Freedom House released its Freedom on the Net 2025 report (November 2025), which is an annual report on global internet freedom.
Human Level’s Take:
- Global internet freedom has declined for the 15th consecutive year, with China and Myanmar remaining the worst environments for internet freedom
- Half of the 18 countries with “Free” internet freedom status experienced declines in their scores. Georgia saw the most significant decline among Free countries, followed by Germany and the United States
- For example, in the United States, increasing restrictions on civic space are stifling digital activism, and foreign nationals have been detained for nonviolent online expression
- Authoritarian authorities are increasing their control over online information in an effort to solidify their power and regimes. Measures include expanding content restrictions, intensifying surveillance of electronic communications, and imposing severe penalties for online dissent
- There are three key trends shaping the future of internet freedom, which can adversely impact human rights such as the rights to privacy and freedom of expression
- Government-backed AI development may amplify threats to privacy and free expression, especially in authoritarian states. Satellite-based internet expansion - while improving connectivity in rural and conflict-affected regions - also exposes providers to government pressure for surveillance and censorship. Policymakers in both free and autocratic countries are increasingly requiring identity verification, undermining anonymity - an essential safeguard for free expression
- So, what can companies do? Companies can start by first committing to respecting human rights and conducting thorough human rights due diligence to address risks linked to their products or services. They can also pay special attention to risks affecting vulnerable groups, including human rights defenders. In addition, they can invest in dedicated staff for policy, trust and safety, reliable information access, and human rights - including regional and country specialists who collaborate with civil society. Furthermore, companies can minimise data collection, particularly sensitive data such as health, biometric, and location information and limit third-party access, as well as clearly communicate what data is collected and why
Some key takeaways:
- The lay of the land: Global internet freedom declined for the 15th consecutive year. Of the 72 countries assessed in this report, conditions for internet freedom declined in 27, while 17 countries registered overall gains. China and Myanmar remained the world’s worst environments for internet freedom, while Iceland held its place as the most free online environment. Half of the 18 countries with an internet freedom status of Free suffered score declines. People in Georgia experienced the most significant decline in the Free cohort, followed by Germany and the United States. For instance, in the United States, increasing restrictions on civic space stifle digital activism and foreign nationals are detained for nonviolent online expression. In addition, authoritarian leaders are increasing their control over online information in order to entrench their regimes. In countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela, authorities have expanded restrictions on content, escalated surveillance of electronic communications and imposed severe penalties on those who expressed online dissent.
- The manipulation of online spaces and new technologies: The report shares that authorities are manipulating online spaces to promote favoured narratives and influence public discourse. Information manipulation campaigns are reshaping online spaces and common methods include paid commenters masquerading as ordinary internet users, news sites mimicking trusted outlets, misleading content generated by artificial intelligence (AI), and prominent social media influencers who post pro-government content without clear or formal affiliation. In addition, there are three main developments that will impact the future of internet freedom. Governments globally are overseeing investments in their domestic AI industries, which could amplify existing threats to freedom of expression and privacy if developed or deployed by repressive governments. Advances in satellite-based internet connectivity - while bringing many communities online, particularly in rural and war-torn areas - are exposing satellite service providers to government pressure with regards to surveillance and censorship. Online anonymity, an essential enabler for freedom of expression, is entering a period of crisis as policymakers in free and autocratic countries mandate the use of identity verification technology for certain websites or platforms.
- Recommendations for companies: The report provides recommendations on how companies can address the three major drivers of digital repression: 1) countering restrictions on freedom of expression; 2) countering manipulation of the online environment; and 3) countering restrictions on privacy and disproportionate government surveillance.
- In relation to countering restrictions on freedom of expression, companies can consider:
- a) committing to respecting the rights of people who use their platforms or services, and to addressing any adverse impact that their products might have on human rights;
- b) supporting the accessibility of anticensorship technologies;
- c) using all available legal channels to challenge content removal requests that would adversely affect international human rights standards, particularly when they relate to the accounts of human rights defenders, civil society activists, and journalists;
- d) ensuring that any restrictions are as limited as possible in duration, geographic scope, and type of content affected;
- e) documenting government demands internally and notifying people who use their platforms as to why connectivity or content may be restricted; and
- f) bringing strategic legal cases that challenge government overreach, in consultation or partnership with civil society.
- In relation to countering manipulation of the online environment companies can consider:
- a) ensuring that its products contribute to, and do not undermine, a diverse and reliable information space and the protection of freedom of expression
- b) investing in staff tasked with work related to policy, access to reliable information, trust and safety, and human rights, including teams of regional and country specialists. These teams can collaborate with civil society groups to understand the local impact of the company’s products and policies
- c) continuing to develop effective methods to watermark AI-generated content, while considering the privacy risks for human rights defenders and other vulnerable users
- d) assessing whether government agencies (that are seeking to engage with technology firms) are operating independently and without political interference, in consultation with in-country civil society
- e) adopting processes to ensure that engagement does not undermine free expression, access to information, due process, and other fundamental rights
- In relation to countering restrictions on privacy and disproportionate government surveillance, companies can consider:
- a) mainstreaming end-to-end encryption in their products, supporting anonymity software, and upholding other robust security protocols
- b) using all available legal channels to challenge problematic requests from state agencies, especially when they relate to the accounts of human rights defenders, civil society activists, and journalists
- c) minimizing the collection of personal information, such as health, biometric, and location data, and limiting how third parties can access and use it
- d) clearly explaining to people who use their services what data is being collected and for what purpose
