Why Did the U.S. Administration Cut Funding to Voice of America and Radio Free Europe?
However, in the March 2025 executive order to defund and dismantle Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) contradicts this stance. These U.S.-funded broadcasters have played a crucial role in countering authoritarian propaganda in the Middle East, particularly in countries like Iran, Iraq, and Syria, where governments strictly control media narratives.
On March 15, 2025, the White House issued an executive order titled “Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy”, which called for eliminating inefficient government agencies. According to the official White House statement, the order was designed to reduce waste and reallocate government resources toward domestic priorities. However, this decision effectively dismantled U.S.-funded global media operations, including Voice of America, RFE/RL, and related international broadcasting services.
Additionally, in a White House article titled “The Voice of Radical America”, the administration justified the cuts by claiming that VOA and similar agencies had deviated from their mission and were promoting anti-American narratives instead of advancing U.S. interests abroad. The administration accused these broadcasters of giving platforms to foreign adversaries and argued that their services were no longer necessary in an era dominated by private media and digital platforms.
However, critics argue that this move weakened America’s influence in regions where press freedom is already under attack and empowered authoritarian regimes like Iran’s Islamic Republic and Russia’s state-controlled media. This raises a critical question: Is this truly a move to defend free speech, or is it a selective effort to silence media that don’t align with the administration’s views?
- Iranian Activists: Radio Farda, RFE/RL's Persian-language service, has been a crucial source of unbiased information for Iranians, especially the youth, with 10% of Iranian adults tuning in weekly. The shutdown of such platforms hampers the dissemination of independent news and the exposure of human rights violations, leaving many activists without a voice.
- Syrian Opposition Groups: Prior to the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime, Syrian opposition groups relied on VOA Arabic for coverage of war crimes and humanitarian issues. The absence of such independent reporting raises concerns about potential media blackouts and the unchecked spread of misinformation.
What Was the Role of VOA and RFE/RL in the Middle East?
For decades, Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) have been essential in delivering uncensored news and factual reporting to countries with restricted press freedom. Their Persian-language service, Radio Farda, has been a lifeline for Iranians living under strict media censorship. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, these outlets provided independent coverage on war, corruption, and human rights abuses, topics that local state media often suppress.
According to the 2022 Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Press Freedom Index, Iran ranks 178th out of 180 countries, making it one of the world’s most repressive media environments. The Iranian government controls nearly all domestic media, and independent journalists risk imprisonment or worse. Before its funding was cut, Radio Farda reached millions of Iranians through satellite radio and digital platforms, providing a critical alternative to government-controlled narratives.
Why Does Shutting Down These Outlets Matter?
The decision to eliminate U.S.-funded international broadcasting in the Middle East comes at a time when autocratic regimes are tightening their grip on information. Without VOA and RFE/RL, audiences in Tehran, Baghdad, and Damascus are left with state-controlled media, often used as propaganda tools by authoritarian leaders. This shift has significant consequences:
- Iran’s state media, including Press TV, now faces fewer challenges to its pro-government messaging.
- Russia’s RT Arabic and China’s CGTN Arabic are expanding their influence in the region, filling the void left by VOA and RFE/RL.
- Democratic movements in Iran and the Middle East lost a vital platform for information sharing.
By removing these independent news sources, the U.S. has ceded the information battleground to its geopolitical adversaries, strengthening regimes that actively suppress free speech and dissenting voices.
Why Did the U.S. Administration Cut Funding to Voice of America and Radio Free Europe?
Did the U.S. Administration Shut Down VOA and RFE/RL to Promote Free Speech or Control the Narrative?
However, his decision to defund Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) raises serious concerns about whether he was protecting free expression or silencing independent journalism.
These U.S.-funded broadcasters have been instrumental in countering authoritarian propaganda in Iran, Russia, and China, serving as a rare source of unfiltered news in regions where governments suppress independent journalism.
1. Did the U.S. Government Perceive VOA and RFE/RL as Undermining National Interests?
This was made clear in the White House article, “The Voice of Radical America,” which accused VOA of amplifying enemy propaganda instead of strengthening American influence.
However, critics argue that this was less about national security and more about censorship, as many of these reporters were investigating corruption, extremism, and authoritarian abuses in Iran, Russia, and China.
2. Was the Administration Cutting Funding to Prioritize Domestic Issues?
However, foreign policy analysts warn that these cuts came at a significant strategic cost, allowing authoritarian regimes like Iran’s Islamic Republic and Russia’s state-controlled RT Arabic to dominate the narrative in regions where press freedom was already under attack.
3. Did Security Concerns Justify Defunding These Agencies?
Another major justification given for the funding freeze was national security concerns. The administration raised fears that foreign governments—including China, Russia, and even elements within Iran—were infiltrating U.S.-funded media.
- In June 2024, USAGM announced that multiple employees had been dismissed due to concerns over foreign influence in certain language services, particularly in VOA Persian and Arabic broadcasts.
- This US administration placed strict oversight on funding, arguing that the independence of these media organizations had become a liability.
However, investigative reports suggest that these security concerns were exaggerated and that the real goal was to silence independent voices that were exposing authoritarian regimes—especially in Tehran, Moscow, and Beijing.
4. Did the Administration’s War on Traditional Institutions Extend to U.S.-Funded Journalism?
While supporters of this decision argue that these agencies had become outdated, many policy experts contend that disbanding them only empowered authoritarian leaders in countries where access to truth and free speech is already severely restricted.
Where Does This Leave Free Speech?
The decision to defund Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) raises a fundamental contradiction: Was it truly about protecting free speech, or was it about controlling the narrative?
While officials argued that these agencies had become biased, their shutdown empowered authoritarian regimes, giving Iran, Russia, and China more control over media narratives in their regions. The loss of
- Iran’s Press TV, Russia’s RT Arabic, and China’s CGTN Arabic now dominate the media space, spreading unchecked propaganda.
- Dissidents and activists in the Middle East lost one of their last platforms for challenging state narratives.
- U.S. diplomacy suffered a setback, as America lost an important tool for promoting free speech abroad.
The question now is: Can independent journalism survive in these authoritarian-controlled environments?
The Contradiction: Free Speech Rhetoric vs. Policy Actions
Did the Administration Truly Defend Free Speech, or Was It About Control?
However, this decision to defund and dismantle Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) contradicts this stance. These U.S.-funded broadcasters were among the few independent sources of news in authoritarian regimes like Iran, Russia, and China—yet this administration shut them down, effectively aiding state-controlled propaganda.
This contradiction raises a crucial question: Was the government truly defending free speech, or was it selectively silencing media that didn’t align with it’s views?
Claims of Defending Free Speech
Throughout its tenure, the administration frequently criticized big tech companies, accusing platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube of censoring certain viewpoints. It also opposed the European Union’s digital policies, which regulate hate speech and misinformation, claiming that these laws restricted unfiltered speech.
The rhetoric often centered on the idea that the media was unfairly suppressing specific perspectives and that efforts were being made to protect open discourse in the United States.
- In 2020, the administration signed an executive order targeting Section 230, a law that shields social media companies from liability over content moderation decisions. The move was intended to limit platforms' ability to censor users and hold them accountable for perceived bias in content regulation.
- In February 2025, the administration criticized the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), calling it an unfair restriction on American businesses and a threat to free expression online. It was argued that the EU’s regulations enable European governments to control online content, effectively exporting censorship on a global scale.
But They Silenced Free Press Where It Mattered Most
VOA and RFE/RL have long played a crucial role in delivering independent journalism to people living under authoritarian regimes. Their Persian-language service, Radio Farda, reached millions of Iranians, offering an alternative to Iran’s state-controlled media.
Similarly, RFE/RL’s Russian service countered Kremlin propaganda, providing accurate news to audiences in Moscow and beyond. Despite this, this administration defunded these outlets, cutting off a vital source of independent journalism in repressive regimes.
By shutting down these agencies, it actually helped state-controlled media in hostile nations flourish:
Political Strategy vs. Free Speech Reality
- Supporters framed VOA and RFE/RL as outdated, arguing that taxpayer money should not fund global media operations
- However, foreign policy analysts warned that dismantling these agencies only empowered authoritarian leaders, restricting access to truth in regions where press freedom is already under attack
Conclusion: Free Speech or Political Control?
The contradiction on free speech is clear:
- Efforts to combat tech censorship at home stood in contrast to the shutdown of independent journalism abroad.
- While advocating for open dialogue, the policy decisions enabled regimes in China, Russia, and Iran to suppress alternative voices.
- This contradiction undermines U.S. credibility on free speech, weakens soft power, and allows authoritarian regimes to control narratives unchallenged. By silencing U.S.-funded independent journalism, these actions effectively ceded influence to adversaries while diminishing America's role as a global defender of press freedom.
These actions reveal a political strategy rather than a genuine defense of free expression. As authoritarian regimes gain more control over media narratives, the decision to eliminate VOA and RFE/RL may prove to be a historic setback for global press freedom.
The Role of VOA and RFE/RL in the Middle East Before the Cuts
How Did VOA and RFE/RL Provide Unbiased News in Censored Regions?
For decades, Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) played a critical role in countering authoritarian censorship in the Middle East, particularly in countries like Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, where independent journalism is severely restricted. These U.S.-funded broadcasters provided factual, unbiased reporting in places where state-run media dominate the news landscape.
Iran (Radio Farda): A Rare Alternative to State-Controlled Media
- Radio Farda, the Persian-language service of RFE/RL, was one of the only reliable, independent news sources available to Iranians outside of the government's tightly controlled media system.
- In a country where press freedom ranks among the worst in the world, Radio Farda provided uncensored news on human rights violations, government corruption, and political repression.
- Many Iranians relied on Radio Farda’s broadcasts and digital platforms to access information blocked by Iranian state media.
Iraq & Afghanistan: Investigative Reporting on Corruption and Extremism
- VOA and RFE/RL were trusted sources of news in Iraq and Afghanistan, providing independent reporting on topics often censored by local governments or distorted by extremist groups.
- These media outlets exposed corruption among political elites and security forces, which local news agencies often avoided due to government pressure.
- Their coverage of democratic movements, human rights violations, and counterterrorism efforts made them essential for citizens seeking objective information
How Did VOA and RFE/RL Counter Extremist Narratives?
One of the most significant contributions of VOA and RFE/RL was their role in exposing and countering extremist propaganda, particularly from groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda.
Example: Exposing ISIS Propaganda and Weakening Recruitment
- During ISIS’s peak in Iraq and Syria (2014-2019), RFE/RL and VOA provided fact-based reports debunking extremist narratives, offering an alternative to radical online propaganda.
- VOA conducted interviews with defectors from ISIS, exposing the harsh realities of life under the so-called caliphate to dissuade potential recruits.
- RFE/RL monitored extremist messaging and worked with Arabic-language media partners to dispel misinformation that fueled radicalization.
By providing factual news and testimonies from survivors of extremist rule, these broadcasters helped reduce ISIS’s ability to attract new recruits, serving as a valuable tool in the U.S. counterterrorism strategy.
How Did VOA and RFE/RL Strengthen U.S. Soft Power and Diplomacy?
In addition to countering propaganda, VOA and RFE/RL were essential tools of U.S. diplomacy, promoting press freedom and democratic values in regions dominated by authoritarianism.
Promoting Press Freedom and Countering Disinformation
- VOA and RFE/RL challenged government narratives in Iran, Russia, and China, offering fact-based reporting in places where state media suppress dissent.
- Their journalists were often targeted by authoritarian regimes for their work—proof of their impact in disrupting propaganda networks.
Supporting Democratic Movements
- During the Iranian protests of 2019 and 2022, VOA Persian and RFE/RL’s Radio Farda provided real-time coverage of demonstrations that Iranian state media ignored or misrepresented
- In Iraq and Afghanistan, their coverage of elections, human rights, and government corruption empowered local populations to demand reforms.
By cutting off funding for these agencies, the U.S. effectively removed a key diplomatic tool that supported free expression and democracy in authoritarian regions.
Conclusion: A Strategic Loss for Independent Journalism and U.S. Influence
Before the funding cuts, VOA and RFE/RL played an irreplaceable role in the Middle East:
- They provided the only reliable news source for millions of people in Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
- They countered extremist propaganda, particularly from ISIS, weakening radical recruitment.
- They served as a tool of U.S. diplomacy, promoting free speech and democratic values.
With their shutdown, authoritarian regimes no longer face independent scrutiny, extremist groups have fewer obstacles in spreading disinformation, and the U.S. has lost a powerful instrument of soft power in a region where media freedom is already under attack.
The Consequences of Shutting Down These Media Outlets
The shutdown of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) has had major consequences for global media freedom, particularly in the Middle East. By eliminating these independent sources of news, the U.S. has left a vacuum—one that authoritarian regimes, state-controlled propaganda, and extremist groups are now filling.
This shift makes the U.S. more vulnerable in several ways:
- Loss of Soft Power: Without these media outlets, the U.S. has lost a key tool for shaping global narratives, allowing Russia, China, and Iran to control the discourse unchallenged. This weakens America’s ability to promote democratic values and counter disinformation abroad.
- Weakened Counterterrorism Efforts: Extremist groups now have fewer obstacles in spreading radical propaganda, increasing the risk of foreign and domestic radicalization without effective counterprogramming.
- Increased Foreign Influence on U.S. Allies: With Russia’s RT Arabic and China’s CGTN Arabic expanding their reach, many U.S. allies in the Middle East may drift toward authoritarian regimes that offer controlled narratives favoring anti-American sentiment.
Has State-Controlled Propaganda Taken Over the Middle East?
The absence of VOA and RFE/RL has allowed governments like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Syria to strengthen their grip on media narratives. These states already heavily control domestic news, but without external independent reporting, their propaganda now faces even less resistance.
Example: Iran’s Press TV and Saudi-controlled Al-Arabiya No Longer Face Scrutiny
- Iran’s state-run Press TV has a long history of spreading pro-regime narratives, often distorting facts about protests, elections, and foreign relations
- Saudi-controlled Al-Arabiya has expanded its influence across the Middle East, shaping narratives in favor of the Saudi monarchy.
- Without VOA Persian and Radio Farda, Iranian citizens now rely almost entirely on government-approved sources, which limits their access to objective reporting.
The result? State-controlled media in the Middle East are no longer challenged by Western-backed independent journalism, allowing governments to fully control their populations’ perception of reality.
How Are Russia and China Expanding Their Influence?
As the U.S. withdraws from international media engagement, Russia and China have been quick to fill the void. Both nations operate large-scale, state-funded media networks that shape global perceptions in favor of their governments.
Example: RT Arabic and CGTN Arabic Are Replacing Western News Sources
The result? Anti-American sentiment in Arabic-language media is rising, as Russian and Chinese broadcasters promote narratives that portray the U.S. as an unreliable global partner.
Is the Loss of These Outlets Making Counterterrorism More Difficult?
One of the most overlooked consequences of shutting down VOA and RFE/RL is the impact on counterterrorism efforts.
For years, these outlets provided a crucial counterbalance to extremist messaging, exposing the false promises and brutal realities of terrorist organizations.
Example: The Taliban’s Media Strategy—How U.S.-Funded Journalism Countered Extremist Narratives
- During the Taliban’s resurgence in Afghanistan (2018–2021), VOA and RFE/RL played a crucial role in exposing Taliban disinformation, particularly regarding their claims of governance, women’s rights, and military victories.
- RFE/RL’s Radio Azadi provided Afghan citizens with real-time, fact-based reporting, countering Taliban propaganda that exaggerated battlefield successes and downplayed human rights abuses.
- VOA’s Pashto and Dari services broadcast firsthand accounts from refugees and victims of Taliban violence, providing a counter-narrative to the group's recruitment propaganda.
- Without these U.S.-funded broadcasts, the Taliban has greater control over Afghanistan’s media landscape, making it easier for them to suppress dissent, spread extremist messaging, and manipulate vulnerable populations.
Is the U.S. Losing a Critical Soft Power Tool?
The shutdown of VOA and RFE/RL is not just about journalism—it is about America’s global influence.
For decades, these outlets were key diplomatic tools, promoting democratic values, free speech, and fact-based reporting in regions dominated by authoritarianism.
Historical Parallel: The Cold War vs. Today
- During the Cold War, RFE/RL played a crucial role in countering Soviet propaganda. The U.S. actively used radio broadcasts to spread pro-democracy messaging behind the Iron Curtain
- Now, by cutting these programs, the U.S. is abandoning its own tools of influence, allowing authoritarian regimes to fill the gap.
The result? America’s ability to shape narratives, support dissidents, and counter misinformation has been drastically weakened—a major loss for U.S. diplomacy and global democracy.
The Long-Term Impact of Defunding VOA and RFE/RL
- State-controlled propaganda in the Middle East is rising, with fewer challenges to authoritarian narratives.
- Russia and China are expanding their influence, filling the vacuum left by U.S.-funded media.
- Extremist groups now face less resistance in spreading radical propaganda.
- The U.S. has lost a major tool for shaping international opinion and promoting democratic values.
The consequences of shutting down VOA and RFE/RL extend far beyond budget cuts—they represent a shift in global media power, one that favors authoritarian states over free and independent journalism.
Real-World Reactions & Expert Insights
The shutdown of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) has sent shockwaves across the journalism industry, Middle Eastern activist circles, and authoritarian governments. While former journalists and press freedom advocates warn of the dangers of silencing independent reporting, authoritarian regimes have celebrated the loss of U.S.-backed media in their territories.
How Are Journalists Reacting to the Closure of VOA and RFE/RL?
Former reporters from VOA and RFE/RL have expressed deep concerns over the dismantling of one of the last major sources of independent journalism in regions controlled by authoritarian governments.
Journalists’ Perspectives: A Devastating Blow to Press Freedom
Masih Alinejad
An Iranian-American journalist and activist, has been a prominent target of the Iranian government’s efforts to silence dissenting voices abroad. In a recent trial, it was revealed that Iran had placed a $500,000 bounty on her head, underscoring the severe risks faced by journalists covering Iranian affairs from outside the country.
Reza Valizadeh
n Iranian-American journalist and former employee of Radio Farda, was detained in Iran amid heightened tensions following an Israeli attack on the country. His arrest exemplifies the Iranian government’s practice of detaining foreign nationals, particularly those associated with Western media, to exert political leverage.
The result? Independent journalists are either forced into exile or silenced altogether, reducing the flow of objective information in repressive regions.
How Are Middle Eastern Activists and Dissidents Responding?
In countries like Iran, Syria, and Afghanistan, where press freedom is virtually nonexistent, activists and dissidents relied on VOA and RFE/RL to spread their messages and counter government propaganda.
Loss of an Essential Platform for Dissidents
- Iranian Activists: Radio Farda, RFE/RL's Persian-language service, has been a crucial source of unbiased information for Iranians, especially the youth, with 10% of Iranian adults tuning in weekly. The shutdown of such platforms hampers the dissemination of independent news and the exposure of human rights violations, leaving many activists without a voice.
- Syrian Opposition Groups: Prior to the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime, Syrian opposition groups relied on VOA Arabic for coverage of war crimes and humanitarian issues. The absence of such independent reporting raises concerns about potential media blackouts and the unchecked spread of misinformation.
The result? Authoritarian regimes now operate with even greater impunity, as opposition groups and dissidents struggle to share their stories with the outside world.
How Are Governments Responding?
The shutdown of U.S.-funded media outlets has been welcomed by authoritarian regimes, who see it as an opportunity to expand their own media influence while silencing alternative voices.
Authoritarian Regimes Are Celebrating the Loss of U.S. Media Presence
- Press TV, Iran's state-run English-language news network, reported on the administrative leave of VOA employees following the executive order to cut funding. The report highlighted the cessation of VOA's operations, framing it as a significant reduction in U.S. government-backed media activities.
- Chinese State Media, particularly outlets like the Global Times, celebrated the U.S. administration's decision to cut funding to VOA and Radio Free Asia. They hailed the move as a reduction of "radical" media influences and positioned it as a positive development against Western disinformation.
- RT (Russia Today), Russia's state-controlled international news network, has historically positioned itself as an alternative to Western media narratives. In response to the U.S. funding cuts, Russian TV host Vladimir Solovyov shared Margarita Simonyan's (RT's editor-in-chief) satisfaction over the U.S. administration's decision to defund RFE/RL and VOA, highlighting the perceived decline of Western media influence.
Conclusion: A Shift in Global Media Power
- Journalists warn of a major setback for press freedom, as independent voices are silenced.
- Middle Eastern activists and dissidents lose a critical platform to expose government abuses.
- Authoritarian regimes celebrate the shutdown, as it removes a key challenge to their propaganda.
The shutdown of VOA and RFE/RL has reshaped global media dynamics—not in favor of free speech, but in favor of governments that seek to suppress it.
Will the Future of Media in the Middle East Be Controlled or Underground?
With VOA and RFE/RL gone, will authoritarian regimes tighten their grip on media, or will underground journalism and technology keep free speech alive?
Scenario 1: Authoritarian Regimes Strengthen Media Control
- Countries like Iran, Russia, and China are already expanding state-run media, increasing censorship, and restricting access to foreign news sources .
- AI-powered surveillance systems are being used to monitor dissidents and journalists, making it harder for independent voices to operate safely.
Scenario 2: Underground Journalism and VPN-Based Access Expand
- Encrypted platforms like Telegram, Signal, and VPN services have allowed citizens to bypass censorship, keeping independent media alive in Iran, Syria, and Russia.
- Underground newspapers and digital media networks are growing, similar to the samizdat movements of the Soviet era, where dissidents circulated banned publications.
While state control is increasing, underground journalism remains a powerful force—and as long as technology enables free expression, independent reporting may survive despite government efforts to silence it.
The Future of Independent Media in the Middle East
- Privately funded journalism and social media platforms are trying to fill the void left by VOA and RFE/RL.
- A new U.S. administration could restore international broadcasting efforts, but rebuilding credibility will be difficult.
- The future of Middle Eastern media depends on whether authoritarian regimes tighten their grip or if underground journalism continues to thrive.
The battle for free speech in the Middle East is far from over, and while state-controlled propaganda is gaining ground, independent journalists and activists are finding new ways to keep the truth alive.
Conclusion: Did This Decision Defend Free Speech or Silence It?
Instead of expanding press freedom, theseactions weakened independent journalism in authoritarian regions, allowing state-controlled media in Iran, Russia, and China to go unchallenged.
- In Iran, Radio Farda was one of the last unbiased news sources—now, Iranians are left with government-controlled narratives.
- In the Arab world, Russia’s RT Arabic and China’s CGTN Arabic are replacing Western news sources, spreading anti-American sentiment.
- In the fight against terrorism, extremists now face fewer obstacles in spreading propaganda.
- For U.S. diplomacy, the loss of these media outlets means a decline in American influence, just as authoritarian regimes expand theirs.
Did This Move Strengthen or Undermine Democracy?
By shutting down U.S.-funded international journalism, this administration effectively helped suppress free speech where it mattered most—in places where authoritarian regimes are already trying to control the flow of information.
- The stated goal was to fight censorship, but in reality, this decision eliminated one of the last independent news sources in highly censored countries.
- While criticizing big tech for restricting free expression, the government itself dismantled platforms that provided a voice for dissidents and activists.
- The cuts were presented as a measure to streamline bureaucracy, but foreign policy experts argue that they amounted to a strategic loss that ultimately benefited authoritarian leaders.
The result? Dictatorships now have full control over their media landscapes, while the U.S. has lost one of its most effective tools for promoting democratic values abroad.
The Fight for Independent Journalism is More Important Than Ever
With state-controlled propaganda growing stronger, the need for alternative independent journalism is greater than ever. While VOA and RFE/RL may be gone, the battle for truth and free expression in authoritarian regions is far from over.
What can be done?
- Independent journalists, activists, and media organizations must continue finding new ways to reach censored audiences.
- Social media platforms and encrypted networks can play a key role in spreading reliable information.
- A future U.S. administration must decide whether to restore international broadcasting efforts or abandon them permanently.
Free speech is not just about the right to speak—it is about the right to access truthful, independent reporting. In regions where governments suppress information, independent journalism is a lifeline to reality—and that lifeline must be protected, supported, and rebuilt.
