Imagine a comedian on stage, delivering a sharp joke or a pointed remark that deeply offends a powerful national leader. Or perhaps it’s a critical cartoon or a satirical TV program that hits too close to home.
In response, these leaders and their allies quickly accuse the artists and their employers of undermining moral standards and national values. What follows is a swift crackdown: state authorities issue severe threats, apply financial pressure, and even suggest closures. Consequently, comedians seek legal counsel, executives become fearful, and a clear message emerges: no negative or embarrassing content about the government or its supporters will be tolerated.
This scenario is all too familiar for citizens in countries like China, India, Iran, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela. These nations, governed by varying degrees of authoritarian rule, have consistently seen their comedians, broadcasters, journalists, and cartoonists silenced through various oppressive tactics.
Now, with President Trump’s recent threats to revoke broadcasting licenses from networks whose late-night hosts dare to mock him, the United States appears to be inching closer to this notorious group. His pattern of filing lawsuits against media companies, slashing public broadcasting funds, and threatening to revoke licenses or block mergers—while simultaneously favoring compliant news sources—mirrors a worrying global trend.
Jennifer McCoy, a political science professor at Georgia State University who specializes in the decline of democracy, explains that ‘controlling information and media is one of the initial and crucial steps an authoritarian leader takes. This is then followed by the repression of dissent and criticism, extending beyond the media to political opponents and ordinary citizens alike.’
It’s important to note that no expert or organization monitoring free expression currently equates Mr. Trump with the world’s most severe human rights violators. The most brutal authoritarian regimes have a history of murdering critics and imprisoning individuals based on mere suspicion. Many dictators, upon seizing power, immediately shut down newspapers and nationalized television networks.
However, the United States has long championed free speech. The strategies adopted by Mr. Trump—implying that only opinions sanctioned by the president are legitimate and safeguarded—position the U.S. uncomfortably among nations with less democratic values.
Alarmingly, freedom of expression is on the decline in America and 43 other countries—a staggering one-quarter of the world’s nations, as highlighted in the 2025 Democracy Report by the V-Dem Institute in Sweden. This number has increased from 35 countries just a year prior, indicating a worsening trend that the institute notes has persisted for at least a decade.
Across both democratic and dictatorial systems, individuals who wield humor as a tool for critique are increasingly becoming targets.
- Last month in Iran, prosecutors brought morality charges against Zeinab Mousavi, a pioneering female stand-up comedian. The charges stemmed from a video where she incorporated explicit language into an epic poem about pre-Islamic Iran. This was her third police summons since she introduced her character ‘Empress of Kuzcoo,’ a humorous portrayal of an elderly villager whose hijab notably exposes only her nose.
- In July, Turkey saw the arrest of four cartoonists from the satirical magazine LeMan. Their offense was an image depicting Moses and the Prophet Muhammad conversing amiably in heaven while bullets flew between Jews and Muslims on Earth. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly denounced the cartoon as ‘a vile provocation,’ leading to one cartoonist being charged with ‘insulting the president.’
- India, another nation experiencing a decline in free expression, now considers even subtle jokes about local politicians to be unacceptable. In March, comedian Kunal Kamra, known for his political humor, performed a lighthearted song at a Mumbai comedy club. The song used the word ‘gaddar,’ or traitor, seemingly directed at a local politician. This single act provoked the state’s chief minister to demand legal action, resulting in government employees vandalizing and ransacking the venue.
An image shows President Trump aboard Air Force One, giving the ‘OK’ sign. He has recently threatened to revoke licenses from networks that feature late-night hosts who make jokes at his expense.
Helmut K. Anheier, a sociology professor at the Hertie School in Berlin, points out that the strategy of attacking free expression and penalizing elites for popular political advantage was first observed by sociologist Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci noted this dynamic during his imprisonment by Italian Fascists in the 1920s.
According to Anheier, for many demagogues then and now, the primary objective is to ‘achieve cultural and political dominance’—or, as other academics describe it, to redefine public ‘common sense.’
The subjugation of independent institutions is merely one component of this broader effort to impose a new narrative, crafting a mythological image of a burgeoning strongman at the expense of fundamental public freedoms.
As Gramsci famously wrote from prison around 1930, ‘The old is dying and the new cannot be born. In this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.’
Today, China stands as a prime example of successful expression management. Although control mechanisms have varied throughout its history, under Xi Jinping, Beijing has significantly tightened its grip, transforming news outlets, films, comedy, and social media into meticulously controlled platforms for state-sanctioned messages.
During a 2016 tour of Chinese media, Mr. Xi unequivocally stated that ‘media sponsored by the party and government’—a category encompassing almost all major Chinese outlets—’should serve as propaganda platforms for the party and government.’
Since then, investigative journalists, who once bravely scrutinized government abuses and corruption even while working for state-controlled media, have largely disappeared. Following a pattern seen in places like Hungary and Russia, loyalists have been systematically placed in leadership roles at previously independent publications.
Furthermore, authorities have intensified their control over movies and books, placing them directly under the supervision of the Communist Party’s propaganda department. Censors meticulously vet content, not just for overt political messages, but for anything that deviates from the party’s established priorities.
The consequences for overstepping these boundaries can be severe. In 2020, Hong Kong’s public broadcaster aired an episode of ‘Headliner,’ its well-known satire program, that implied police were hoarding masks during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic. Despite the show having a history of such critiques since 1989, it was canceled months after this particular episode.
An image shows several people from behind, observing a monitor in a broadcast studio. This is the set of ‘Headliner’ at Radio Television Hong Kong in 2020, a show that was later taken off air after an episode discussing coronavirus masks.
In 2023, a Beijing stand-up comedian faced accusations of insulting the Chinese military with a joke about stray dogs. Authorities levied a hefty $2 million fine on the comedy studio, and police in northern China even detained a woman who had voiced support for the comedian online.
Despite these global parallels, the United States still sees a robust flow of satire and criticism, including pointed insults and investigations into potential corruption involving the Trump family, reaching wide audiences through various media channels.
Nonetheless, experts identify alarming signs of authoritarian tendencies as Mr. Trump threatens broadcasting licenses or initiates lawsuits against educational institutions and prominent newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.
These threats against broadcasting licenses emerged after ABC decided to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s show ‘indefinitely.’ This move came amid pressure from Federal Communications Commission chairman Brendan Carr, who had criticized Kimmel’s remarks about Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin — Kimmel had asserted that Trump supporters were ‘desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them’ — leading Mr. Trump to suggest that merely canceling the show might not be sufficient.
Such aggressive regulatory threats evoke memories for many. Italians recall Silvio Berlusconi, who wielded both political power and media ownership to blacklist critics and pressure executives into silencing dissent. Venezuelans remember Hugo Chávez revoking radio licenses and compelling television networks to air his populist addresses. Viktor Orban of Hungary, admired by many on the Trumpist right, notably employed tax policies to harass and undermine major media outlets.
Meanwhile, Russia scholars draw parallels between Mr. Trump’s threats to late-night comedians and Vladimir V. Putin’s initial years in power in Moscow.
During that period, a satirical TV program named ‘Kukly’ featured oversized, somewhat grotesque puppets that parodied political figures and current events, including the Chechnya war and President Boris N. Yeltsin’s alcohol consumption. In the post-Soviet 1990s, as Russia attempted to project a democratic image, the show was largely tolerated, even by the Kremlin.
However, everything changed with Mr. Putin’s ascent to power. Through initial harassment and a subsequent complete takeover by the state oil monopoly, he transformed the previously independent network that broadcast ‘Kukly’ into a government-friendly channel, conspicuously without the satirical show.
Daniel Treisman, a political science professor at UCLA and an expert on dictatorships, observes, ‘In general, few authoritarian leaders possess a sense of humor, and even fewer can laugh at themselves.’ He added that Putin was reportedly furious over his depiction as an ‘evil dwarf.’
An image shows figures moving through a dimly lit entrance to an event space. This is the El Capitan theater in Los Angeles, where ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ is recorded, on the day ABC pulled the show indefinitely.
Mr. Trump might be taking these jokes personally, or perhaps he’s channeling the collective outrage of his political base.
He famously stated regarding major networks, ‘They give me only bad publicity.’
Many Russians have already issued a stark warning: ‘Watch out, America, for what comes next.’ Viktor Shenderovich, the principal writer for ‘Kukly,’ was later compelled to flee Russia due to relentless government harassment and credible death threats.
Numerous other individuals involved in the production of the satirical comedy show also sought refuge outside their home country, fearing for their safety.