I found it rather ironic that Vladimir Putin was using the US media to criticize president Obama this week when Russia's media ranks a dismal 148th out of 179 countries.
We are down to #20 (Canada) that is a loss of 10 spots what the hell did we do? The one flaw to Reporters Without Borders is that they seem to massively flip out over small things and things that are common sense they see as evil.
I completely understand Putin's logic in writing his op-ed however that doesn't change the irony or the hypocrisy. If President Obama were to write a similar op-ed that's critical of the Russian government would that be allowed to be carried in the Russian media uncensored?well, if you want to be heard by Americans it's probably a waste of time going through Pravda.
This is a media ranking. What does infant mortality have to do with that?When you look at these rankings you have to look at the criteria by which countries are judged. Many list socialized medicine as a top priority. Others include infant mortality but many countries keep statistics for infant mortality differently. Many countries rank higher than the US does but the way they count infant deaths vary.
I completely understand Putin's logic in writing his op-ed however that doesn't change the irony or the hypocrisy. If President Obama were to write a similar op-ed that's critical of the Russian government would that be allowed to be carried in the Russian media uncensored?
When you look at these rankings you have to look at the criteria by which countries are judged. Many list socialized medicine as a top priority. Others include infant mortality but many countries keep statistics for infant mortality differently. Many countries rank higher than the US does but the way they count infant deaths vary.
I will admit that the US has suffered with respect to it's international public relations with it's inept foreign policy and NSA spying scandals.
"Reporters Without Borders" Press Freedom Index 2013
Top Ten Countries
--------------------------
1) Finland
2) Netherlands
3) Norway
4) Luxembourg
5) Andorra
6) Denmark
7) Liechtenstein
8) New Zealand
9) Iceland
10) Sweden
[...]
The United States ranked #32 between Suriname and Lithuania.
Socialized medicine is what you would call single payer. It's just theft and redistribution.What is 'socialised medicine'? Does it mean a normal health service? Are there really countries without this?
This is a media ranking. What does infant mortality have to do with that?
The top ten free media states by population:
1) Finland - 5,439,741
2) Netherlands - 16,799,300
3) Norway - 5,077,798
4) Luxembourg - 537,000
5) Andorra - 76,246
6) Denmark - 5,608,784
7) Liechtenstein - 36,842
8) New Zealand - 4,474,590
9) Iceland - 323,810
10) Sweden - 9,606,522
Total: about 48,000,000, Average: 4,800,000
One common theme among lists like this one, the ones that people always reference to show how the US is slipping, is that these tiny western countries are always the ones occupying the top spots. About half of our states have higher populations than the average of these top ten countries.
List of U.S. states and territories by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Two points: 1. If your country is advanced and tiny, there is no excuse to not have your stuff together. 2. The same people that use these studies are also the ones that usually love Federal gov't. If these studies show anything, its that our smaller state governments are better positioned to excel than large cumbersome federal gov't. Can we learn something from these countries, sure, but it would be a mistake to assume our federal gov't can copy a system of one of these tiny countries and apply it across the board to our country which is about 280,000,000 people larger and succeed.
Does anyone honestly believe we don't have the most robust media/press in the world?
The report is based partly on a questionnaire[3] sent to partner organizations of Reporters Without Borders (18 freedom of expression non-governmental organizations located in all five continents) and its 150 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists.[2] The questionnaire asks questions about pluralism, media independence, environment and self-censorship, legislative framework, transparency, and infrastructure. The questionnaire takes account of the legal framework for the media (including penalties for press offences, the existence of a state monopoly for certain kinds of media and how the media are regulated) and the level of independence of the public media. It also reflects violations of the free flow of information on the Internet. Violence against journalists, netizens, and media assistants, including abuses attributable to the state, armed militias, clandestine organizations, and pressure groups, are monitored by RSF staff during the year and are also part of the final score. A smaller score corresponds to greater freedom of the press.
Basically what it means is that I didn't follow the link and didn't read much further than ranking. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
You didn't seem to read the Op which explained a lot of that. Perhaps if you wish to participate in a medium where reading and writing are pretty much the only part of it you might want to do things like read. But hey why read when you can spout irrelevant partisan hackery and make yourself look so good. perhaps the US media does not have to be good when certain people seem only to care about catch phrases and never really wanted to know the issue in the first place. It just goes to show a person who wants only to complain has no need for a free press when faux news opr MSNBC feeds them the lines they want to believe in. The free market at work, if intellectual debate sold they would fight for a free press, but since the main part of society is ignorant people who could care less there is no need for the market to be bothered with the few people who actually want information over a catch phrase.
I completely understand Putin's logic in writing his op-ed however that doesn't change the irony or the hypocrisy. If President Obama were to write a similar op-ed that's critical of the Russian government would that be allowed to be carried in the Russian media uncensored?
Socialized medicine is what you would call single payer. It's just theft and redistribution.
Don't understand. All civilised countries look after their citizens' health, obviously. What sort of sick bastards would do otherwise?
What the hell does population size have to do with freedom of the press?
I won't disagree with you there with respect to our cable tv news. They exist solely for entertainment purposes while getting a little news at the same time. But you are mistaken to think those are the only news sources. America has hundreds of newspapers and online publications, hundreds of radio stations devoted to news, dozens of Sunday news programs, not to mention access to any other news paper online.Yes. Your media is often rather pathetic and sensationalist and rarely does actual journalism any more. Looking at MSNBC, CNN, FOX News and so on.. it is partisan biased attacks and very little journalism on the facts.. with a large portion of sensationalism. I remember a report during the Bush years, where there was American troops dying daily in Iraq and Afghanistan and the coverage was beyond pathetic... Fox News were mostly running Anna Nicole Smith stories (was just after her death), and the other media outlets were covering it, but still they were trying to focus more on the Anna Nicole Smith story.
Really? A questionnaire? Pathetic.But the rankings are based on the following.
The report is based partly on a questionnaire[3] sent to partner organizations of Reporters Without Borders (18 freedom of expression non-governmental organizations located in all five continents) and its 150 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists.[2] The questionnaire asks questions about pluralism, media independence, environment and self-censorship, legislative framework, transparency, and infrastructure. The questionnaire takes account of the legal framework for the media (including penalties for press offences, the existence of a state monopoly for certain kinds of media and how the media are regulated) and the level of independence of the public media. It also reflects violations of the free flow of information on the Internet. Violence against journalists, netizens, and media assistants, including abuses attributable to the state, armed militias, clandestine organizations, and pressure groups, are monitored by RSF staff during the year and are also part of the final score. A smaller score corresponds to greater freedom of the press.
More about cable tv news which I've already explained is a highly visible minority of news outlets. Actually, the "violence against the press" that you mentioned only highlights the freedom of association that our press has. They are free to go wherever they want and report on whatever they want...and are subject to the consequences of where they put themselves after reasonable efforts are made to shield them. You'll have to give me a link or something to your GITMO claim because I'm unaware of that one.On the bold/underlined bits the US fails badly which is why the US ranks so low.. relatively.
For one the US media constantly self censors. A classic example is on the Israel/Palestinian issue. They also often self censor when the story goes against a political ideology the choose to follow (or are ordered by corporate HQ to follow) which is another issue when it comes to the rankings.. independence. Most US media are not as independent as American's think they are. They are all controlled by 3-5 different companies who use them as their pet political voice to one degree or another. Newscorp uses it a lot, where as Time Warner Bros does not as much (but still does). This hinders the journalist independence and that counts down a hella of a lot.
And then there is the groups within government and corporations that go after journalists for doing their jobs. Violence against the press during the OWS protests across the US was the reason the US went down 15+ places on last years rankings. Violence against journalists... and killings in Iraq and Afghanistan plus the imprisonment of a journalist on GITMO is another reason the US is so low on the rankings... and frankly well deserved.
Obviously I disagree with your points...they are overwhelmingly based on the highly visible minority of news outlets, cable tv news. The only thing I'll concede to you is how this administration has pursued leaks via going after reporters rather than the leakers. That is a worthy discussion, and sparked outrage...and that is how the system is supposed to work. This ranking, however, is more or less symbolic so people can pat themselves on the back and mock the US which maintains the most prolific and free press taken as a whole in the world.The myth about how "free and fair" the US media is.. needs to be shaken up and the truth needs to be brought to light so we can return to the day where US media (along with the BBC) was the cornerstone of freedom and democracy in the world... the days of Cronkite and Bernstien and whats his name.. Those days are long gone.
Not too much, but your post is about RANKINGS. Doesn't matter what the ranking is for, Population has a HUGE impact on that. Do you really think it's hard for Liechtenstein to have a really good press corps? They probably have like 5 journalists total.
I won't disagree with you there with respect to our cable tv news. They exist solely for entertainment purposes while getting a little news at the same time. But you are mistaken to think those are the only news sources. America has hundreds of newspapers and online publications, hundreds of radio stations devoted to news, dozens of Sunday news programs, not to mention access to any other news paper online.
Really? A questionnaire? Pathetic.
More about cable tv news which I've already explained is a highly visible minority of news outlets. Actually, the "violence against the press" that you mentioned only highlights the freedom of association that our press has. They are free to go wherever they want and report on whatever they want...and are subject to the consequences of where they put themselves after reasonable efforts are made to shield them.
You'll have to give me a link or something to your GITMO claim because I'm unaware of that one.
Obviously I disagree with your points...they are overwhelmingly based on the highly visible minority of news outlets, cable tv news.
The only thing I'll concede to you is how this administration has pursued leaks via going after reporters rather than the leakers. That is a worthy discussion, and sparked outrage...and that is how the system is supposed to work.
This ranking, however, is more or less symbolic so people can pat themselves on the back and mock the US which maintains the most prolific and free press taken as a whole in the world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?