Reporters without borders freedom index

[Dittohead not!]

Here is where the world's countries stand in the freedom index.

The 2015 World Press Freedom Index highlights the worldwide deterioration in freedom of information in 2014. Beset by wars, the growing threat from non-state operatives, violence during demonstrations and the economic crisis, media freedom is in retreat on all five continents.
The indicators compiled by Reporters Without Borders are incontestable. There was a drastic decline in freedom of information in 2014. Two-thirds of the 180 countries surveyed for the 2015 World Press Freedom Index performed less well than in the previous year. The annual global indicator, which measures the overall level of violations of freedom of information in 180 countries year by year, has risen to 3,719, an 8 percent increase over 2014 and almost 10 percent compared with 2013. The decline affected all continents.

Clearly, the index is based on freedom of the press, as would be expected from "Reporters without borders."

 

[Andalublue]

Here is where the world's countries stand in the freedom index.



Clearly, the index is based on freedom of the press, as would be expected from "Reporters without borders."

I often keep an eye on this index; it's useful to know where people are being best informed and enjoy the most freedom to express themselves without fear of retribution. The commentary attached, in which it explains the changing picture across the globe, is very interesting too. It shows us that for all the rhetoric, the major western powers are not the paragons of free speech that they have convinced themselves they are. The positions of Greece, Italy, Japan and the US must be causes for concern.

 

[Excon]

It is amazing what folks buy into.



Methodology

[...]

The aim of the index is to measure freedom of information in 180 countries. It reflects the degree of freedom that journalists, news media and netizens (Internet citizens) enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the authorities to respect and ensure respect for this freedom. It should not be seen as an indication of the quality of the media in the countries concerned.

Major changes were made to the method used to compile the index in 2013 so that it is better adapted to all the situations that journalists, news media and bloggers may have to face. We are particularly grateful to the Adessium Foundation for helping us to make these changes.

The questionnaire used to compile the index was sent to our partner organizations, to our network of correspondents, and to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights defenders. It consists of 87 questions covering all of the problems involved in providing the public with freely-reported information. It is available in 20 languages in an effort to ensure that it is fully understood by respondents.

The questionnaire used by Reporters Without Borders can be downloaded here.

As well as the questionnaire’s qualitative criteria, Reporters Without Borders uses quantitative criteria based on the information obtained from its own monitoring. These criteria aim to measure the level of violence and harassment to which journalists and other information providers were subjected during the period assessed. For the 2015 index, the period was 15 October 2013 to 14 October 2014.

[...]

http://fr.rsf.org/IMG/pdf/methodology-en.pdf​

 

[CanadaJohn]

I'd have to say this "report" or evaluation is ideological/political in nature in that it seems not to make a great deal of sense, at least to me.

I'll take one example. Canada is rated as #8 on the list, an improvement from #14 last year, while the US is rated as #49, a decrease from #42 last year. This seems odd to me since about 80% of Canada's population lives within 100 miles of the US border and we/they are inundated with American information/culture to the extent that it greatly influences our view of the world and world events. Add to that the vast majority of internet news sources being American based, how is it that America doesn't have one of the very highest ratings on such a report?

 

[RDS]

Your closest ally Saudi Arabia is #164 and you have a big base there?

 

[Dittohead not!]

I'd have to say this "report" or evaluation is ideological/political in nature in that it seems not to make a great deal of sense, at least to me.

I'll take one example. Canada is rated as #8 on the list, an improvement from #14 last year, while the US is rated as #49, a decrease from #42 last year. This seems odd to me since about 80% of Canada's population lives within 100 miles of the US border and we/they are inundated with American information/culture to the extent that it greatly influences our view of the world and world events. Add to that the vast majority of internet news sources being American based, how is it that America doesn't have one of the very highest ratings on such a report?

Good question.

Could it have to do with the media bias that has already been cussed and discussed at great length in this forum? Just a guess.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Good question.

Could it have to do with the media bias that has already been cussed and discussed at great length in this forum? Just a guess.

There's plenty of media bias in Canadian journalism, and plenty of corporate editorial slant, and that's not including all the US TV and internet feeds we're inundated with.

I think it has more to do with ideology and a general lack of interest in crediting America with anything good.

 

[Excon]

Good question.

Could it have to do with the media bias that has already been cussed and discussed at great length in this forum? Just a guess.

I would hope not, as any reported bias not from the Gov. is evidence of freedom.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Even with the flaws in the index methodology, it is still reasonable to review it the context of relation to other nations. When it comes to the disposition of this nation with any sense to "freedom" we have no place to go but down. We regulate much to much, we have awkward taxation means and results, we have too much active government process in constitutionally questionable ways, we incarcerate more by percentage than anyone else on the planet, and we have serious underline economic concerns such as wealth gap, income quintile mobility, social cohesion, and labor participation rates.

It really is no shock the U.S. gets not so favorable rankings in these types of indexes.

 

[PeteEU]

I'd have to say this "report" or evaluation is ideological/political in nature in that it seems not to make a great deal of sense, at least to me.

I'll take one example. Canada is rated as #8 on the list, an improvement from #14 last year, while the US is rated as #49, a decrease from #42 last year. This seems odd to me since about 80% of Canada's population lives within 100 miles of the US border and we/they are inundated with American information/culture to the extent that it greatly influences our view of the world and world events. Add to that the vast majority of internet news sources being American based, how is it that America doesn't have one of the very highest ratings on such a report?

Well look at the methodology and you will see why.

1) Pluralism ... Fox News and MSNBC will be a big negative here.
2) Media independence ... Again Fox News will cause issues here. Also the fact that like 3 companies own most of the media is a major issue.
3) Environment and self-censorship.... a problem in all countries of course, but it is quite evident in the US these days. Cherry picking of facts by media for political points is rampant.
4) Legislative framework....protection of journalists sources in US courts is a big issue here.
5) Infrastructure ... here I suspect the US is in top or near the top.
6) Abuses... here there again are problems. Arrests of journalists, and harassment is well known and as I understand it, a large part of the negative ranking.

So it is not a wonder that Canada ranks higher than the US. Americans might think that their press is free and all that nationalistic bs.. but the reality is much different when you do comparisons with other countries.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Well look at the methodology and you will see why.

1) Pluralism ... Fox News and MSNBC will be a big negative here.
2) Media independence ... Again Fox News will cause issues here. Also the fact that like 3 companies own most of the media is a major issue.
3) Environment and self-censorship.... a problem in all countries of course, but it is quite evident in the US these days. Cherry picking of facts by media for political points is rampant.
4) Legislative framework....protection of journalists sources in US courts is a big issue here.
5) Infrastructure ... here I suspect the US is in top or near the top.
6) Abuses... here there again are problems. Arrests of journalists, and harassment is well known and as I understand it, a large part of the negative ranking.

So it is not a wonder that Canada ranks higher than the US. Americans might think that their press is free and all that nationalistic bs.. but the reality is much different when you do comparisons with other countries.

It is a great point, in the context of this freedom index the U.S. should rank low when it comes to the press.

 

[joG]

Here is where the world's countries stand in the freedom index.



Clearly, the index is based on freedom of the press, as would be expected from "Reporters without borders."

I looked at the way the individual country indices are constructed, because the rankings did not correspond to my experience with the media I follow. It turns out that they measure gross breeches of freedom like in Syria, Russia or China quite well, but miss the less visible pressures from state owned media etc almost totally.

 

[Excon]

Even with the flaws in the index methodology, it is still reasonable to review it the context of relation to other nations. When it comes to the disposition of this nation with any sense to "freedom" we have no place to go but down. We regulate much to much, we have awkward taxation means and results, we have too much active government process in constitutionally questionable ways, we incarcerate more by percentage than anyone else on the planet, and we have serious underline economic concerns such as wealth gap, income quintile mobility, social cohesion, and labor participation rates.

It really is no shock the U.S. gets not so favorable rankings in these types of indexes.

World Press Freedom Index.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Well look at the methodology and you will see why.

1) Pluralism ... Fox News and MSNBC will be a big negative here.
2) Media independence ... Again Fox News will cause issues here. Also the fact that like 3 companies own most of the media is a major issue.
3) Environment and self-censorship.... a problem in all countries of course, but it is quite evident in the US these days. Cherry picking of facts by media for political points is rampant.
4) Legislative framework....protection of journalists sources in US courts is a big issue here.
5) Infrastructure ... here I suspect the US is in top or near the top.
6) Abuses... here there again are problems. Arrests of journalists, and harassment is well known and as I understand it, a large part of the negative ranking.

So it is not a wonder that Canada ranks higher than the US. Americans might think that their press is free and all that nationalistic bs.. but the reality is much different when you do comparisons with other countries.

Our media here in Canada is very narrowly owned - I'd say less so than in the US. In addition, one of our biggest media outlets is government funded although it is entirely independent from the government interference.

But my main point was that a large part of the media exposure Canadians get is American based because of our proximity to the border and the large influence.

But I will grant that Canada does not have a Prime Minister/President who has instructed his Justice Department to prosecute journalists and others who have exposed government secrets. There is a far greater political respect for the independence and freedom of journalism here, even if it's not always appreciated.

And that could explain why, since the advent of the Obama Presidency, the US ranking has greatly regressed. In the second term of the Bush administration, after the 9/11 crackdowns in the first, the US ranking had improved from #53 to #20 and during Obama's two terms, that has steadily risen from #20 to #49, reversing the trend.

 

[Andalublue]

World Press Freedom Index.

You get an impressive 19th place in this one...
Democracy Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And 17th in this one...
Corruption Perceptions Index -- 2014

 

[Excon]

You get an impressive 19th place in this one...
Democracy Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And 17th in this one...
Corruption Perceptions Index -- 2014

:lamo:lamo

Thank G_d we are not a Democracy.

As for the second? Perceptions?
iLOL
:lamo:lamo:lamo

 

[OrphanSlug]

World Press Freedom Index.

I understand, just making a point about why we do so poorly on "these types of indexes." When it comes to the press, the index has some merit on why we score low.

 

[Excon]

I understand, just making a point about why we do so poorly on "these types of indexes." When it comes to the press, the index has some merit on why we score low.

I see the bias, but no, I see no merit at all.

 

[Andalublue]

And that could explain why, since the advent of the Obama Presidency, the US ranking has greatly regressed. In the second term of the Bush administration, after the 9/11 crackdowns in the first, the US ranking had improved from #53 to #20 and during Obama's two terms, that has steadily risen from #20 to #49, reversing the trend.

To be more accurate, let's just offer the stats, because I think your analysis is hinkey, for obvious reasons.

[table="width: 500, class: outer_border"]
[tr]
[td]Year[/td]
[td]PFI Posn.[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2002[/td]
[td]17[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2003[/td]
[td]31[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2004[/td]
[td]22[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2005[/td]
[td]44[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2006[/td]
[td]53[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2007[/td]
[td]48[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2008[/td]
[td]36[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2009[/td]
[td]20[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2010[/td]
[td]20[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2012[/td]
[td]47[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2013[/td]
[td]32[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2014[/td]
[td]46[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td][/td]
[td][/td]
[/tr]

[/table]

Bush year average: 35.8
Obama year average: 33

Not much in it, but not the ringing endorsement of Bush you were pitching for.

 

[Fearandloathing]

There's plenty of media bias in Canadian journalism, and plenty of corporate editorial slant, and that's not including all the US TV and internet feeds we're inundated with.

I think it has more to do with ideology and a general lack of interest in crediting America with anything good.

The last line has more import than you might realize. There are some generalizations I came across in my tenure reporting in Canada; one being that journalists usually college graduates, tend to lean to left. Another is a bias against US based reporting. There has always been a good deal of skepticism by journalists, especially those who have worked alongside US networks; the Montreal Olympics had Canadians laughing at US coverage. As a desk editor, given a conflict of data we would always gravitate to international sources over US.

And despite the corporate media slant, which does exists in editorials, Alberta has just reversed 65 years of right wing governance.

 

[LowDown]

I'd have to say this "report" or evaluation is ideological/political in nature in that it seems not to make a great deal of sense, at least to me.

I'll take one example. Canada is rated as #8 on the list, an improvement from #14 last year, while the US is rated as #49, a decrease from #42 last year. This seems odd to me since about 80% of Canada's population lives within 100 miles of the US border and we/they are inundated with American information/culture to the extent that it greatly influences our view of the world and world events. Add to that the vast majority of internet news sources being American based, how is it that America doesn't have one of the very highest ratings on such a report?

Canada's standing is hard to understand. Don't they have laws against "hate speech" there, for example? Mark Steyn, for one, was dragged into court for being critical of Islam, and other news people have been treated in a similar fashion.

The US's position in the rankings is explained thusly:

In the United States, 2014 was marked by judicial harassment of New York Times investigative reporter James Risen in connection with the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer charged under the Espionage Act with giving him classified information. US journalists are still not protected by a federal shield law that would guarantee their right not to name their sources or reveal other confidential information about their work. Meanwhile, at least 15 journalists were arbitrarily arrested during clashes between police and demonstrators protesting against black teenager Michael Brown’s fatal shooting by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.

So it's apparently based on isolated incidents where the US is concerned.

Freedom of the press is fine as an abstract concept, but I part company when they start talking about publication of military or intelligence secrets that put military or intelligence people in danger. That's grounds for a charge of treason as far as I'm concerned.

Eritrea, in the Horn of Africa, is dead last on the list, even below the Norks. There is no free press there at all, just a government media, and news from outside of the country is censored. Foreign correspondents are forbidden from entering the country.

 

[Andalublue]

Freedom of the press is fine as an abstract concept, but I part company when they start talking about publication of military or intelligence secrets that put military or intelligence people in danger. That's grounds for a charge of treason as far as I'm concerned.

Which is precisely the attitude that has you at a lowly #46. There seems little point in belly-aching about a low ranking on an index whose premise you don't really believe in to begin with. Why should you care? Unless of course you wish to believe two impossible things before lunchtime: that yours is the free-est nation on Earth, and that whistleblowers are traitors.

 

[CanadaJohn]

To be more accurate, let's just offer the stats, because I think your analysis is hinkey, for obvious reasons.


Not much in it, but not the ringing endorsement of Bush you were pitching for.

I wasn't pitching a ringing endorsement of Bush - in fact, I accurately noted that the index had regressed under Bush to #53 following 9/11. That was a reference to institution of the Patriot Act and other security restrictions on access to the military and Gitmo, etc. But in his second term, those numbers started to reverse again and rose to #20. I also accurately noted that under Obama, that has regressed again, and my analysis isn't "hinkey" - I simply opined that it might have to do with the Obama administrations attack on whistle blowers and the media they run to. If you're going to deny that Obama has attempted to prosecute more journalists and whistle blowers in his two terms than all other Presidents combined since the early 1900's, that's up to you but the facts won't support you.

 

[LowDown]

Which is precisely the attitude that has you at a lowly #46. There seems little point in belly-aching about a low ranking on an index whose premise you don't really believe in to begin with. Why should you care? Unless of course you wish to believe two impossible things before lunchtime: that yours is the free-est nation on Earth, and that whistleblowers are traitors.

For a country to say it's OK to get their military and intelligence people killed is insane. Don't conflate whistle-blowing with that.

 

[PeteEU]

Our media here in Canada is very narrowly owned - I'd say less so than in the US. In addition, one of our biggest media outlets is government funded although it is entirely independent from the government interference.

Well yes and no. The US media is owned by 8 companies, where as there are a considerable more regional and local owners in Canada.. but it is all relative.

But my main point was that a large part of the media exposure Canadians get is American based because of our proximity to the border and the large influence.

This has zero influence on the rankings.

But I will grant that Canada does not have a Prime Minister/President who has instructed his Justice Department to prosecute journalists and others who have exposed government secrets. There is a far greater political respect for the independence and freedom of journalism here, even if it's not always appreciated.

Give it time!

And that could explain why, since the advent of the Obama Presidency, the US ranking has greatly regressed. In the second term of the Bush administration, after the 9/11 crackdowns in the first, the US ranking had improved from #53 to #20 and during Obama's two terms, that has steadily risen from #20 to #49, reversing the trend.

Yes and yes. Hardly unique to Obama though... Bush was in many ways worse since he imprisoned journalists without trial.