Methodology
Access the database
Project partners
Funded by
OUR APPROACH
All persons enjoy the rights to freedom of expression and creativity, to participate in cultural life and to enjoy the arts. Expressions, whether artistic or not, always remain protected under the right to freedom of expression.
Faridah Shaeed, The Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights (2009 – 2015)
Artistic freedom is a basic human right guaranteed in Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The 2005 Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expression states that every person has:
- The right to create without censorship or intimidation
- The right to have artistic work supported, distributed, and remunerated
- The right to freedom of movement
- The right to freedom of association
- The right to protection of social and cultural rights
- The right to participate in cultural life
HOW WE DO IT
Methodology: The research combines qualitative and quantitative methods. Data is collected through desk-top research from a wide range of public sources (news reports, blogs, catalogues, freedom of expression reports). Where necessary, researchers conduct interviews and/or use their networks to capture additional case information, or to document cases that are not in the public space.
Inclusion criteria: We documented all actions that violate, diminish, disadvantage, discourage the right to freedom of expression in the arts by any party, for any reason, using any method. The research currently documents cases in Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam. Other Southeast Asian countries will be added progressively from 2025.
Based on analysis of hundreds of incidents in SEA, we designed a data collection tool to capture and categorize baseline information about each case, including, but not limited to:
- Target – who or what the challenge was directed at
- Agent – the party challenging the target
- Method – the act(s) used by the agent(s) to challenge or violate artistic freedom.
- Challenge chain – the multi-step process where a single target is challenged by different agents, using different methods.
- Reason – the accusation/justification for the challenge
- Response – the response to the challenge from the targeted individual/organization.
For more details about the data we collect, go here. (link to info on page 3 of this doc)
These are only some of the baseline data we collect. Our quantitative data is characterized by a “thick” description, with over 50 data points per case. This granular information is used to generate quantitative statistics, about the frequency, source, and methods used to constrain free expression in arts and culture in the region.
However, data and statistics, tell only part of the story.
The quantitative data is combined with qualitative data collected, where possible, through interviews with stakeholders, and/or close analysis of the cases and research into the wider context within which these acts of oppression take place on the local and regional level.
These lead to more nuanced learnings, including identifying unique features in the way that arts and culture are constrained, or in the way that artists respond or fight back in each country.
The Target: The target of oppression may be an item, event or cultural practice. In other cases, it may be a person, group or organisation. The data divides the target into three buckets, the artwork, the creator and the presenter.
May be an Item, event or practice – e.g. painting, music video, advertisement, heritage site,festival, workshop, exhibition, ritual weaving, folk narrative.
May be an individual, group or organisation which created the artwork or event. Artistic and cultural rights apply to a person even if they are not identified as an “artist”, but are part of the wider cultural ecosystem, e.g. a bookshop owner, a venue operator and an audience member.
May be an individual, group or organisation involved in the presentation or distribution of the artwork or event, e.g broadcaster, presenters, gallery, booksellers, publishers, advertisers
Forms: We document challenges to a range of artistic forms, heritage and cultural practices, including everyday cultural and creative expressions or objects, broadly organised under 8 forms:
- Visual arts
- Performance
- Music
- Film & Broadcast
- Publications
- Interactive Media
- Heritage, customs, cultural practices
- Design and creative services
We exclude media, political or general freedom of expression cases as there are existing mechanics to monitor these.
Challenge chain: A case may consist of a single challenge, or a multi-step challenge chain by different agents using different methods. In some instances, the same agent uses multiple methods on the same target.
For example, netizens launch an online campaign to cancel a rock concert. The concert sponsor then withdraws their sponsorship of the rock band. A third step may involve the police visiting the office of the concert promoter. On the day of the concert, a vigilante group tries to prevent ticket holders from entering the stadium. Our research tool captures the individual steps that make up the challenge chain – the agents and specific methods used on each target type (concert, rock band, concert promoter, audiences).
The Methods:
“Smart censors adjust these levels to achieve their desired results. Censorship detection needs to be similarly calibrated to capture censors’ full spectrum of methods”.
– Cherian George and Sunny Liew Red Lines : Political Cartoons and The struggle against Censorship
A broad range of obstacles stand in the way of artistic free expression in Southeast Asia. They may be ‘Above the radar’ oppressions which are easily identifiable and …‘Below the radar’ oppressions that are often more subtle and less easy to identify.”
The criteria for inclusion includes a spectrum of methods used to challenge the rights of art makers and presenters to make and distribute works, and/or the public to freely access and participate in arts and culture.
- Destroyed, confiscated, damaged, attacked
- Banned, cancelled
- Partial removal, alteration
- Restricting distribution / access
- Withdrawal of resources
- Protest, complaint, accusations, boycott
- Investigated, surveillance
- Death, disappearance, exile
- Physical abuse, attack
- Banned, removed, sacked, replaced
- Sexual violence, gender-related methods
- Arrested, detained
- Prosecuted, legal process
- Fined, penalised, sanctioned, loss of license
- Restriction of movement, surveillance
- Questioned, investigated, re-educated, warned
- Proxy targeted
- Withdrawal of resources
- Protest, complaint, accusations, boycott, harassment
The Agents: individuals, institutions, prominent public figures and faceless netizens are some of the agents threatening artistic freedom. We divide agents into two distinct groups, State and non-state agents, which are future sub-categorized into different groups.
- Regulatory – e.g.ratings or censor boards, regulators
- Arts, culture stakeholders – e.g. arts council, museum, heritage board
- Non-arts authority – e.g. ministry, organisation, politician, leader
- Enforcement – e.g. police, military, security guard
- Judiciary – e.g., court system, lawyers, public prosecutor, etc.
- Faith-based -e.g. state religious department, national mufti
- Education- e.g., educational institution, lecturer
- Media – government media agency only.
- Arts, culture stakeholders – E.g., arts related guilds, funder, venue etc.
- Faith-based/religious – individual or community of believers; religious leaders.
- Education e.g. private colleges/schools
- Media e.g.non-state media/press
- Corporation, private enterprise
- Foreign government, citizen, organisation
- Public, civil society – e.g. netizens, NGOs
- Family, friends
Theme: Based on analysis of available publicity material or statements by the creator or presenter about the work/event, researchers assigned one or several themes to each target.
- Socio-economic
- Customs
- Politics
- Spirituality
- Gender/sexuality
- History
- Humanity/love
- Environment
- Human Rights
- Entertainment/Advert
The Reason: There are myriad reasons a work might be targeted. These accusations/justification for the challenge may be arbitrary, in that it may be outside the intended meaning of the work by the creator. The stated reason for a challenge may also be a smokescreen, used to obscure the real reasons for the attack. We have identified umbrella accusations, which cover a range of reasons a work might be targeted.
- Politics
- Moral policing, religion, morality, tradition
- Misinformation, fake news
- Child protection, graphic violence, gore
- Social justice, rights
- International, geopolitical
- Adverse economic impact
- Public safety, property damage
Response: the presenter or creator targeted may respond in one, or a combination of the following ways:
- Compliance (willingly or under duress)
- Non-compliance
- Proceeds using strategic tactics
- Legal challenge
- Leaves arts sector
LIMITATIONS
Relying on mainly public sources or the in-country Researcher’s local networks means that we may miss cases that are not accessible to us.
The increasing use of subtle, below the line methods makes it difficult to conclusively verify some cases, leading to a lower number of incidents than is actually occurring.
Some of the data is evaluative, based on the Researcher’s analysis and knowledge. This carries with it the risk of researcher biases, and also makes building uniformity and consistency in analysis across the 6 countries under study challenging at times.
Some artists may be reluctant to share their experience with us for fear of being further targeted by the agents. Many acts of censorship are often themselves concealed from public view by targets who are compelled by fear to remain silent about these acts of silencing.