Slashdot Mirror
US Plunges To 46th In World Press Freedom Index
schwit1 writes "Reporters Without Borders puts out their Press Freedom Index every year, and the 2014 ranking came out today. It was not a good showing for the U.S. Specifically, the U.S. registered one of the steepest falls of all nations, down 13 slots to the #46 position, just above Haiti and just below Romania."
Press freedom's drop was noticed because of Manning and Snowdon: now American-born reporters are afraid to come home. They've been threatened with both criminal charges and extrajudicial punishment for publishing the leaks. Net result? They get published in the UK.
davecb@spamcop.net
but this is just a rank based on a number calculated according to an arbitrary weighting of factors. It is possible that the rank drop of the US might have been less had the factors used in calculating the score been weighted differently, or the cases used to arrive at the score been characterized somewhat differently.
For example, the score weights "Pluralism" twice as much as "self-censorship" and four times as much as "transparency". Why? Can such things be weighted precisely at all?
The scores for these factors are likewise arbitrarily scaled numbers in the range 0-100. The ranking of each country is a linear combination of non-parametric factors; as such the rank on such a score is so arbitrary as to be practically meaningless, or at best very imprecise.
I think such a score might have some value in comparing a country's performance to its prior performance, or even to compare progress made in one country vs. another -- provided it is taken with a large grain of salt. But the nature of the score is such that very little can be inferred about country A vs. country B based on their relative ranks.
As a liberal geek I'm all up for harsh criticism of America as a nascent plutocracy, but this particular story is just manufactured controversy.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
They do care but between trying to financially keep their heads above water and fighting off the urge to watch Duck Dynasty they have little time to enact change.
Well that was sarcasm but life is so busy that things like government tyranny fall by the wayside. Our lives are just comfortable and busy enough to allow us to ignore the greater issues at hand. Ask a person today what their concerns are and I bet its going to be things like job security, getting a better job to make more money or keeping their head above water. Government tyranny is just low enough to let us not care. Then throw in the incentive for social problems and you have the foundation for a pacifying system to keep people just above poverty and starving so they do revolt.
We can't have Land of the Free OR Home of the brave.
Because we are afraid of everything, we have elected to give up our freedom in trade of safety.
After 9/11 there was little talk about this attacks being the price we may pay to live in a free society, and more talks about how to stop it again. Then we complained how these people were even allowed on the plane before, because of lack of proper intelligence.
After the Boston Marathon Bombing, citizens gladly sacrificed their freedom and locked themselves at home until the bomber was caught. Then we complained left and right how we could have let these minor hints get us by and let these people back into the us.
We Cannot live in a free society when we are afraid of the bad man getting us. To live in a free society we need to stand up and face these problems even if it means our death.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Because those making the leaks need to flee the country and take asylum elsewhere, or end up imprisoned for years.
It's not about the presence of the leaks, it's about the way that the government has persecuted the leakers, and the members of the press they went to.
First of all... IF Snowden is a LEAKER then, by definition and by virtue of the paperwork he signed the government has the right (if not the obligation) to haul his butt into criminal court and store his living carcass in jail for long periods of time. If convicted...
The government does NOT have a "right" to incarcerate a person indefinitely, without convicting them of a crime.
Conversely, Edward Snowden does have a right to a fair and free trial, to face his accusers and the evidence they present against him, and to be judged by a jury of his peers.
None of which will happen under the current government.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
you act like racism and bigotry don't exist, and it's just a ploy to smear people
that's some convoluted psychological denial going on there
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Not that I'm totally happy with the situation, but I wonder if this story is a bit exaggerated. Reporters Without Borders says that they made changes to their methodology. Suddenly the U.S. drops in rank. I think those two facts are related.
Proverbs 21:19
None of which will happen under the current government.
How on earth can you KNOW that he would be unfairly treated?
You mean, aside from the existence of Gitmo, the repeated threats of death from various US officials, and the treatment Bradley/Chelsea Manning received when he/she was suspected of whistle-blowing?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
At least, that's the story that the right-wing news sources you use would like you to believe.
Then, too, you have those that call people:
"Gay agenda" for believing that big government doesn't have a place dictating who you can or can't marry.
"Tax and spend liberal" for trying to rebuild the crumbling roads, waterways, and other infrastructure all around us.
"Hostile to business" for expecting that we not grossly pollute the air and water around us that we all depend on.
"Socialist" for expecting that insurance be available to everybody.
Both sides have their merits.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Dude, read the damn article. This has nothing to do with the left-right hotbutton issues you're talking about. Our press is manifestly free to make all the points you make, on repeat, 24 hours a day.
This is about silencing of whistleblowers and the legal harassment of the reporters who report leaked information. It has zero to do with the Tea Party, or any specific difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, who are equally complicit in this.
There's no need to suppress press. The US found that out long ago.
People want to see war pics. So they only "invite" you to report if you report favorably. If you'd consider reporting something that conflicts with the "good guy" image, you're not going to get support by the powers that are. You will not be able to show those great, ratings-boosting clips where our boys kick some serious enemy ass with futuristic weapons.
It's just so win-win. If you comply, you will have great pics that not only boost the US image but also your ratings. If you dare to oppose, your news will be boring, which makes your ratings drop, which also has the "nice" side effect that fewer people are going to hear it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
But I can't recall hearing anyone saying "Thank god the police came and locked everything down and started busting in our doors trying to find this guy!"
You don't live near Boston, then. People were pretty much saying exactly that. I'd hate to think what the ancestors who started the American Revolution would think of the people who live here now...
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
Well, they can't win. If they stay anonymous, people will call it fake. If they go public, they're attention whores.
It's actually sad how we treat people who put their very life on the line to protect our liberty.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.