U.S. drops lower in freedom of press rankings (1 Viewer)

[KCC]

For anyone who still cares about where the U.S. stands regarding freedom of the press:

U.S. Rank on Press Freedom Slides Lower

By Nora Boustany

Washington Post Foreign Service

Tuesday, October 24, 2006; A15

Some poor countries, such as Mauritania and Haiti, improved their record in a global press freedom index this year, while France, the United States and Japan slipped further down the scale of 168 countries rated, the group Reporters Without Borders said yesterday.

The news media advocacy organization said the most repressive countries in terms of journalistic freedom -- such as North Korea, Cuba, Burma and China -- made no advances at all.

The organization's fifth annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index tracks actions against news media through the end of September. The group noted its concern over the declining rankings of some Western democracies as well as the persistence of other countries in imposing harsh punishments on media that criticize political leaders.

"Unfortunately nothing has changed in the countries that are the worst predators of press freedom, and journalists in North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Cuba, Burma and China are still risking their life or imprisonment for trying to keep us informed," the organization said in a news release. North Korea holds the worst ranking at 168.

Iran ranks 162nd, between Saudi Arabia and China. The report said conditions in Russia and Belarus have not improved. It said that Russia continued to steadily dismantle the independent media and that the recent slaying of investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya "is a poor omen for the coming year."

Northern European countries top the index, with no reported censorship, threats, intimidation or physical reprisals, either by officials or the public, in Finland, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. All of those countries were ranked in first place.

Serious threats against the artists and publishers of the Muhammad cartoons, which caricatured the prophet of Islam, caused Denmark, which was also in first place last year, to drop to 19th place. Yemen, at 149th place, slipped four places, mostly because of the arrests of journalists and the closure of newspapers that reprinted the cartoons. Journalists in Algeria, Jordan, Indonesia and India were harassed because of the cartoons as well.

Although it ranked 17th on the first list, published in 2002, the United States now stands at 53, having fallen nine places since last year.

"Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of 'national security' to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his 'war on terrorism,' " the group said.

"The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media's right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism," the group said.

Lucie Morillon, the organization's Washington representative, said the index is based on responses to 50 questions about press freedom asked of journalists, free press organizations, researchers, human rights activists and others.

France, 35th, dropped five places since last year because of searches of media offices and journalists' homes, as well as physical attacks on journalists during a trade union dispute, the group said.

In Lebanon, a series of bomb attacks targeting journalists and publishers in 2005, and Israeli military attacks last summer, contributed to a drop in the country's ranking from 56th to 107th in the past four years.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Thanks FOX and Food Channel.

 

[Angry Cheesehead]

A media outlet saying that they don't have enough freedom to get information!?!? Say it isn't so!

 

[KCC]

A media outlet saying that they don't have enough freedom to get information!?!? Say it isn't so!

"(T)he index is based on responses to 50 questions about press freedom asked of journalists, free press organizations, researchers, human rights activists and others."

Since the same index is used in all the countries listed, I don't think it's merely a reflection of the press wanting more access. It's all relative and it's possible other nations have just increased their press freedoms, but either way, we're falling behind.

 

[saintsfan]

Oh no.

Our press better win out or we'll miss out on a BCS Bowl game.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The press definitely has less freedom today than it had even a year or two ago. For example, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 has recently made it more difficult for members of the press to play online poker.

 

[BGP]

I see they fail to mention how ABC aired a movie that never claimed to be based on real events that suggested Clinton's role in allowing 9/11 to happen, which was followed by threats from Bill Clinton, his lawyers, and democrat politicans in an attempt to chill free speech. No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech. You can't question their motives. I'm sure the left had the best of intentions. ABC ought to shut up and get in line. There's more important things than to question this - such as Bush Bashing. We don't have enough of that around here.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech.

I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I think it is off base.

 

[BGP]

No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech.

I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I think it is off base.

How dare you question the democrats motives?? Surely you understand they know whats best when it comes to policing speech? If ABC needs a slap on the wrist for releasing a fictional film that makes democrats look bad, the democrats can be fully and completely trusted to make that call.

 

[ThisGuy]

Less media in anything is good. Looks like the administration is finally doing something right.

 

[redman]

For anyone who still cares about where the U.S. stands regarding freedom of the press:

U.S. Rank on Press Freedom Slides Lower

By Nora Boustany

Washington Post Foreign Service

Tuesday, October 24, 2006; A15

Some poor countries, such as Mauritania and Haiti, improved their record in a global press freedom index this year, while France, the United States and Japan slipped further down the scale of 168 countries rated, the group Reporters Without Borders said yesterday.

The news media advocacy organization said the most repressive countries in terms of journalistic freedom -- such as North Korea, Cuba, Burma and China -- made no advances at all.

The organization's fifth annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index tracks actions against news media through the end of September. The group noted its concern over the declining rankings of some Western democracies as well as the persistence of other countries in imposing harsh punishments on media that criticize political leaders.

"Unfortunately nothing has changed in the countries that are the worst predators of press freedom, and journalists in North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Cuba, Burma and China are still risking their life or imprisonment for trying to keep us informed," the organization said in a news release. North Korea holds the worst ranking at 168.

Iran ranks 162nd, between Saudi Arabia and China. The report said conditions in Russia and Belarus have not improved. It said that Russia continued to steadily dismantle the independent media and that the recent slaying of investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya "is a poor omen for the coming year."

Northern European countries top the index, with no reported censorship, threats, intimidation or physical reprisals, either by officials or the public, in Finland, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. All of those countries were ranked in first place.

Serious threats against the artists and publishers of the Muhammad cartoons, which caricatured the prophet of Islam, caused Denmark, which was also in first place last year, to drop to 19th place. Yemen, at 149th place, slipped four places, mostly because of the arrests of journalists and the closure of newspapers that reprinted the cartoons. Journalists in Algeria, Jordan, Indonesia and India were harassed because of the cartoons as well.

Although it ranked 17th on the first list, published in 2002, the United States now stands at 53, having fallen nine places since last year.

"Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of 'national security' to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his 'war on terrorism,' " the group said.

"The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media's right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism," the group said.

Lucie Morillon, the organization's Washington representative, said the index is based on responses to 50 questions about press freedom asked of journalists, free press organizations, researchers, human rights activists and others.

France, 35th, dropped five places since last year because of searches of media offices and journalists' homes, as well as physical attacks on journalists during a trade union dispute, the group said.

In Lebanon, a series of bomb attacks targeting journalists and publishers in 2005, and Israeli military attacks last summer, contributed to a drop in the country's ranking from 56th to 107th in the past four years.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

:IBTL:

 

[KCC]

No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech.

I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I think it is off base.

How dare you question the democrats motives?? Surely you understand they know whats best when it comes to policing speech? If ABC needs a slap on the wrist for releasing a fictional film that makes democrats look bad, the democrats can be fully and completely trusted to make that call.

What exactly about their assessment of the freedom-of-the-press index leads you to the conclusion that this is a partisan issue?

 

[KCC]

For anyone who still cares about where the U.S. stands regarding freedom of the press:

U.S. Rank on Press Freedom Slides Lower

By Nora Boustany

Washington Post Foreign Service

Tuesday, October 24, 2006; A15

Some poor countries, such as Mauritania and Haiti, improved their record in a global press freedom index this year, while France, the United States and Japan slipped further down the scale of 168 countries rated, the group Reporters Without Borders said yesterday.

The news media advocacy organization said the most repressive countries in terms of journalistic freedom -- such as North Korea, Cuba, Burma and China -- made no advances at all.

The organization's fifth annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index tracks actions against news media through the end of September. The group noted its concern over the declining rankings of some Western democracies as well as the persistence of other countries in imposing harsh punishments on media that criticize political leaders.

"Unfortunately nothing has changed in the countries that are the worst predators of press freedom, and journalists in North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Cuba, Burma and China are still risking their life or imprisonment for trying to keep us informed," the organization said in a news release. North Korea holds the worst ranking at 168.

Iran ranks 162nd, between Saudi Arabia and China. The report said conditions in Russia and Belarus have not improved. It said that Russia continued to steadily dismantle the independent media and that the recent slaying of investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya "is a poor omen for the coming year."

Northern European countries top the index, with no reported censorship, threats, intimidation or physical reprisals, either by officials or the public, in Finland, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. All of those countries were ranked in first place.

Serious threats against the artists and publishers of the Muhammad cartoons, which caricatured the prophet of Islam, caused Denmark, which was also in first place last year, to drop to 19th place. Yemen, at 149th place, slipped four places, mostly because of the arrests of journalists and the closure of newspapers that reprinted the cartoons. Journalists in Algeria, Jordan, Indonesia and India were harassed because of the cartoons as well.

Although it ranked 17th on the first list, published in 2002, the United States now stands at 53, having fallen nine places since last year.

"Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of 'national security' to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his 'war on terrorism,' " the group said.

"The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media's right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism," the group said.

Lucie Morillon, the organization's Washington representative, said the index is based on responses to 50 questions about press freedom asked of journalists, free press organizations, researchers, human rights activists and others.

France, 35th, dropped five places since last year because of searches of media offices and journalists' homes, as well as physical attacks on journalists during a trade union dispute, the group said.

In Lebanon, a series of bomb attacks targeting journalists and publishers in 2005, and Israeli military attacks last summer, contributed to a drop in the country's ranking from 56th to 107th in the past four years.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

:IBTL:

 

[redman]

No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech.

I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I think it is off base.

How dare you question the democrats motives?? Surely you understand they know whats best when it comes to policing speech? If ABC needs a slap on the wrist for releasing a fictional film that makes democrats look bad, the democrats can be fully and completely trusted to make that call.

What exactly about their assessment of the freedom-of-the-press index leads you to the conclusion that this is a partisan issue?

The American press does far more to censor itself by banning the use of certain words and promoting the use of others than anything the U.S. government does. Political correctness = self-censorship.

 

[KCC]

No, democrats are above reproach when it comes to free speech.

I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I think it is off base.

How dare you question the democrats motives?? Surely you understand they know whats best when it comes to policing speech? If ABC needs a slap on the wrist for releasing a fictional film that makes democrats look bad, the democrats can be fully and completely trusted to make that call.

What exactly about their assessment of the freedom-of-the-press index leads you to the conclusion that this is a partisan issue?

The American press does far more to censor itself by banning the use of certain words and promoting the use of others than anything the U.S. government does. Political correctness = self-censorship.

Given the criteria they use, I'm not sure that political correctness would be something they base their scale on (I'm not saying they don't use it at all, just that I don't see any evidence of it. From their website:

Worldwide press freedom index 2006How the index was compiledThe index measures the state of press freedom in the world. It reflects the degree of freedom journalists and news organisations enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the state to respect and ensure respect for this freedom.Each one has a ranking and a score which together sum up the state of press freedom there. A country can change rank from year to year even if its score stays the same, and vice-versa.It is based solely on events between 1 September 2005 and 1 September 2006. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just press freedom violations.Reporters Without Borders compiled a questionnaire with 50 criteria for assessing the state of press freedom in each country. It includes every kind of violation directly affecting journalists (such as murders, imprisonment, physical attacks and threats) and news media (censorship, confiscation of issues, searches and harassment).It registers the degree of impunity enjoyed by those responsible for such violations. It also takes account of the legal situation affecting the news media (such as penalties for press offences, the existence of a state monopoly in certain areas and the existence of a regulatory body) and the behaviour of the authorities towards the state-owned news media and the foreign press. It also takes account of the main obstacles to the free flow of information on the Internet.We have taken account not only of abuses attributable to the state, but also those by armed militias, clandestine organisations or pressure groups that can pose a real threat to press freedom.The questionnaire was sent to partner organisations of Reporters Without Borders (14 freedom of expression groups in five continents) and its 130 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists. A scale devised by the organisation was then used to give a country-score to each questionnaire. The Statistics Institute of the University of Paris provided assistance and advice in processing the data reliably and thoroughly.The 168 countries ranked are those for which we received completed questionnaires from a number of independent sources. Others were not included because of a lack of credible data. Where countries tied, they are listed in alphabetical order.The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the press in the countries concerned.

 

[Redwes25]

To be honest, this surprises me a bit. As the US legal system has always protected much more speech then most other western countries.

Since, this focuses more on the press that could explain the difference.

 

[wildbill]

The fact that the Bush administration has done nothing about the national security leaks published in the New York Times makes me think the press has more than enough freedom.

 

[TinHat]

"The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media's right not to reveal its sources,..."

Thank you very much Patrick Fitzgerald and the Plamegate crowd.

 

[TinHat]

I dunno, the last journalist I remember the US Government imprisoning for publishing something the Government didn't like was James Sanders and that was back in the 90s.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The USA currently ranks 46th:

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

USA AND BRAZIL – NEW WORLD GIANTS THAT SET A BAD EXAMPLEOne is a superpower and the other an emerging power. One for a long time was the embodiment of an established democracy where civil liberties reign supreme. The other created the conditions for developing a powerful civil society during the Lula years (2003-2010) on the basis of a democratic constitution adopted just three years after the end of two decades of military dictatorship (1964-1985). Rich in diversity, the United States and Brazil should have given freedom of information a supreme position both in their laws and their social values. Unfortunately the reality falls far short of this.

In the United States, 9/11 spawned a major conflict between the imperatives of national security and the principles of the constitution’s First Amendment. This amendment enshrines every person’s right to inform and be informed. But the heritage of the 1787 constitution was shaken to its foundations during George W. Bush’s two terms as president by the way journalists were harassed and even imprisoned for refusing to reveal their sources or surrender their files to federal judicial officials.

There has been little improvement in practice under Barack Obama. Rather than pursuing journalists, the emphasis has been on going after their sources, but often using the journalist to identify them. No fewer that eight individuals have been charged under the Espionage Act since Obama became president, compared with three during Bush’s two terms. While 2012 was in part the year of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, 2013 will be remember for the National Security Agency computer specialist Edward Snowden, who exposed the mass surveillance methods developed by the US intelligence agencies.

The whistleblower is the enemy. Hence the 35-year jail term imposed on Private Chelsea/Bradley Manning for being the big WikiLeaks source, an extremely long sentence but nonetheless small in comparison with the 105-year sentence requested for freelance journalist Barrett Brown in a hacking case. Amid an all-out hunt for leaks and sources, 2013 will also be the year of the Associated Press scandal, which came to light when the Department of Justice acknowledged that it had seized the news agency’s phone records.

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-americas.php#

I would also throw in the illegal wiretapping and seizure of emails and who knows what else of James Rosen of Fox.

 

[jon_mx]

Seems like a pretty lame poll. Journalists in different countries will have a much different perspective when answering questions. A journalists in Iran may not feel any oppression until he sees his co-workers head chopped off. While a US journalist may feel oppressed if he gets an email suggesting the story should not be reported. Answers to such questions are very relative to ones environment and make a horrible comparison. But this is true for most types of international rankings.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Seems like a pretty lame poll. Journalists in different countries will have a much different perspective when answering questions. A journalists in Iran may not feel any oppression until he sees his co-workers head chopped off. While a US journalist may feel oppressed if he gets an email suggesting the story should not be reported. Answers to such questions are very relative to ones environment and make a horrible comparison. But this is true for most types of international rankings.

Well as for Iran, they finished 173rd, so maybe there's a better example.

 

[Todd Andrews]

The USA currently ranks 46th:

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

USA AND BRAZIL – NEW WORLD GIANTS THAT SET A BAD EXAMPLEOne is a superpower and the other an emerging power. One for a long time was the embodiment of an established democracy where civil liberties reign supreme. The other created the conditions for developing a powerful civil society during the Lula years (2003-2010) on the basis of a democratic constitution adopted just three years after the end of two decades of military dictatorship (1964-1985). Rich in diversity, the United States and Brazil should have given freedom of information a supreme position both in their laws and their social values. Unfortunately the reality falls far short of this.

In the United States, 9/11 spawned a major conflict between the imperatives of national security and the principles of the constitution’s First Amendment. This amendment enshrines every person’s right to inform and be informed. But the heritage of the 1787 constitution was shaken to its foundations during George W. Bush’s two terms as president by the way journalists were harassed and even imprisoned for refusing to reveal their sources or surrender their files to federal judicial officials.

There has been little improvement in practice under Barack Obama. Rather than pursuing journalists, the emphasis has been on going after their sources, but often using the journalist to identify them. No fewer that eight individuals have been charged under the Espionage Act since Obama became president, compared with three during Bush’s two terms. While 2012 was in part the year of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, 2013 will be remember for the National Security Agency computer specialist Edward Snowden, who exposed the mass surveillance methods developed by the US intelligence agencies.

The whistleblower is the enemy. Hence the 35-year jail term imposed on Private Chelsea/Bradley Manning for being the big WikiLeaks source, an extremely long sentence but nonetheless small in comparison with the 105-year sentence requested for freelance journalist Barrett Brown in a hacking case. Amid an all-out hunt for leaks and sources, 2013 will also be the year of the Associated Press scandal, which came to light when the Department of Justice acknowledged that it had seized the news agency’s phone records.

http://rsf.org/index2014/en-americas.php#

I would also throw in the illegal wiretapping and seizure of emails and who knows what else of James Rosen of Fox.

It is getting worse, and the media becomes more and more commercialized isnt helping.

 

[Jack White]

There is no free press in the USSA (other than some heroic independent web guys, who are unknown to 99.9% of Americans).

The main job of the modern press is to be a stenographer of state propaganda.

 

[Ilov80s]

There is no free press in the USSA (other than some heroic independent web guys, who are unknown to 99.9% of Americans).

The main job of the modern press is to be a stenographer of state propaganda.

I think it has more to do with commercialization. The media just wants to make money and is ran by big investors, not journalists. Why rock the boat?