Who will protect freedom of expression now?

Apologies for another newsletter hitting your inbox that opens on the US election results, but it feels remiss not to talk about something that could have large implications for global free expression. Donald Trump is not a free speech hero. As I wrote on Wednesday here his attacks will start with the media. Where they will stop is anyone’s guess. To say we are unnerved by the prospect of another four years of Trump is to understate. With him at the helm the USA could become a hybrid regime, a country merging autocratic features with democratic ones.

While our concerns are first for the people in the USA, we are also worried about what this means globally. Who will criticise China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the like for their gross attacks to free expression with the same clout as the USA? What terrible things will happen while we are all distracted by the clown in the White House?

But on the note of distraction, I want to end there in terms of Trump and instead talk about other things of import from the world of free expression this week.

First up, Cop29. It starts on Monday and it is keeping to tradition, namely being held in a country that thrives on both oil and the suppression of human rights – in this case Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijan government has long engaged in a crackdown on civil society, which has only heightened over the last few years. Azerbaijan authorities claim they are “ensuring everyone’s voices are heard” at Cop29. This is a lie. Prominent activists, journalists and government critics have recently been jailed, including key voices on the climate crisis. In April, for example, they arrested prominent climate justice activist Anar Mammadli and placed him in pre-trial detention, where he remains.

Such harassment has forced many local activists to leave Azerbaijan. Those who remain risk prosecution and retaliation if they dare voice criticism during Cop29. One person who is not deterred is Danish artist Jens Galschiøt (the artist behind the Tiananmen Pillar of Shame). He and his team are currently transporting three sculptures to Baku to highlight climate injustice. We will be watching closely what happens next.

Beyond Baku, we were disturbed to read this week of a Papuan news outlet, Jujur Bicara (also known as Jubi), which was attacked with a bomb. The bomb damaged two cars before staff at the paper were able to put out the fire. Jubi editor Victor Mambor said that he’s been the victim of a string of attacks, which he believes relate to his work.

As we approach the year’s end we’re reflecting on just what a brutal year it has been for media freedom. Ditto protest rights. Those protesting Mozambique’s election last month can attest to this – at least 18 have been killed since the 9 October vote, with police firing tear gas at protesters this week in the capital Maputo, while in Belarus around 50 people were recently detained, all of whom were connected to peaceful protests around the 2020 elections.

Finally, a good news story, of sorts. The Satanic Verses is no longer banned in India. A court in the country overruled a decades-long import ban on the book. I say good news of sorts because lifting the ban seems to be down to an administrative error. A petition was filed in 2019 on the grounds that the ban violated constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression. The man who filed the petition, Sandipan Khan, requested a copy of the notification that banned the import of the book back in 1988. When he was informed that the document could not be located, the Delhi High Court ruled that it had “no other option except to presume that no such notification exists”. It’s not every day we get wins in the free speech world so we’ll take this one.

On the note of Salman Rushdie, who was our 2023 Trustees Award winner at our annual Freedom of Expression Awards, we’ve just announced the shortlist for our 2024 awards. Click here to see the amazing individuals and organisations who are holding the line on free expression today. And if you value free expression and you have been rattled by the events of this week please do consider donating to Index. We’re a small charity with big ambitions and a lot of that is down to the support of people like you.

Thank you and take care.

All the news that’s fake to print

Hello, readers. This is Sarah Dawood here, the new editor of Index on Censorship. Every week, we bring the most pertinent global free speech stories to your inbox.

This week, headlines have been dominated by the ongoing devastation of the war in the Middle East, where the death toll is now more than 42,000 in Gaza, and more than 2,100 in Lebanon. Monday also marked a painful milestone for Israelis and Jewish people everywhere, as the first anniversary of Hamas’s attacks, which killed 1,200 people. You can read Jerusalem correspondent Ben Lynfield’s forensic analysis on the region’s risks to journalists and press freedom below.

Attention has also been on the destructive Hurricane Milton in Florida, which has killed at least 16 people. The climate event has resulted in human tragedy, physical damage and the distortion of truth, with false information and AI-generated images accumulating millions of views on social media, including a fabricated flooding of Disney World in Orlando. Such imagery has been seized upon by hostile states, far-right groups, and even US politicians to advance their own aims: Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti reposted the fake Disney World photos to its Telegram channel, whilst Republican members of Congress have proclaimed conspiracy theories of government-led “storm manufacturing”. This emphasises how crises can be manipulated and monopolised to stir up division.

But while disinformation can undermine democracy, so too can information blockades. This brings us to some important stories coming out of Latin America. In Brazil, the social media platform X is now back online after a shutdown in September. The platform was banned by a top judge during the country’s presidential election campaign, in an attempt to prevent the spread of misinformation. But as Mateus Netzel, the executive director of Brazil-based digital news platform Poder360 told Reuters, social media bans not only restrict public access to information, but can undermine journalists’ ability to gather and report on news. Elon Musk himself was using X to post about the development of the ban, but this was inaccessible to Brazilian journalists. “In theory, there are journalists and outlets who do not have access to that right now and this is a very important restriction because they need to report on this issue and they will have to rely on indirect sources,” said Netzel.

We also heard frightening news from Mexico, where a local politician was murdered and beheaded just days after being sworn in as city mayor of Chilpancingo. Whilst we don’t yet know the reason that Alejandro Arcos Catalán was killed, his murder is yet another example of journalists, politicians, and other public figures being routinely targeted by criminal gangs. Bar active war zones, Mexico has consistently been the most dangerous country in the world for journalists, topping Reporters Without Borders’ list in 2022.

Meanwhile, in El Salvador, climate activists are being silenced through false imprisonment. Five protesters, who fronted a 13-year grassroots campaign to ban metal mining due to its devastating environmental impacts are now facing life in prison for the alleged killing of an army informant in 1989. The charge has been condemned by the UN and international lawyers as baseless and politically motivated, and echoes heavy-handed prison sentences being handed to climate protesters globally, including in democratic countries. As Index’s Mackenzie Argent reported last month, human rights lawyers have called out the UK’s hypocrisy in claiming egalitarianism whilst disproportionately punishing environmental activists, pointing specifically to the sentencing of Just Stop Oil’s Roger Hallam to five years in prison in July. These two stories, although taking place 5,000 miles away from each other, underline how climate defenders are currently on the front line of attempts to be silenced.

Two plus two equals five in US presidential debate

Who could have predicted that Donald Trump would unite George Orwell and Taylor Swift in the form of an Index newsletter? But that’s the strange world in which we’re living.

This week I’ve been obsessively telling my Index colleagues about Laura Beers’ excellent book Orwell’s Ghosts, which is full of insights about today’s political climate through the lens of the Animal Farm author’s wisdom. One part that’s really stuck with me is the relationship between free speech and the truth, as Orwell saw it.

“Orwell could never endorse a world in which ‘alternative facts’ were given free rein,” Beers writes, reminding her readers about the famous Nineteen Eighty-Four line where Orwell describes freedom as the right to say that 2 + 2 = 4. As Beers points out, it is very much not the right to say that 2 + 2 = 5. Objective truth matters.

Anyone with even a passing interest in the US election will know that this week has been a goldmine for talking points on truth, lies and misinformation. It is the perfect moment to be reading this book.

When ABC News hosted a debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump this week, it was also the first time they’d met in person. After shaking hands, the debate began with gusto, Harris quickly getting under Trump’s skin. What was particularly interesting about this debate though was the on-the-go fact-checking live on air. It’s something we’ve never seen to this degree, and the fact that ABC feel it is needed now is telling.

On the issue of abortion, Trump asserted — not for the first time — that babies in the USA are being executed after being born. Moderators took down the false claim: “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born.”

Commentators on the right were quick to denounce this new era of fact-checking. It was unfairly skewed towards Trump and they were picking him apart more than Harris. There is of course a simple explanation for that, which is that he told more lies. According to CNN, Trump delivered more than 30 false claims while Harris gave one, although additional claims of hers were misleading or lacking in context.

The award for top untruth of the night goes perhaps to Trump’s claim that Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating people’s pet cats and dogs. The internet quickly got to work with memes of The Simpsons’ dog Santa’s Little Helper giving the side eye to cat Snowball II. But ABC moderators were speedier than the meme-makers and set the story straight live on air, confirming that there had been “no credible reports” of this alleged neighbourhood pet buffet.

Of course, the lie didn’t come out of thin air. As The Economist breaks down, the “allegation had been circulating in right-wing circles on social media, boosted by Elon Musk”. Amid anti-immigrant sentiment in some circles, a Facebook post “cited fourth-hand knowledge” about the cat-eating claim. A half-truth is still a lie. And when it comes to a Facebook post based on fourth-hand knowledge being pedalled by a would-be (and former) president, we’re not even close to the realms of a half-truth. Two plus two does not equal four. Two plus two equals Lassie for lunch.

Social media has played a starring role in the misinformation story. Perhaps now is a good time to move on to X owner and tech billionaire Elon Musk’s post directed at pop superstar Taylor Swift.

Following the TV debate, Swift endorsed Harris in an Instagram post to her 284 million followers (to Trump’s 26.5 million and Harris’s 16.9 million, just to demonstrate the sway she has), where she talked about her concern over AI-generated content claiming to show her endorsing Donald Trump. Beneath a picture of the Shake It Off singer holding her ragdoll cat Benjamin Button, she wrote: “The simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth,” and signed off “Taylor Swift, Childless Cat Lady,” riffing off the sexist trope used by Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance towards Harris and others.

While not distracted by SpaceX (one of his other companies), which yesterday launched the first ever privately-funded spacewalk, Musk found the time to post: “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.” If we know anything about Swift it’s that Musk is about to become the villain in an upcoming hit single.

Trump also reacted to Swift endorsing Harris. He said the popstar would “probably pay a price for it in the marketplace”.

Swift might say: “Haters gonna hate”. But when powerful billionaires and presidential candidates are deriding cultural figures for having a political voice, and objective truth becomes optional in a democracy, there is a problem. As this and other elections continue to unfold, it’s everyone’s responsibility to make sure that two plus two continue to equal four.

The death penalty is the new normal in Iran

Yes! Yes Sir! Life is normal
A labourer’s annual wage is worth a dinner abroad
Yes! Of course, Sir! Life is normal
We don’t dare say otherwise, in case we get in trouble

These are the opening lines of Toomaj Salehi’s song Normal. Salehi did dare to say otherwise though and for that he did get in trouble. On Wednesday an Iranian revolutionary court sentenced him to death. The charge was “corruption on earth”. The only thing corrupt is Iran’s regime. 

For those unfamiliar with Salehi, he is a well-known Iranian hip-hop artist whose lyrics are infused with references to the human rights situation in Iran. He was an outspoken supporter of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement. Last year, Index awarded Salehi a Freedom of Expression award in the Arts category. Salehi donated his cash prize to victims of recent floods in Iran. 

Because of his advocacy Salehi has faced continuous judicial harassment, including arrest and imprisonment. He has been in and out of prison since 2021. A moment of respite came in November 2023 when Iran’s Supreme Court struck down Salehi’s six-year prison sentence. The respite was short-lived. Just days after he was released from prison Salehi was rearrested upon uploading a video to YouTube documenting his treatment while in detention. 

On 18 April 2024, Branch 1 of Isfahan’s Revolutionary Court held a new trial for Salehi where the court ultimately convicted Salehi and sentenced him to death. His lawyer alleged that the ruling had significant legal errors, including contradicting the Supreme Court verdict. He said that they will appeal the verdict. They only have 20 days. 

Index has been in close contact with his family, as well as lawyers and other organisations who work in our field. We are shocked by the barbarity of this decision (please read our CEO Ruth Anderson’s article on what he means to us more personally here), as well as heartened by how the international community has pulled together. If you are on social media and have not yet engaged with his case, we have a small favour to ask – do please post about Salehi and use the hashtag #FreeToomaj. Making noise might not change the outcome of the case but we know that solidarity can have a huge impact on the emotional wellbeing of dissidents and their families. 

Salehi’s case is top of the Index priority list. Still, we have been keeping a close eye on the USA, where academic freedom, free assembly and broader First Amendment rights are being put to the test. While we have seen instances of hate speech directed towards Jewish students – vile and unjustifiable – the overall picture being painted is one of police overreach and brutality. There are too many disturbing scenes by now but let me highlight one – a CNN video of Professor Caroline Fohlin from Emory University in Atlanta being hurled to the ground and handcuffed. She had simply asked the police “What are you doing?” after she came across the violent arrest of a protester on campus.

There are immediate concerns for free speech here. Beyond these are two longer term ones. Firstly that this is part of a broader pattern of less tolerance towards protest across the world. We’ve seen it in the UK in the form of legislation restricting where and how people can protest, which has also led to an overzealous police force who arrest campaigners before their protests even start. Secondly that this will provide perfect justification for Trump, should he be re-elected, to further crack down on rights. “Look”, he’ll say, “Biden’s administration did it too”.

We’ve read a lot of good, thoughtful articles this week about the protests, such as this from Slate talking to Columbia students about the situation on the ground, this from Robert Reich on the free speech implications (he argues universities should actively encourage debate and disagreement) and this from Sam Kahn on what it feels like to be Jewish in the USA right now (he takes issue with what he terms a “nothing-to-see-here je ne sais quoi” approach to the protests). We also had an NYU professor, Susie Linfield, commenting late last year here. Do take a read. It feels slightly like wading through treacle right now – it’s easy to get stuck on one argument and then stuck on a totally different one. So we should take a step back and that step back for me came from the Gazan-American Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib when he commented on what was happening at the University of Texas Austin:

“Regardless of what you think of pro-Palestine protesters, attacking students (and a cameraman) during a peaceful assembly is shameful and wrong. This will inspire even more protests and further inflame a really difficult and an impossible situation. Absent acts of violence, harassment, or destruction of property, students have a right to freedom of expression. We cannot lose sight of that.”

Whether in the USA or Iran we stand by peaceful protesters and we will always call out those who seek to silence them.