Freedom House • • Do publishers, digital platforms, and content hosts (including intermediaries such as app stores and content delivery networks) arbitrarily remove such content due to informal or formal pressure from government officials or other powerful political actors? Do publishers, digital platforms, content hosts, and other intermediaries face excessive or improper legal responsibility for opinions expressed by third parties transmitted via the technology they supply, incentivizing them to remove such content? 3. Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? (0–4 points) • • • • • • Are there national laws, independent oversight bodies, and other democratically accountable procedures in place to ensure that decisions to restrict access to certain content abide by international human rights standards and are proportional to their stated aim? Do specific laws or binding legal decisions require publishers, digital platforms, ISPs, content hosts, and other intermediaries to restrict access to online material, particularly that which is protected under international human rights standards? Are those that restrict content—including state authorities, ISPs, content hosts, digital platforms, and other intermediaries—transparent about what content is blocked, deleted, or otherwise limited, including to the public and directly to the impacted user? Are rules for the restriction of content clearly defined, openly available for individuals to view, and implemented in a consistent and nondiscriminatory manner? Do individuals whose content is subjected to censorship have access to efficient and timely avenues of appeal with the actor responsible for restricting that content? Are self-regulatory mechanisms and oversight bodies effective at ensuring content protected under international human rights standards is not removed? 4. Do journalists, commentators, and ordinary people practice self-censorship online? (0–4 points) • • • Do internet users in the country engage in self-censorship on important political, social, or religious issues, including on public forums and in private communications? Does fear of retribution, censorship, state surveillance, or data collection practices have a chilling effect on online speech or cause individuals to avoid certain online activities of a civic nature? Where widespread self-censorship online exists, do some journalists, commentators, or ordinary individuals continue to test the boundaries, despite the potential repercussions? 5. Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a favored interest? (0–4 points) • • • • • • Do political leaders, government agencies, political parties, or other powerful actors directly manipulate information or disseminate false or misleading information via state-owned news outlets, official social media accounts/groups, or other formal channels? Do government officials or other actors surreptitiously employ or encourage individuals, companies, or automated systems to artificially amplify favored narratives or smear campaigns on social media? Do government officials or other powerful actors pressure or coerce online news outlets, journalists, or other online commentators to follow a particular editorial direction in their reporting and commentary? Do authorities issue official guidelines or directives on coverage to online media outlets, including instructions to downplay or amplify certain comments or topics? Do government officials or other actors bribe or use close economic ties with online journalists, commentators, or website owners in order to influence the content they produce or host? Does disinformation, coordinated by foreign or domestic actors for political purposes, have a significant impact on public debate? 6. Are there economic, regulatory, or other constraints that negatively affect individuals’ ability to publish content online? (0–3 points) @freedomhouse freedomhouse.org 39