How much precedent is there for this? Are there parallels for other countries? Does the US prohibit any news agencies from operating in our borders? Does Europe? Does Russia? Does China?
I presume North Korea does, but I don't actually know. These aren't designed to be leading questions. I don't know the answers, and rather than searching, I figured someone else here might know offhand.
I'll try to tackle this as objectively as possible.
Not many countries enshrine press freedom as a constitutional right. US can't directly shut down news agencies by law but there are other less direct ways to restrict their ability to operate (like not granting visas). The US has all sorts of fringe news outlets, including some run by cults like Falun Gong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Tang_Dynasty_Television )
Europe likes to claim they support press freedom but they banned RT in many countries. Looking at the press freedom index my kneejerk is to rank a lot of their countries lower, but then I remembered there's a habit of suing or disappearing journalists in the US that probe into larger corps.
As for Russia/DPRK/China, laws heavily restrict reporting. These are all way worse than Israel's current restrictions. DPRK has fully centralized mass media, so any other reporting inside is illegal by default without explicit approval of the state. China and Russia I think allows some reporting, basically anything appearing critical of nations of China or Russia can get you jailed/killed.
RT was heavily censored in the USA and is banned in several European countries. Press censorship is pretty much the norm in 'western democracies' similar to everywhere else.
I don't know of any outright censorship of it, but all US journalists who worked for it were no longer allowed to after the outbreak of the war. If money is speech under citizens united, then pay for journalism would seem like it could possibly be protected under the same standard, though I think election funding is still allowed to be banned from foreign states even if they use super-PACs.
How heavily has RT been censored in the USA? Has the government ever censored it or pressured others to censor it, or is it just that links/rebroadcasts have been dropped by private entities of their own volition?
It hasn't been. Probably more accurate to state that when it was carried on cable media they broadcast a bowdlerized version. Al Jazeera did the same thing when it was carried by cable/satellite in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_America
Like any decision, the difference is how it is made (e.g. a vote in parliament versus an executive order), how long it remains in force (a limited time while a investigation is done versus indefinitely), and how accountable the decision makers are.
All countries are on a spectrum, there is no clear line between shiny democracy and brutal dictatorship. They all have institutions that look similar on the surface. A democracy is not going to stop having a police force just because some police states also have one, for example.
So yes, some democracies ban some media spreading propaganda for foreign interests, but the details matter.
WW2 provides ample examples. Information is part of warfare
Russia is certainly jailing journalists. As example, Evan Gershkovich, a Wall Street Journal reporter, is currently imprisoned: https://www.wsj.com/news/evan-gershkovich.
Nowadays, every country has an interest in preventing foreign influence operations across traditional and social media
I believe RT (which is Russian but produced some interesting journalism once in a while) was banned in Europe (or at least it is in France). I don't even know what to think about it...
Maybe in theory, but there are no mechanisms or jurisdiction to enforce the ban in many countries. It's not like we have country wide firewall here. Blocks usually happen at ISP DNS server level, and that means very little these days.
> TikTok wasn't banned explicitly. They are required to divest within a year. If they don't, then the app becomes banned
Note, too, the difference between the app being banned and the source being banned. TikTok.com will continue to resolve even if they remain under Chinese control.
Its not but it is being banned because people are getting their news from there and its not following the right narrative that the 'real' news agencies are failing at peddling to the public.
Then again I could be wrong and the U.S government just doesn't like people people dancing, hard to tell which one is the reason behind it all.
Like sibling said, they've been pretty clear on the why. They called an emergency session and Senator Ricketts was pretty clear that they view pro-Palestinian tiktok content as Chinese propaganda that's inciting the youth to protest[0].
The administration has been threatening tiktok for two Presidental terms, but it wasn't until pro-Palestinian tiktok content had "more reach than the top 10 US news sites, combined" that they've taken broad bipartisan action.
I've personally experienced the propaganda that US mainstream media doles out, I know it's real; in my mind this smacks of leaders reacting in fear to the erosion of control over what the American people can know about what's happening in the war. This lines up exactly with Israel's muting of Al Jazzera.
Pretty amusing to watch sibling's link of Mitt Romney and the interviewer haltingly say "narrative" in hushed tones, like they know it's some kind of dirty word.
The thing with propaganda is that it needs to have parts rooted in truth in order to be effective outside total information control; I consider the ability to consume everyone's propaganda an essential tool in distilling the most truth possible in a world where media and leadership across the world are openly concerned with the breakdown of their PR (read propaganda).
Watching the clip is just the usual "Who you gonna believe? us our your lying eyes?". Thing is that the days of a media fully controlling the narrative are gone. Before it was easier since all you had were rumors of what was really going on but now anyone can take video and give direct proof, how are you going to Baghdad-Bob your way into the narrative you want?.
The best they can aim for is trying to create a narrative that at least somewhat aligns with the reality that is impossible to fully hide now.
The United States right of free speech is uniquely strong. That's why we're all just sitting here acting completely blase about bad faith propaganda destroying us.
I presume North Korea does, but I don't actually know. These aren't designed to be leading questions. I don't know the answers, and rather than searching, I figured someone else here might know offhand.