Jump to content

Freedom of the press: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Line 18: Line 18:
*The [[Committee to Protect Journalists]] (CPJ) uses the tools of journalism to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and firsthand contacts in the field, including local working journalists in countries around the world. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, a global e-mail network. CPJ also tracks journalist deaths and detentions. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment.
*The [[Committee to Protect Journalists]] (CPJ) uses the tools of journalism to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and firsthand contacts in the field, including local working journalists in countries around the world. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, a global e-mail network. CPJ also tracks journalist deaths and detentions. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment.
*[[Freedom House]] likewise studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. So the concept of '''independence of the press''' is one closely linked with the concept of press freedom.
*[[Freedom House]] likewise studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. So the concept of '''independence of the press''' is one closely linked with the concept of press freedom.
A. LEGAL ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

Do the constitution or other basic laws contain provisions designed to protect freedom of the press and of expression, and are they enforced? (0–6 points)
Do the penal code, security laws, or any other laws restrict reporting, and are journalists punished under these laws? (0–6 points)
Are there penalties for libeling officials or the state, and are they enforced? (0–3 points)
Is the judiciary independent, and do courts judge cases concerning the media impartially? (0–3 points)
Is freedom of information legislation in place, and are journalists able to make use of it? (0–2 points)
Can individuals or business entities legally establish and operate private media outlets without undue interference? (0–4 points)
Are media regulatory bodies, such as a broadcasting authority or national press or communications council, able to operate freely and independently? (0–2 points)
Is there freedom to become a journalist and to practice journalism, and can professional groups freely support journalists’ rights and interests? (0–4 points)
B. POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT (0–40 POINTS)

To what extent are media outlets’ news and information content determined by the government or a particular partisan interest? (0–10 points)
Is access to official or unofficial sources generally controlled? (0–2 points)
Is there official censorship? (0–4 points)
Do journalists practice self-censorship? (0–4 points)
Is media coverage robust, and does it reflect a diversity of viewpoints? (0–4 points)
Are both local and foreign journalists able to cover the news freely? (0–6 points)
Are journalists or media outlets subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor? (0–10 points)
C. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

To what extent are media owned or controlled by the government, and does this influence their diversity of views? (0–6 points)
Is private media ownership transparent, thus allowing consumers to judge the impartiality of the news? (0–3 points)
Is private media ownership highly concentrated, and does it influence diversity of content? (0–3 points)
Are there restrictions on the means of journalistic production and distribution? (0–4 points)
Does the state place prohibitively high costs on the establishment and operation of media outlets? (0–4 points)
Do the state or other actors try to control the media through allocation of advertising or subsidies? (0–3 points)
Do journalists receive payment from private or public sources whose design is to influence their journalistic content? (0–3 points)
Does the economic situation in a country accentuate media dependency on the state, political parties, big business, or other influential political actors for funding? (0–4 points)
Legend



==Status of press freedom worldwide==
==Status of press freedom worldwide==
Line 27: Line 58:


The country with the least degree of press freedom was [[North Korea]], followed by [[Burma]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[People's Republic of China]] ([[mainland China|mainland]] only), [[Vietnam]], [[Nepal]], and [[Iran]].
The country with the least degree of press freedom was [[North Korea]], followed by [[Burma]], [[Turkmenistan]], [[People's Republic of China]] ([[mainland China|mainland]] only), [[Vietnam]], [[Nepal]], and [[Iran]].

===Non-democratic states===
===Non-democratic states===
According to [[Reporters Without Borders]], more than a third of the world's people live in countries where there is no press freedom. Overwhelmingly, these people live in countries where there is no system of [[democracy]] or where there are serious deficiencies in the democratic process.Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of access to information is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional [[blacklisting]] to [[death threat]]s, [[kidnapping]], [[torture]], and [[assassination]]. Reporters Without Borders reports that, in 2003, 42 journalists lost their lives pursuing their profession and that, in the same year, at least 130 journalists were in prison as a result of their occupational activities. In 2005, 63 journalists and 5 media assistants were killed worldwide.
According to [[Reporters Without Borders]], more than a third of the world's people live in countries where there is no press freedom. Overwhelmingly, these people live in countries where there is no system of [[democracy]] or where there are serious deficiencies in the democratic process.Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of access to information is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional [[blacklisting]] to [[death threat]]s, [[kidnapping]], [[torture]], and [[assassination]]. Reporters Without Borders reports that, in 2003, 42 journalists lost their lives pursuing their profession and that, in the same year, at least 130 journalists were in prison as a result of their occupational activities. In 2005, 63 journalists and 5 media assistants were killed worldwide.

Revision as of 20:50, 21 February 2009

Freedom of the press consists of constitutional or statutory protections pertaining to the media and published materials.

With respect to governmental information, any government distinguishes which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that are used to define the ambit of national interest.

Basic principles and criteria

"I fear three newspapers more than a hundred thousand bayonets."

— Napoleon Bonaparte [1]

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers"

This philosophy is usually accompanied by legislation ensuring various degrees of freedom of scientific research (known as scientific freedom), publishing, press and printing the depth to which these laws are entrenched in a country's legal system can go as far down as its constitution. The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by the same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to media and individuals.

Besides legal definitions, some non-governmental organizations use other criteria to judge the level of press freedom around the world:

  • Reporters Without Borders considers the number of journalists murdered, expelled or harassed, and the existence of a state monopoly on TV and radio, as well as the existence of censorship and self-censorship in the media, and the overall independence of media as well as the difficulties that foreign reporters may face.
  • The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) uses the tools of journalism to help journalists by tracking press freedom issues through independent research, fact-finding missions, and firsthand contacts in the field, including local working journalists in countries around the world. CPJ shares information on breaking cases with other press freedom organizations worldwide through the International Freedom of Expression Exchange, a global e-mail network. CPJ also tracks journalist deaths and detentions. CPJ staff applies strict criteria for each case; researchers independently investigate and verify the circumstances behind each death or imprisonment.
  • Freedom House likewise studies the more general political and economic environments of each nation in order to determine whether relationships of dependence exist that limit in practice the level of press freedom that might exist in theory. So the concept of independence of the press is one closely linked with the concept of press freedom.

A. LEGAL ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

Do the constitution or other basic laws contain provisions designed to protect freedom of the press and of expression, and are they enforced? (0–6 points) Do the penal code, security laws, or any other laws restrict reporting, and are journalists punished under these laws? (0–6 points) Are there penalties for libeling officials or the state, and are they enforced? (0–3 points) Is the judiciary independent, and do courts judge cases concerning the media impartially? (0–3 points) Is freedom of information legislation in place, and are journalists able to make use of it? (0–2 points) Can individuals or business entities legally establish and operate private media outlets without undue interference? (0–4 points) Are media regulatory bodies, such as a broadcasting authority or national press or communications council, able to operate freely and independently? (0–2 points) Is there freedom to become a journalist and to practice journalism, and can professional groups freely support journalists’ rights and interests? (0–4 points) B. POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT (0–40 POINTS)

To what extent are media outlets’ news and information content determined by the government or a particular partisan interest? (0–10 points) Is access to official or unofficial sources generally controlled? (0–2 points) Is there official censorship? (0–4 points) Do journalists practice self-censorship? (0–4 points) Is media coverage robust, and does it reflect a diversity of viewpoints? (0–4 points) Are both local and foreign journalists able to cover the news freely? (0–6 points) Are journalists or media outlets subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor? (0–10 points) C. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

To what extent are media owned or controlled by the government, and does this influence their diversity of views? (0–6 points) Is private media ownership transparent, thus allowing consumers to judge the impartiality of the news? (0–3 points) Is private media ownership highly concentrated, and does it influence diversity of content? (0–3 points) Are there restrictions on the means of journalistic production and distribution? (0–4 points) Does the state place prohibitively high costs on the establishment and operation of media outlets? (0–4 points) Do the state or other actors try to control the media through allocation of advertising or subsidies? (0–3 points) Do journalists receive payment from private or public sources whose design is to influence their journalistic content? (0–3 points) Does the economic situation in a country accentuate media dependency on the state, political parties, big business, or other influential political actors for funding? (0–4 points) Legend


Status of press freedom worldwide

Worldwide press freedom index

Freedom of the press worldwide according to Reporters Without Borders.

Every year, Reporters Without Borders establishes a ranking of countries in terms of their freedom of the press. The Worldwide press freedom index list is based on responses to surveys sent to journalists that are members of partner organisations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, jurists and human rights activists. The survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media as well as other indirect sources of pressure against the free press, such as pressure on journalists by non-governmental groups. RWB is careful to note that the index only deals with press freedom, and does not measure the quality of journalism.

In 2003, the countries where press was the most free were Finland, Iceland, the Netherlands and Norway. In 2004, apart from the above countries, Denmark, Ireland, Slovakia, Portugal and Switzerland were tied at the top of the list, followed by New Zealand and Latvia.

The country with the least degree of press freedom was North Korea, followed by Burma, Turkmenistan, People's Republic of China (mainland only), Vietnam, Nepal, and Iran.

Non-democratic states

According to Reporters Without Borders, more than a third of the world's people live in countries where there is no press freedom. Overwhelmingly, these people live in countries where there is no system of democracy or where there are serious deficiencies in the democratic process.Freedom of the press is an extremely problematic problem/concept for most non-democratic systems of government since, in the modern age, strict control of access to information is critical to the existence of most non-democratic governments and their associated control systems and security apparatus. To this end, most non-democratic societies employ state-run news organizations to promote the propaganda critical to maintaining an existing political power base and suppress (often very brutally, through the use of police, military, or intelligence agencies) any significant attempts by the media or individual journalists to challenge the approved "government line" on contentious issues. In such countries, journalists operating on the fringes of what is deemed to be acceptable will very often find themselves the subject of considerable intimidation by agents of the state. This can range from simple threats to their professional careers (firing, professional blacklisting to death threats, kidnapping, torture, and assassination. Reporters Without Borders reports that, in 2003, 42 journalists lost their lives pursuing their profession and that, in the same year, at least 130 journalists were in prison as a result of their occupational activities. In 2005, 63 journalists and 5 media assistants were killed worldwide.

According to the Press Freedom Index for 2007, Iran ranked 166th out of 169 nations. Only three other countries - Eritrea, North Korea and Turkmenistan - had more restrictions on news media freedom than Iran.[3] The government of Ali Khamenei and the Supreme National Security Council had imprisoned 50 journalists in 2007 and had all but eliminated press freedom.[4] Reporters Without Borders (RWB) has dubbed Iran the "Middle East's biggest prison for journalists."[5]

Regions closed to foreign reporters

  • Chechnya, Russia[6]
  • Jaffna, Sri Lanka[7]
  • Myanmar (Burma)
  • Jammu & Kashmir, India[8]
  • Papua, Indonesia[9]
  • Waziristan, Pakistan[10]
  • Tibet, People's Republic of China[11]

History

Sweden

The world's first Freedom of the Press Act was introduced in Sweden in 1766.[12][13][14][15][16]

Denmark-Norway

Between September 4, 1770 and October 7, 1771 the kingdom of Denmark-Norway had the most unrestricted freedom of press of any country in Europe. This occurred during the regime of Johann Friedrich Struensee, whose first act was to abolish the old censorship laws. However, due to the great amount of mostly anonymous pamphlets published that was critical and often slanderous towards Struensees own regime, he reinstated some restrictions regarding the freedom of press a year later, October 7 1771.[17]

England

The Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England established parliamentary sovereignty over the Crown and, above all, the right of revolution. A major contributor to Western liberal theory was John Locke. Locke argued in Two Treatises of Government that the individual placed some of his rights present in the state of nature in trusteeship with the sovereign (government) in return for protection of certain natural individual rights. A social contract was entered into by the people.

Until 1694, England had an elaborate system of licensing. No publication was allowed without the accompaniment of a government-granted license. Fifty years earlier, at a time of civil war, John Milton wrote his pamphlet Areopagitica. In this work Milton argued forcefully against this form of government censorship and parodied the idea, writing "when as debtors and delinquents may walk abroad without a keeper, but unoffensive books must not stir forth without a visible jailer in their title." Although at the time it did little to halt the practice of licensing it would be viewed later a significant milestone in press freedom.

Milton's central argument was that the individual is capable of using reason and distinguishing right from wrong, good from bad. In order to be able to exercise this ration right, the individual must have unlimited access to the ideas of his fellow men in “a free and open encounter." From Milton's writings developed the concept of the open marketplace of ideas, the idea that when people argue against each other, the good arguments will prevail. One form of speech that was widely restricted in England was seditious libel, and laws were in place that made criticizing the government a crime. The King was above public criticism and statements critical of the government were forbidden, according to the English Court of the Star Chamber. Truth was not a defense to seditious libel because the goal was to prevent and punish all condemnation of the government.

John Stuart Mill approached the problem of authority versus liberty from the viewpoint of a 19th century utilitarian: The individual has the right of expressing himself so long as he does not harm other individuals. The good society is one in which the greatest number of persons enjoy the greatest possible amount of happiness. Applying these general principles of liberty to freedom of expression, Mill states that if we silence an opinion, we may silence the truth. The individual freedom of expression is therefore essential to the well-being of society.

Mill’s application of the general principles of liberty is expressed in his book On Liberty: "If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and one, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind".

Nazi Germany

The dictatorship of Adolf Hitler largely suppressed freedom of the press through Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. As the Ministry's name implies, propaganda did not carry the negative connotations that it does today (or did in the Allied countries); how-to manuals were openly distributed by that same ministry explaining the craft of effective propaganda. The Ministry also acted as a central control-point for all media, issuing orders as to what stories could be run and what stories would be suppressed. Anyone involved in the film industry -- from directors to the lowliest assistant -- had to sign an oath of loyalty to the Nazi Party, due to opinion-changing power Goebbels perceived movies to have. (Goebbels himself maintained some personal control over every single film made in Nazi Europe.) Journalists who crossed the Propaganda Ministry were routinely imprisoned or shot as traitors.

India

The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word "press", provides for "the right to freedom of speech and expression" (Article 19(1) a). However this right is subject to restrictions under sub clause (2), whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of "sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt, court, defamation, or incitement to an offense". Laws such as the Official Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorism Act[18] (PoTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under PoTA, person could be detained for up to six months for being in contact with a terrorist or terrorist group. PoTA was repealed in 2006, but the Official Secrets Act 1923 continues.

For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..."[19] With the liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. Organizations like Tehelka and NDTV have been particularly influential, e.g. in bringing about the resignation of powerful Haryana minister Venod Sharma.however this freedom of speech and expression is automatically canceled during emergency.the word Reasonable was not present in the original article 19(1)(a. but this was later on added to this article. and presently in India there are number of organization who are really influential.

Italy

Main article: Freedom of the press in Italy

Russia

Main article: Media freedom in Russia

United States

Main article: Freedom of the press in the United States

Implications of new technologies

Many of the traditional means of delivering information are being slowly superseded by the increasing pace of modern technological advance. Almost every conventional mode of media and information dissemination has a modern counterpart that offers significant potential advantages to journalists seeking to maintain and enhance their 'freedom of speech'. A few simple examples of such phenomena include:

  • Terrestrial television versus satellite television: Whilst terrestrial television is relatively easy to manage and manipulate, satellite television is much more difficult to control as journalistic content can easily be broadcast from other jurisdictions beyond the control of individual governments. An example of this in the Middle East is the satellite broadcaster Al Jazeera. This Arabic language media channel operates out of the 'relatively liberal' state of Qatar, and often presents views and content that are problematic to a number of governments in the region and beyond. However, because of the increased affordability and miniaturisation of satellite technology (e.g. dishes and receivers) it is simply not practicable for most states to control popular access to the channel.
  • Web-based publishing (e.g., blogging) vs. traditional publishing: Traditional magazines and newspapers rely on physical resources (e.g. offices, printing presses) that can easily be targeted and forced to close down. Web-based publishing systems can be run using ubiquitous and inexpensive equipment and can operate from any global jurisdiction. To get control over web publications, nations and organisations are using Geolocation and Geolocation software.
  • Voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) vs. conventional telephony: Although conventional telephony systems are easily tapped and recorded, modern VOIP technology can employ sophisticated encryption systems to evade central monitoring systems. As VOIP and similar technologies become more widespread they are likely to make the effective monitoring of journalists (and their contacts and activities) a very difficult task for governments.

Naturally, governments are responding to the challenges posed by new media technologies by deploying increasingly sophisticated technology of their own (a notable example being China's attempts to impose control through a state run internet service provider that controls access to the Internet) but it seems that this will becomes an ever increasingly difficult task as journalists continue to find new ways to exploit technology and stay one step ahead of the generally slower moving government institutions that attempt to censor them.

Organizations for press freedom

See also

Template:Multicol

Template:Multicol-break

Template:Multicol-end

Notes

  1. ^ The Newspaper and Society: A Book of Reading, by George Lloyd Bird, Frederic Maton Mervin, Prentice-Hall, 1949, pg 254
  2. ^ "About [[Reporters Without Borders]]". {{cite web}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help)
  3. ^ rsf.org "Eritrea ranked last for first time while G8 members, except Russia, recover lost ground". Worldwide Press Freedom Index 2007. Reporters Without Borders. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  4. ^ Power, Catherine. "Overview of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA): Repression Revisited". World Press Freedom Review 2007. International Press Institute region review. nine journalists remain in prison at year's end and the opposition press has all but been quashed through successive closure orders
  5. ^ "Iran - Annual report 2008". Reporters Without Borders.
  6. ^ "Do journalists have the right to work in Chechnya without accreditation?". Moscow Media Law and Policy Center. March 2000. Retrieved 2008-09-06. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  7. ^ "Sri Lanka - Advice for this Country". International News Safety Institute. Retrieved 2008-11-01. the coastline and adjacent territorial sea of the Trincomalee, Mullaittivu, Jaffna, Kilinochchi and Mannar administrative districts in the north and east have been declared restricted zones by the Sri Lankan authorities and should be avoided.
  8. ^ "India praises McCain-Dalai Lama meeting". Washington, D.C.: WTOPews.com. July 27, 2008. Retrieved 2008-09-06.
  9. ^ "Indonesia: Police Abuse Endemic in Closed Area of Papua". Human Rights Watch. May 7, 2007. Archived from the original on 2007-09-15. Retrieved September 6 2008. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Unknown parameter |dateformat= ignored (help)
  10. ^ Landay, Jonathan S. (March 20, 2008). "Radical Islamists no longer welcome in Pakistani tribal areas". McClatchy Washington Bureau. Retrieved 2008-09-06.
  11. ^ "China criticizes McCain-Dalai Lama meeting". Washington, D.C.: WTOPews.com. July 27, 2008. Retrieved 2008-09-06.
  12. ^ "The Freedom of the Press Act", Sveriges Riksdag [1]
  13. ^ "THE SWEDISH TRADITION OF FREEDOM OF PRESS" [2]
  14. ^ "The World's First Freedom of Information Act (Sweden/Finland 1766)" [3]
  15. ^ freedominfo.org, "Sweden" [4]
  16. ^ Wikipedia, "Freedom of information legislation" [5]
  17. ^ Laursen, John Christian (January 1998). "David Hume and the Danish Debate about Freedom of the Press in the 1770s". Journal of the History of Ideas. 59 (1). University of Pennsylvania Press: 167–172.
  18. ^ "The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002".
  19. ^ "Freedom of the Press". PUCL Bulletin,. People's Union for Civil Liberties. July 1982.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)

References

  • Starr, Paul (2004). The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-08193-2.
  • Gant, Scott (2007). We're All Journalists Now: The Transformation of the Press and Reshaping of the Law in the Internet Age. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-7432-9926-4.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Freedom_of_the_press&oldid=272338036"