es 
Alexander Mario Fábregas (34) was sentenced in March 2025 to seven years in prison for making Facebook live transmissions where he called for the release of political prisoners, defended civil disobedience, and urged protests. The crime? “Propaganda against the constitutional order”. His story is not an exception.
In the last 4 years, more than 100 Cubans have suffered some type of reprisal for raising their voice on social media. At least 42 ended up in jail, many of them sentenced to penalties of up to 15 years, and others awaiting trial. What happens when posting a video on social media turns into a threat to the regime?
What began as media control has evolved into a systematic digital repression in which laws, surveillance, and state propaganda campaigns work together to silence any dissident voice, also in the virtual space.
The Figures of Repression on Social Media
Since the social uprising of July 11, 2021, at least 42 people have been imprisoned for social media publications, according to data verified by the Diario de Cuba team. Added to this are more than 100 citizens sanctioned, cited by State Security, and 43 citizens who received fines, most under Decree-Law 370, known as the “Whip Law” (Ley Azote).
These sanctions are not minor. A fine for “disseminating information contrary to social interest” reaches 3,000 CUP, an amount equivalent to around 7 dollars in the informal market, although it rises to 125 dollars at the official exchange rate, and represents the monthly salary of a worker. Furthermore, sanctioned individuals usually lose their electronic devices and are subjected to constant surveillance or threats to their relatives.
Between January and August 2025, ProBox identified 13,938 mentions on social media about political prisoners, mostly on X (71.9%), followed by Facebook (15.9%), Instagram (8.8%), and TikTok (3.4%). The most repeated terms were “prison,” “freedom for,” “political prisoners,” and hashtags like #AbajoLaDictadura (Down with the Dictatorship) and #PresosDeCastro (Castro’s Prisoners).
Although it is increasingly risky to express an opinion, protest, or speak about political prisoners on the internet in Cuba, censorship has not managed to silence the denunciation. Cases like Alexander Fábregas and many others still manage to gain visibility on X and Facebook, where users demand their release and denounce their convictions. These are citizen expressions that keep a conversation alive that the regime intends to silence.
Controlled Social Media: Protest Goes “Down,” Propaganda Goes Up
Between January 2021 and August 2025, only 46 trends on X related to arbitrary detentions were positioned, highlighting #LibertadParaLosPresosPolíticos (Freedom For Political Prisoners) (8 times) and #SOSCuba (5 times), which together totaled about 312,000 tweets. In contrast, the official apparatus promoted 1,788 trends and 33.5 million tweets, while the citizen conversations barely exceeded 3.2 million in the same period ; a difference of almost 10 to 1.
The volume of the protest is minimal compared to the official deployment : between 2021 and 2025, the conversation about political prisoners represented barely 2.34% of the trends on X and 1.22% of the tweets generated in the Cuban ecosystem. This difference is not only explained by censorship, but by a sophisticated state digital propaganda system that manages to place the official narrative far above citizen denunciations.
In addition, more than 50 state media outlets were identified as active in promoting official narratives on social media during this year, confirming that control of the digital discourse in Cuba is total and planned. Among them are Radio Granma, TeleTurquino, La Jiribilla, ECV Nacional, Latido Izquierdo, La Demajagua, Prensa Cuba España, Radio Camagüey, Radio Habana Cuba, Radio Reloj, Radio Guamá, Radio Cubana, Canal Habana, Portal de la Radio Cubana en Internet, and Radio Rebelde, among others.
Despite the imbalance in figures, the origin of the conversation marks a crucial difference. According to a ProBox study, while the regime uses hundreds of coordinated accounts with official backing, 85% of the messages around #SOSCuba in 2023 were authentic, issued by real users.
July continues to be the month with the highest digital activism, especially due to the commemoration of 11J (July 11th). In 2025, 14,285 mentions related to political prisoners were recorded, and words like “prison,” “freedom for,” and “political prisoners” dominated the conversation on this topic. #SOSCuba, in particular, has functioned as an umbrella hashtag, positioning itself 22 times and surpassing 1.5 million tweets, by encompassing various social denunciations beyond the political theme. Its global reach and continuity have made it a symbol of digital resistance against authoritarianism.
The Pattern of Digital Repression in Cuba
The Cuban state has consolidated a sophisticated system of surveillance and digital repression that ranges from constant monitoring of content on social media, which in many cases allows for the imprisonment of citizens for their publications. Protected by the 2019 Constitution and decrees such as 370 and 35, the regime tracks activities on platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp, and X (Twitter), justifying its intervention in the name of “ethics” and the “common good”. This surveillance has led to detentions of users who expressed criticism of the government, such as Alexander Verdecia or Félix Daniel Pérez Ruiz.
In parallel, the propaganda apparatus deploys defamation and cyber-harassment campaigns against activists and independent journalists. Television programs like Con Filo or Hacemos Cuba, along with fake accounts on social media, disseminate manipulated information to discredit opposition figures like Yunior García, José Daniel Ferrer, or Félix Navarro.
Citations and interrogations without legal backing are frequent; State Security uses these practices to intimidate, threatening with dismissals or family reprisals. In more serious cases, ambiguous crimes like “contempt” (desacato) or “enemy propaganda” are applied to justify arbitrary arrests and “exemplary” cases, such as those of Sulmira Martínez Pérez or Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara.
Control extends to the technical level: ETECSA, the country’s only operator, allows the government to censor content and block internet access during protests, as occurred on March 17, 2024. Furthermore, Decree-Law 370 imposes fines and confiscates equipment from those who disseminate information considered contrary to the “social interest”. Together, these measures configure a digital ecosystem under absolute control, where criticism is punished, self-censorship and repression are imposed, and connection becomes a privilege conditioned by political loyalty.
Authoritarian Cooperation: Cuba and Its Digital Allies
The Cuban model of digital control is not an isolated case. Authoritarian regimes like those in Venezuela and Nicaragua have replicated strategies of surveillance, censorship, and discrediting of dissent on the internet, turning social media into political control tools.
In Venezuela, the Anti-Hate Law (Ley contra el Odio) is used to detain people for simple posts on social media. Furthermore, the regime operates a vast network of automated and coordinated accounts, many linked to Cuban allies, which flood platforms with official propaganda.
In Nicaragua, the Cybercrime Law (Ley de Ciberdelitos) of 2020 allows punishing any content considered “false” or “destabilizing”. As in Cuba, government critics are monitored, cited, or imprisoned, while state media reinforces the official narrative and silences dissident voices.
The collaboration between these regimes also manifests in the digital conversation. Between January 2023 and July 2024, 66.8% of the socio-political messages disseminated on X (Twitter) from Cuba came from Venezuelan accounts, many associated with Cuban medical missions in that country. In total, more than 29 million messages and 50 coordinated trends were recorded between both governments. A symbolic example was in March 2023, when the hashtag #ChávezInfinito became a trend simultaneously in Cuba and Venezuela.
According to ProBox data, since 2020, 60% of the trends promoted by the Cuban regime on social media come from 10 structured groups, including De Zurda Team, a digital community openly aligned with the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. This shows how these three countries not only share methods of censorship but are part of a coordinated online propaganda ecosystem that seeks to sustain their authoritarian narratives and neutralize dissent throughout the region.
What to Do? How to Protect and Respond Digitally?
In a context where social media is monitored and any word can be used against you, digital self-protection is a basic necessity. Cuban specialists in digital matters, Norges Rodríguez, director of YucaByte, and Salvi Pascual, director of Technology at Cubadata, shared practical advice for facing surveillance and protecting oneself in hostile digital environments.
- Secure Passwords: Both specialists recommend long and unique passwords, updated frequently, and never relying on facial or fingerprint authentication, because during a detention they can force you to unlock the phone.
- Two-Factor Authentication (2FA): The best alternative is two-step verification (2FA) using code generator applications, never by SMS, since telecommunications are under regime control. Rodríguez even suggests printing the backup codes provided by services like Google, Facebook, X, and storing them in a safe place.
- File Encryption: It is advisable to keep information encrypted. “If the files are encrypted, there is no way to access them, not even by connecting a cable,” explains Pascual. In the case of journalists and activists, Rodríguez insists that this care must be even greater.
- Reliable Applications: Only install programs from official stores (Play Store or App Store). Pascual recommends avoiding applications that allow screen or keyboard sharing, as they can be used to install keyloggers or extract information.
To resist narratively:
- Use humor as protection and denunciation: Satire, memes, and double entendres not only convey the message but also make its direct criminalization difficult.
- Brief and personal testimonies: A simple story can be more powerful than an extensive denunciation. Accounts of daily life, small injustices, or micro-stories connect emotionally and are easy to share.
- Make visible what they want to hide: Recovering historical dates, commemorating forgotten events, and naming the silenced is a way to preserve memory and build community. Every publication can be an act of symbolic resistance.
- Create support and amplification networks: Not everyone can expose themselves equally. Relying on friendly accounts to share, replicate, or disseminate content protects those who are at greater risk. Networking is also a form of mutual care.
Citizenship in Cuba has understood that the digital struggle is not just about shouting louder. It is about being more creative, more organized, and more visible. Amidst tight control, citizens continue to find ways to raise their voice, demonstrating that neither surveillance nor censorship can completely silence the universal desire for freedom and justice.
Go to all articles
