Muslim refugees. How Hungary and Slovakia have treated their minority populations as well as how they continue to treat them will serve as important gauges for the advancement of Democratic principles in both nations. Freedom of independent media depends on government institutions to actively protect free speech. Both countries require an actively free press in order to present a broad range of views within the realm of political discussion that questions both ends of the political spectrum. Democracy cannot fully be achieved without an informed public, and therefore it is important that the media has the autonomy to make crucial information easily accessible. There are other important variables that could be observed in order to measure
…show more content…
According to Freedom House statistics, the most recent evaluations of Slovakia and Hungary scored the freedom of independent media in Slovakia at 3, and that of Hungary at 3.75 (0-7 scale, least to most corrupt). This signifies a substantial contrast (“Slovakia, Nations in Transit," n.d.) (“Hungary, Nations in Transit,” n.d.). Through analysis of particular facets of the media and its ability to operate freely, it can be surmised that Slovakia’s media is more independent than Hungary’s. In Slovakia, the constitution guarantees and actively protects the right to free speech. Independent media in Slovakia provides an array of diverse views. The extent of press freedom leaves news outlets largely unimpeded, yet they are required to operate within a fairly strict code. For example, defamation of nationalities and individuals is considered a criminal act, carrying a penalty of up to eight years in prison. Other forms of free speech, including denial of the Holocaust, are also restricted (“Slovakia, Freedom of the Press," n.d.). While the Slovakian government may consider these restrictions necessary and proper, the inevitable collateral outcome is stricture of the free flow of ideas essential for a burgeoning democracy, and a precedent that permits further restrictions on free speech. Defamation suits brought by officials in Slovakia have garnered large monetary awards. While the Slovakian
According to Freedom House statistics, the most recent evaluations of Slovakia and Hungary scored the freedom of independent media in Slovakia at 3, and that of Hungary at 3.75 (0-7 scale, least to most corrupt). This signifies a substantial contrast (“Slovakia, Nations in Transit," n.d.) (“Hungary, Nations in Transit,” n.d.). Through analysis of particular facets of the media and its ability to operate freely, it can be surmised that Slovakia’s media is more independent than Hungary’s. In Slovakia, the constitution guarantees and actively protects the right to free speech. Independent media in Slovakia provides an array of diverse views. The extent of press freedom leaves news outlets largely unimpeded, yet they are required to operate within a fairly strict code. For example, defamation of nationalities and individuals is considered a criminal act, carrying a penalty of up to eight years in prison. Other forms of free speech, including denial of the Holocaust, are also restricted (“Slovakia, Freedom of the Press," n.d.). While the Slovakian government may consider these restrictions necessary and proper, the inevitable collateral outcome is stricture of the free flow of ideas essential for a burgeoning democracy, and a precedent that permits further restrictions on free speech. Defamation suits brought by officials in Slovakia have garnered large monetary awards. While the Slovakian