Slashdot Mirror


US Plummets On World Press Freedom Ranking

Jeremiah Cornelius writes "Reporters Without Borders released its 2011-2012 global Press Freedom Index. The indicators for press freedom in the U.S. are dramatic, with a downward movement from 27th to 47th in the global ranking, from the previous year. Much of this is correlated directly to the arrest and incarceration of American journalists covering the 'Occupy' protest movements in New York and across the country. 'This is especially troubling as we head into an election year which is sure to spark new conflicts between police and press covering rallies, protests and political events.' Only Chile, who dropped from 33 to 80, joined the U.S. in falling over 100% of their previous ranking. Similarly, Chile was downgraded for 'freedom of information violations committed by the security forces during student protests.'"

16 of 427 comments (clear)

  1. No shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm surprised the US isn't lower.

    I don't think they'd rate a Brave New World-esque media as "free".

    http://www.recombinantrecords.net/docs/2009-05-Amusing-Ourselves-to-Death.html

    1. Re:No shit! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a certain sense, that's actually the alarming thing.

      The historical American press neutralization strategy rested largely on a mixture of drowning out the information with expertly crafted 'infotainment' and ensuring that the bulk of the journalists owed their paychecks and their 'access'(and often sympathized with personally) the people they were supposed to be writing about.

      Not good for highest quality journalism; but all very soft-power. Overt suppression by assorted 'security forces', of varying levels of shadiness, is quite a different strategy...

    2. Re:No shit! by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's most disturbing about it all is that the Obama voters still cheer him on, even though he's turning out to be much worse for human rights and civil liberties than Bush ever was.

    3. Re:No shit! by reboot246 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You must have been asleep for the last three years. Obama has wholeheartedly embraced what Bush was doing and has taken Federal powers, and thus his own, to new levels.

    4. Re:No shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Shall we start with the executive order allowing the assassination of American citizens who might be doing something the government doesn't like? Or the reversal on closing GITMO?, or the expansion of the use of drones by local police departments? SOPA, PIPA, Extension of the Patriot Act, expansion of the warranties wiretapping program? Need I go on?

    5. Re:No shit! by Dynedain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't forget the take over of several American industries through "stimulus" funds and the takeover of banks through TARP. Never in the history of America has the POTUS fired the CEO of a major corporation until this president came along.

      They didn't have to take the stimulus funds. And they didn't need to engage in the problems that led to needing the stimulus funds.

      Plenty of smaller banks stayed out of the subprime and mortgage securities scam market and sailed nicely through the aftermath without needing TARP funds. Quite a few of the banks that did accept the money repaid it practically overnight so that they wouldn't have to deal with extra federal oversight.

      Ford (unlike GM and Chrysler) didn't accept the stimulus funds, and so were able to fix things their own way. If you accept huge amounts of government funding to avoid collapse, then you better expect there will be an equivalent amount of government oversight and input into how you do things. And that includes the government firing management (who were responsible for the bad decisions to begin with).

      If you're the largest shareholder in a company, you get the most say in how things are run, and who runs it. Doesn't matter if you as a shareholder are an individual, a mutual fund, a pension fund, or the government.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    6. Re:No shit! by StevenMaurer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We elect Presidents in the U.S. Not dictators. The fact that you don't understand, or are unwilling to admit, how powerful Congress is, and how dysfunctional they've become, is the real source of your sickness.

    7. Re:No shit! by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's always struck me as odd how people can be so vigilant about 1984 but not a brave new world. I don't understand people who spend all their time worrying about big government, but think big business is a good thing. Same goals: taking your rights and your money. Same people even. Business becoming the government is okay, but somehow government regulating business is evil socialism.

  2. "I've got one that can SEE!" -- They Live by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Memorable quotes for
    Looker (1981)
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/quotes

    "John Reston: Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, that's power. "

    "The United States has it's own propaganda, but it's very effective because people don't realize that it's propaganda. And it's subtle, but it's actually a much stronger propaganda machine than the Nazis had but it's funded in a different way. With the Nazis it was funded by the government, but in the United States, it's funded by corporations and corporations they only want things to happen that will make people want to buy stuff. So whatever that is, then that is considered okay and good, but that doesn't necessarily mean it really serves people's thinking - it can stupify and make not very good things happen."
    -- Crispin Glover: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000417/bio

    "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, CIA Director

  3. Re:Some kind of irony by bky1701 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not really irony. They simply know where the slippery slope leads. Americans have forgotten why tyranny is bad.

  4. Re:That will happen ... by oodaloop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You mean the oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic? Seems he's one of the few who took it seriously.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  5. Re:Numbers Please for the "Occupy" Repression by mykos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Totally agree, man. As long as the rape of the Constitution isn't too widespread, it's ok. It's just a little rape.

  6. Re:"falling over 100% of their previous ranking" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and incorrectly applied in any case; 47 is less than twice 27.

    Actually, the incorrect part is the summary.. the US fell 27 places... from #20 to #47.

    And while I will admit there is still a long way we can still fall, perhaps some of us should reflect for a moment about the countries ranked higher than we are, and how they got there, considering where they were (in general, not absolutely speaking in terms of this particular metric) not too long ago... Some of these places were the places I I heard about in school when they talked about repression and how "those commies" were trying to take over the world... Phrases like "Papers, please.... Your papers..." were practically ingrained into our social consciousness, asked of poor innocents in every movie with a scene set in one of these places... I'm extremely glad to hear they are doing so well (and that the stereotypes "may" have been exaggerated ;-) ) But I still have to ask; What the hell is happening to us? Aren't we supposed to be the shining light? Aren't we supposed to be the beacon of hope, the pinnacle of freedom? More importantly, why do so few people seem to care?

  7. Re:"falling over 100% of their previous ranking" by Phil06 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Welcome class to Journalism 101

    Things don't rise, they skyrocket, they don't drop, they plummet. Cuts are always draconian, oil spews, smoke belches. Now, make sure you keep your notes for the next semester Political Science 101. Class dismissed

    --
    "...and yet, I blame society" Duke - Repo Man
  8. Re:"falling over 100% of their previous ranking" by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >What the hell is happening to us? Aren't we supposed to be the shining light? Aren't we supposed to be the beacon of hope, the pinnacle of freedom? More importantly, why do so few people seem to care?

    Only two people types of people have ever said that: American politicians and American schoolteachers. Nobody else in the world has EVER thought of you that way, and frankly when us people in the rest of the world think of nations that are the epitomy of civil liberty and freedom - America hasn't even been in the top 10 in decades. The most liberal constitution in the world belongs to an African country for crying out loud.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  9. Y'all keep voting for the authoritarian candidates by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who promise wam fuzzies of one type or another.

    It isn't left vs right. It's authoritarian vs autarchic.

    There are a couple of ironies which are missed in American politics. It's rather bewildering to watch from the outside.

    1. On the liberal side: How can liberal ideals, which are literally those which pertain to being free, possibly be accomplished by handing more authority to a centralised bureaucracy?

    2. On the conservative side: How can conservative ideals, such as lower taxation possibly be accomplished by increasing legislation, rules, regulations on social issues like abortion, drugs or increasing spending on military or law enforcement?

    Both points of view, liberal and conservative are logically inconsistent with the methods being used to achieve them.

    It seems to me that you are voting along the wrong axes. The true axis is authoritarian vs autarchic (I won't use the word "liberal" because the meaning has been perverted) and both sides; republican and democrat are authoritarian.

    --
    Deleted