From Within and Without: The Complete Control of News and Media in Vietnam

It has become widely recognized that the Vietnamese government is steadily eroding the right to free speech and expression. This worrying trend has been tracked and documented by international non-governmental organizations and foreign political bodies, including Freedom House, CIVICUS, and Human Rights Watch (HRW). Within this discourse, the plight of independent journalists, foreign media outlets, and everyday Vietnamese citizens has rightly taken centre stage. However, another aspect of the situation has not been given enough attention and remains under-explored.

Reports often describe the Vietnamese state media as a mouthpiece of the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP) that disseminates government-approved propaganda, news, and narratives. While this characterization is accurate mainly, most discussions often stop there. In reality, the dynamics within Vietnamese state media reveal complexities and issues that have been rarely examined or adequately discussed. 

On November 1, 2024, Legal Initiatives for Vietnam (LIV), in partnership with the Vietnam Media Project (VMP) and The 88 Project, released a report titled”Censorship in Vietnam – State Media Under Unprecedented Attack.”

This 55-page document tracks the development of media and censorship in Vietnam from the early 2000s till the present, highlighting the challenges faced by foreign and independent domestic media outlets operating in the country.

What sets this report apart is its examination of Vietnamese state media and the challenges confronted by journalists, reporters, and news outlets working within the state media apparatus. Therefore, it offers a valuable and often-overlooked perspective on Vietnam’s media landscape.

The Challenges Faced by Independent Domestic Press and Foreign Media 

The first chapter of this report examines how the concept of “press freedom” is shaped in Vietnam and how the VCP has weaponized the entire state apparatus to hinder the activities of independent local media and foreign press agencies. It introduces a “System of Control” composed of three central forces: the police, the state, and the Communist Party.

These entities work together to effectively limit media freedom and restrict journalists through the 2016 Press Law, the 2018 Cybersecurity Law, other legal provisions, the deployment of security forces, and press censorship. This censorship is reinforced through weekly editorial meetings, in which directives or instructions are issued to the media, ensuring their coverage of upcoming stories is aligned with the party’s narrative. 

Additionally, the difficulty in acquiring press licenses adds another layer of control over both local and foreign media.

According to the report, media outlets must have a press license to operate legally, which grants them “the legal right to produce, edit and distribute news.” However, these licenses can only be issued by one of three authorities: (1) party agencies, (2) state agencies, and (3) state-oversight associations at the central or provincial level.

Licensed news agencies are expected to operate only within the scope and boundaries of their licenses, with any violation potentially leading to fines, suspensions, or the cancellation of their license. This licensing structure puts news outlets under the direct control of party or state entities, leading to an imbalance of power dynamics that the state often exploits to manipulate the media. 

For foreign media outlets seeking to operate in Vietnam, additional layers of licensing and permissions are required in addition to the standard press license.

These include press visas for foreign correspondents, press cards for permanent correspondents, and operating licenses for foreign media offices. The report highlights the difficulties foreign news media often face in obtaining these credentials. Specific cases are detailed, such as BBC correspondent Bill Hayton, who was denied entry into Vietnam in 2012, and several Radio Free Asia (RFA) correspondents who have been arrested and imprisoned. 

Unregistered and independent media outlets are often quickly shut down by the government. According to the report, these outlets are often targeted by state-led smear campaigns, have their websites blocked, and face severe operational restrictions, with many independent journalists ending up in jail. Common charges include violations of laws such as Article 117 and Article 331, which accuse journalists of “abusing democratic freedoms” and spreading anti-state propaganda.

The relentless efforts of the VCP have given the government control over the flow of information and journalism in the country, effectively eliminating the presence of independent media and leading to the dominance of state-controlled media.

The Challenges Faced by State-controlled Media 

The near-eradication of independent media in Vietnam has led to the prominence of state-controlled media. Today, the VCP uses these outlets as propaganda tools to expand the government’s influence and control. However, as the report highlights, there was a period in Vietnam’s history when critical journalism flourished despite government interference and attacks. The report refers to this time in Vietnam’s history as “The Phase of Critical Journalism,” which spanned from the 2000s to the mid-2010s. 

During this period, several instances of government corruption were exposed by state-registered media, such as the PMU18 scandal, (2006-2008) and the 2009 bauxite mining project.. While the coverage of these incidents and several others led to the harassment and imprisonment of many Vietnamese journalists, the report describes this period as a time when “professional journalism held power to account.”

The rise of online media and the internet “caused a disruption in the government control system,” leading to a “golden age of critical journalism.” The report adds that this period was also very profitable for the press, with many successful news outlets defined by being financially independent from the state. 

In contrast to this golden era of journalism, the report also examines the period from 2016 to the present day, which is termed “The Phase of Heavy Crackdowns.” This phase is marked by a significant rise in the arrest of independent journalists and the increasing weaponization of laws to combat dissent.

What makes the report particularly noteworthy is that it goes beyond highlighting the effects of repression of an independent press by also examining how state media entities are impacted by the government’s aggressive measures to consolidate control over the flow of information.

The Vietnamese government aims to achieve this through the implementation of Press Plan 2025, an initiative designed to “overhaul the state-media landscape” by limiting the number of media outlets allowed to operate in the country, removing “diversification” in the press system, and establishing multimedia powerhouses that can ensure the widespread dissemination of state-approved narratives. 

According to the report, Press Plan 2025 placed excessive emphasis on media outlets’ adherence to its guiding principles and operational scope, leading to a stark increase in violations and fines for state-media outlets.

In response, many outlets became increasingly compliant, narrowing their coverage to topics approved by the state and neglecting subjects that would appeal to their original audience. As a result, the number of press organizations was halved, with many either shutting down or consolidating with other publications. Many news organizations went into debt, and the heavy penalties imposed on media outlets forced journalists to comply and acquiesce to government demands.

The relentless crackdown on the press has eroded journalists’ will to oppose the Vietnamese government. The report best illustrates this through numerous quotes from anonymous sources scattered throughout the document. These quotes, gathered through interviews specifically conducted for the report, provide insight into the climate of fear and suppression in Vietnam’s media landscape. 

Some prevailing sentiments among the interviewees are the lack of agency journalists and newsrooms have with regard to the issues they can cover, the limited amount of freedom they have in tackling these issues, and their inability to refuse the demands placed upon them by the state.

The lack of government support, coupled with the inherent financial liabilities tied to publishing stories or articles that risk being removed post-publication, has fostered a defeatist attitude and led to widespread self-censorship. As a result, the remaining newsrooms, media outlets, and state journalists in Vietnam have largely been transformed into what they are known for today: mouthpieces of the Vietnamese government regurgitating carefully coordinated propaganda that reinforces the VCP-backed narrative. 

By offering anonymous state journalists a safe platform to express their concerns openly, LIV’s report amplifies voices that might otherwise go unheard. It establishes a foundation for further exploration into the issues it raises.

The report adds nuance to the typical portrayal of Vietnamese state media as a monolithic mouthpiece of the Communist Party, instead humanizing those within the system. Not all journalists are willing lapdogs of the government; many working for state media outlets have been compelled to conform out of necessity or through coercion. 

In their initial foray into documenting and analyzing press freedom in Vietnam, LIV and its collaborators have uncovered the complex reality beneath the surface of Vietnamese state media.

This report reveals that many state journalists are themselves trapped in a system that leaves them little autonomy, limited by the constraints imposed by the Communist Party.

In this sense, Vietnamese state media and its journalists emerge not merely as instruments of the party but also as victims, much like independent and foreign media in the country. This report serves as a crucial step towards understanding the struggles of state journalists in Vietnam and underscores the need to continue pushing for lasting reforms. 

—

LIV’s report can be accessed here.