivalent, Inside Higher Education. But there’s a threat to independent journalism, and academic freedom, when the company that owns these magazines collaborates with countries like Hungary, which consistently try to control freedom of expression.

Index on Censorship contacted the Times Higher Education (THE) Supplement press office for comment but aside from an automated acknowledgement email, it did not respond by the time of publishing.

SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK