Since the creation of the internet in the early 2000s, people have used it as a haven for free expression and access to diverse information. But today, it is increasingly regulated or manipulated. Once hailed as a tool for democratization, the internet has become a battleground for control over information. Around the world, governments deploy sophisticated forms of digital censorship, from blocking independent news websites to manipulating algorithms and surveilling journalists online. The consequences for press freedom are profound, as the digital realm becomes the new frontline in the struggle for truth.
Forms of digital censorship
Digital censorship takes many forms. Some are blunt and immediate, like full internet shutdowns during elections or protests. Others are subtle but equally dangerous, such as algorithmic suppression or the quiet removal of “sensitive” content.
In countries such as Iran, India, and Myanmar, authorities have repeatedly imposed nationwide or regional internet blackouts to limit access to independent reporting during times of unrest. According to Access Now and its #KeepItOn coalition, 2023 saw at least 283 documented internet shutdowns in 39 countries, the highest number since the start of their tracking.
Elsewhere, governments use technical blocking to silence specific outlets. In Russia, independent media such as Meduza or Novaya Gazeta have been blocked or forced into exile under restrictive “false information” laws.
But digital censorship isn’t limited to authoritarian regimes. Even in democracies, new regulations designed to curb hate speech or misinformation have raised concerns about overreach. When governments or platforms hold unilateral power to define what constitutes “harmful” content, journalism often becomes collateral damage.
The algorithm gatekeepers
Beyond direct state control, private technology companies have become gatekeepers of information. Social media platforms determine what millions of people see or never see each day. Their moderation systems, often driven by AI, can mistakenly flag legitimate journalism as “graphic” or “sensitive”, burying it beneath entertainment and disinformation.
For instance, coverage of wars in Gaza and Ukraine has frequently been removed or downranked by automated filters that misinterpret journalistic documentation of violence as prohibited content. Against this backdrop, Freedom House warns of the rise of “digital authoritarianism,” the fusion of repression and technology.
Platforms like Meta (Facebook and Instagram) have faced criticism from human rights groups for lacking transparency about how moderation decisions are made and appealed. Journalists in repressive environments face an even more complex challenge: their content can be geographically blocked at the request of governments and targeted by coordinated trolling campaigns and cyber-attacks.
Surveillance and intimidation
The digital age has enabled not only new forms of censorship but also unprecedented surveillance. Governments use spyware such as Pegasus to monitor journalists’ phones, access encrypted messages, and track sources. Investigations by groups such as Amnesty International and others have revealed journalists being targeted.
This surveillance culture erodes trust between reporters and their sources. Fear of interception discourages whistleblowers, and journalists begin to self-censor to protect themselves and those they communicate with. In this way, censorship doesn’t just block stories; it prevents them from being written at all.
Censorship by design: The weaponization of disinformation
Censorship today is often accompanied by its mirror image: disinformation. Rather than simply silencing journalists, regimes flood the internet with false and misleading content to drown out credible reporting. In China, a vast network of state-backed accounts amplifies propaganda narratives while blocking access to foreign news outlets. In Russia, state media dominate search results and social feeds, creating parallel realities that make truth nearly impossible to discern.
This deliberate distortion of the information landscape blurs the line between censorship and manipulation, allowing those in power to claim that “all sides are lying”. The result is a deep erosion of trust in factual journalism.
The human cost
Behind every blocked website or deleted post lies a person affected: a journalist whose work has disappeared, a citizen denied access to facts, a society left in darkness. For independent reporters, digital censorship leads to shrinking audiences, financial insecurity, and professional isolation.
Some journalists adapt by creating mirror sites, using VPNs, or migrating to encrypted platforms such as Signal or Mastodon. Yet even these measures are precarious. Access to VPNs is often restricted, and the constant need to evade censorship drains resources that could be spent on reporting.
The psychological toll is equally heavy. Knowing that one’s work can disappear at any moment, or that one’s messages might be monitored, creates an atmosphere of constant vigilance and fear.
Defending digital press freedom
Defending press freedom in the 21st century means defending the digital spaces where journalism lives. Advocacy groups such as Article 19, Access Now, and CPJ are pushing for stronger protection against online censorship, surveillance, and arbitrary platform moderation.
There is also a growing call for transparency from tech companies. Platforms must disclose their content moderation policies, provide meaningful appeal mechanisms, and publicly respond to government requests that may violate human rights.
At the same time, journalists need digital security training, funding for secure technologies, and international solidarity to ensure their voices aren’t lost in the noise of suppression.
A call for digital solidarity
The fight for free expression is no longer confined to newsrooms or printing presses; it is happening in algorithms, data centers, and undersea cables. As censorship grows more sophisticated, so must our strategies to counter it. Governments, technology companies, and civil society share a collective responsibility to ensure that the internet remains a space for truth.