http://www.dw.de/journalist-kidnappings-attacks-on-increase-press-freedom-report/a-18133482
QuoteJournalist kidnappings, attacks on increase: press freedom report
Attacks and kidnappings of journalists have soared over the past year, the latest Press Freedom Index by Reporters without Borders has said. In all, 66 journalists were killed in 2014.
Reporters without Borders said on Tuesday that there had been a sharp spike in kidnappings of reporters, with attacks on reporters growing more 'barbaric.'
In its latest report on press freedom, it said journalists face a new dangerous new threat - as shown by the Islamist militant beheadings of reporters in Syria this year.
"Rarely have reporters been murdered with such a barbaric sense of propaganda, shocking the entire world," Reporters Without Borders said.
66 journalists were killed this year, down from 71 in 2013, although the nature of the killings was troubling, the report said. The deadliest countries for journalists' lives were Syria, where 15 died, followed by Iran, Eritrea, eastern Ukraine, Iraq and Libya.
The report also said freedom of information decreases substantially during conflict.
"The 2014 World Press Freedom Index spotlights the negative impact of conflicts of freedom of information and its protagonists," Reporters without Borders said.
This year's report covered 180 countries. Finland was the best place for journalists to continue their work- the Scandinavian nation retained its position for the fourth year running, followed by the Netherlands and Norway. Turkmenistan, Eritrea and North Korea were, once again, at the bottom of the list.
National security takes priority
The report said that the ranking of some countries this year was affected by a "tendency to interpret national security needs in an overly broad and abusive manner to the detriment of the right to inform and be informed."
Information was sacrificed in the name of national security and surveillance, the report said, citing the example of the US, which fell 13 place to 46 following "increased efforts to track down whistleblowers and the sources of leaks."
The trial and conviction of Private Bradley Manning, now known as Chelsea Manning, and the pursuit of NSA analyst Edward Snowden "were warnings to all those thinking of assisting in the disclosure of sensitive information that would clearly be in public interest," the report said.
mg/jr (AFP, Reuters)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frsf.org%2Findex2014%2Fdata%2Fcarte2014_en.png&hash=491b3970fad27c32e522db81a088cbd4696ea292)
name an2014 dif2014
Finland 1 ( - )
Netherlands 2 ( - )
Norway 3 ( - )
Luxembourg 4 ( - )
Andorra 5 ( - )
Liechtenstein 6 (+ 1)
Denmark 7 (- 1)
Iceland 8 (+ 1)
New Zealand 9 (- 1)
Sweden 10 ( - )
Estonia 11 ( - )
Austria 12 ( - )
Czech Republic 13 (+ 3)
Germany 14 (+ 3)
Switzerland 15 (- 1)
Ireland 16 (- 1)
Jamaica 17 (- 4)
Canada 18 (+ 2)
Poland 19 (+ 3)
Slovakia 20 (+ 3)
Costa Rica 21 (- 3)
Namibia 22 (- 3)
Belgium 23 (- 2)
Cape Verde 24 (+ 1)
Cyprus 25 (- 1)
Uruguay 26 (+ 1)
Ghana 27 (+ 3)
Australia 28 (- 2)
Belize 29 ( - )
Portugal 30 (- 1)
Suriname 31 (+ 1)
Lithuania 32 (+ 2)
United Kingdom 33 (- 3)
Slovenia 34 (+ 2)
Spain 35 (+ 2)
Antigua and Barbuda 36 (- 1)
Latvia 37 (+ 3)
El Salvador 38 (+ 1)
France 39 (- 1)
Samoa 40 (+ 9)
Botswana 41 ( - )
South Africa 42 (+ 11)
Trinidad and Tobago 43 (+ 2)
Papua New Guinea 44 (- 2)
Romania 45 (- 2)
United States 46 (- 13)
Haiti 47 (+ 3)
Niger 48 (- 4)
Italy 49 (+ 9)
Taiwan 50 (- 2)
Malta 51 (- 5)
Burkina Faso 52 (- 5)
Comoros 53 (- 1)
Serbia 54 (+ 10)
Argentina 55 ( - )
Republic of Moldova 56 ( - )
Republic of Korea 57 (- 6)
Chile 58 (+ 3)
Japan 59 (- 5)
Mauritania 60 (+ 8)
Hong Kong 61 (- 2)
Senegal 62 (- 2)
Tonga 63 (+ 4)
Hungary 64 (- 7)
Croatia 65 ( - )
Bosnia and Herzegovina 66 (+ 3)
Guyana 67 (+ 3)
Dominican Republic 68 (+ 13)
United Republic Of Tanzania 69 (+ 2)
Mauritius 70 (- 7)
Nicaragua 71 (+ 8)
Sierra Leone 72 (- 10)
Malawi 73 (+ 3)
Lesotho 74 (+ 8)
Benin 75 (+ 5)
Togo 76 (+ 8)
Timor-Leste 77 (+ 14)
Armenia 78 (- 3)
Mozambique 79 (- 5)
Kosovo 80 (+ 6)
Madagascar 81 (+ 8)
Republic of the Congo 82 (- 5)
Cyprus North 83 (+ 12)
Georgia 84 (+ 17)
Albania 85 (+ 18)
Guinea-Bissau 86 (+ 7)
Panama 87 (+ 25)
Mongolia 88 (+ 11)
Liberia 89 (+ 9)
Kenya 90 (- 18)
Kuwait 91 (- 13)
Bhutan 92 (- 9)
Zambia 93 (- 20)
Bolivia 94 (+ 16)
Ecuador 95 (+ 25)
Israel 96 (+ 17)
Kyrgyzstan 97 (+ 10)
Gabon 98 (- 8)
Greece 99 (- 14)
Bulgaria 100 (- 12)
Côte d'Ivoire 101 (- 4)
Guinea 102 (- 15)
Seychelles 103 (- 9)
Peru 104 (+ 2)
Paraguay 105 (- 13)
Lebanon 106 (- 4)
Fiji 107 (+ 1)
Maldives 108 (- 4)
Central African 109 (- 43)
Uganda 110 (- 5)
Brazil 111 (- 2)
Nigeria 112 (+ 4)
Qatar 113 (- 2)
Montenegro 114 ( - )
Tajikistan 115 (+ 9)
Venezuela 116 (+ 2)
Brunei Darussalam 117 (+ 6)
United Arab Emirates 118 (- 3)
South Sudan 119 (+ 6)
Nepal 120 (- 1)
Algeria 121 (+ 5)
Mali 122 (- 22)
Macedonia 123 (- 6)
Angola 124 (+ 7)
Guatemala 125 (- 29)
Colombia 126 (+ 4)
Ukraine 127 ( - )
Afghanistan 128 (+ 1)
Honduras 129 (- 1)
Thailand 130 (+ 6)
Cameroon 131 (- 10)
Indonesia 132 (+ 8)
Tunisia 133 (+ 6)
Oman 134 (+ 8)
Zimbabwe 135 (- 1)
Morocco 136 (+ 1)
Libya 137 (- 5)
Palestine 138 (+ 9)
Chad 139 (- 17)
India 140 (+ 1)
Jordan 141 (- 6)
Burundi 142 (- 9)
Ethiopia 143 (- 5)
Cambodia 144 ( - )
Myanmar 145 (+ 7)
Bangladesh 146 (- 1)
Malaysia 147 (- 1)
Russian Federation 148 (+ 1)
Philippines 149 (- 1)
Singapore 150 ( - )
The Democratic Republic Of The Congo 151 (- 8)
Mexico 152 (+ 2)
Iraq 153 (- 2)
Turkey 154 (+ 1)
Gambia 155 (- 2)
Swaziland 156 ( - )
Belarus 157 (+ 1)
Pakistan 158 (+ 2)
Egypt 159 ( - )
Azerbaijan 160 (- 3)
Kazakhstan 161 ( - )
Rwanda 162 ( - )
Bahrain 163 (+ 3)
Saudi Arabia 164 ( - )
Sri Lanka 165 (- 2)
Uzbekistan 166 (- 1)
Yemen 167 (+ 3)
Equatorial Guinea 168 (- 1)
Djibouti 169 (+ 1)
Cuba 170 (+ 2)
Lao People's Democratic Republic 171 (- 2)
Sudan 172 (- 1)
Islamic Republic of Iran 173 (+ 2)
Vietnam 174 (- 1)
China 175 (- 1)
Somalia 176 ( - )
Syrian Arab Republic 177 ( - )
Turkmenistan 178 ( - )
Democratic People's Republic of Korea 179 ( - )
Eritrea 180 ( - )
Didn't expect places like Greece score so badly.
Full report and rankings here: http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php
Poland is surprisingly high on that list.
Eritrea is still at the bottom? You'd think they'd make one small move to move up at least a notch or two and let the glorious DPRK assume that spot.
Sweden greater freedom of the press than the US? I take it the people who made this are on crack.
Before or after the Sony hack?
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 11:28:32 AM
Sweden greater freedom of the press than the US? I take it the people who made this are on crack.
Reporters Without Borders have a bug up their asses about the "whistleblowers" Snowden and Manning not being deemed heroes and given medals but the US gubmint.
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 11:40:23 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 11:28:32 AM
Sweden greater freedom of the press than the US? I take it the people who made this are on crack.
Reporters Without Borders have a bug up their asses about the "whistleblowers" Snowden and Manning not being deemed heroes and given medals but the US gubmint.
They do come across as retards.
Obviously being beaten by Papaua New Guinea will make Americans a bit butthurt. :sleep:
I stopped being butthurt by these indices about the same time I stopped taking the Nobel Peace Prize seriously.
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 11:40:23 AM
Reporters Without Borders
:lol:
That's
Journalistes Sans Frontières to you, pal.
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 11:40:23 AM
Reporters Without Borders have a bug up their asses about the "whistleblowers" Snowden and Manning not being deemed heroes and given medals but the US gubmint.
Whistleblowers goes a bit further than that. The Obama administration has pursued and prosecuted whistleblowers/sources under the Espionage Act more than all previous administrations combined. It's not just the Snowdens and the Mannings but, for example, intelligence or State officials briefing journalists about, say, Iran's nuclear program or North Korea. It's considerably more than was the case under W for example who I seem to remember got a lot of stick for chasing whistleblowers.
I think it's defensible personally, but it is a departure (as with civil liberties) from Obama's promises in 2008 and is arguably a bad thing for a free press if the government is aggressively looking to shut down sources.
Personally I think the UK should be lower. Since the phone hacking case there's been a big police investigation (Elveden) into corruption in public office which has largely been police officers, prison guards, hospital staff etc selling details to journalists. I think that in itself is fine, but I'm very uncomfortable with the way the police and the CPS have been charging journalists with conspiracy or as accomplices to corruption. So far I don't think they've actually had any successful convictions (because juries are sensible) but by all accounts it's definitely having a chilling effect.
They're not whistleblowers, Shiv.
What do you mean?
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 11:42:17 AM
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 11:40:23 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 11:28:32 AM
Sweden greater freedom of the press than the US? I take it the people who made this are on crack.
Reporters Without Borders have a bug up their asses about the "whistleblowers" Snowden and Manning not being deemed heroes and given medals but the US gubmint.
They do come across as retards.
Don't be transphobic. :mad:
They're snitches.
What does whistleblowers in government have to do with freedom of the press?
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 02:00:32 PM
What does whistleblowers in government have to do with freedom of the press?
The US has investigated leaks far more aggressively under Obama than previous Presidents. Part of that is that they've extended their investigations to the media companies and the journalists (at least one has been a 'co-conspirator') which has allowed them to look at call data, to seize emails and so on.
As in the UK with Elveden I think it's likely to produce a chilling effect. I think trying to shut down leaks/public corruption is justifiable. I'm far more dubious when that starts to move into investigation or prosecution of the media.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 02:00:32 PM
What does whistleblowers in government have to do with freedom of the press?
The US has investigated leaks far more aggressively under Obama than previous Presidents. Part of that is that they've extended their investigations to the media companies and the journalists (at least one has been a 'co-conspirator') which has allowed them to look at call data, to seize emails and so on.
As in the UK with Elveden I think it's likely to produce a chilling effect. I think trying to shut down leaks/public corruption is justifiable. I'm far more dubious when that starts to move into investigation or prosecution of the media.
Publishing private information or state secrets is not an issue of the freedom of the press.
Quote from: Viking on December 18, 2014, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: The Brain on December 18, 2014, 02:00:32 PM
What does whistleblowers in government have to do with freedom of the press?
The US has investigated leaks far more aggressively under Obama than previous Presidents. Part of that is that they've extended their investigations to the media companies and the journalists (at least one has been a 'co-conspirator') which has allowed them to look at call data, to seize emails and so on.
As in the UK with Elveden I think it's likely to produce a chilling effect. I think trying to shut down leaks/public corruption is justifiable. I'm far more dubious when that starts to move into investigation or prosecution of the media.
Publishing private information or state secrets is not an issue of the freedom of the press.
:huh:
Quote from: Viking on December 18, 2014, 02:56:42 PM
Publishing private information or state secrets is not an issue of the freedom of the press.
Sure it is - in general. In the UK I don't think there's any public interest in publishing details of someone's incarceration or health records. But in the case of crime reporting, or in the US national security reporting I think there is a public interest. What's more it's the journalists job.
Take the example of the co-conspirator. In that case a Fox News hack got solidly sourced information from a defence contractor (originally born in South Korea) about North Korea's nuclear program. I think it's probably appropriate to go after the leak. But I don't see what the journalist has actually done wrong. I certainly don't see what he's done that's enough to justify investigators getting access to a journalists call records or private emails.
We give that sort of thing a pass because the UK and the US have a history of a free press. In any other country I think we'd consider it state intimidation of the press.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 06:43:58 PM
Quote from: Viking on December 18, 2014, 02:56:42 PM
Publishing private information or state secrets is not an issue of the freedom of the press.
Sure it is - in general. In the UK I don't think there's any public interest in publishing details of someone's incarceration or health records. But in the case of crime reporting, or in the US national security reporting I think there is a public interest. What's more it's the journalists job.
Take the example of the co-conspirator. In that case a Fox News hack got solidly sourced information from a defence contractor (originally born in South Korea) about North Korea's nuclear program. I think it's probably appropriate to go after the leak. But I don't see what the journalist has actually done wrong. I certainly don't see what he's done that's enough to justify investigators getting access to a journalists call records or private emails.
We give that sort of thing a pass because the UK and the US have a history of a free press. In any other country I think we'd consider it state intimidation of the press.
I think there's a problem if a government official sells information to the press, as you stated upthread has been happening in the UK. The trouble is, in that case the official has accepted a bribe, and I don't see how you can go after them for accepting the bribe unless you're also willing to go after the person who bribed them.
Bradley Manning should be shanked in prison.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 18, 2014, 11:51:36 AM
I stopped being butthurt by these indices about the same time I stopped taking the Nobel Peace Prize seriously.
Not stopped enough being butthurt to feel the need to post that, which has nothing to do with American lack of press freedom, though.
Score one for press freedom.
:bowler:
Quote from: Norgy on December 18, 2014, 07:47:15 PM
Not stopped enough being butthurt to feel the need to post that, which has nothing to do with American lack of press freedom, though.
Score one for press freedom.
:bowler:
Sure. Just butthurt enough to mention that I am not at all butthurt.
:hmm:
The rape threads are all on the first page.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 02:39:55 PM
The US has investigated leaks far more aggressively under Obama than previous Presidents. Part of that is that they've extended their investigations to the media companies and the journalists (at least one has been a 'co-conspirator') which has allowed them to look at call data, to seize emails and so on.
That's how you sometimes have to work an investigation: from both ends. Surprised you didn't know that, Mr. Bonnie Prince Scotland Holmes in a can.
Quote from: dps on December 18, 2014, 07:31:19 PM
I think there's a problem if a government official sells information to the press, as you stated upthread has been happening in the UK. The trouble is, in that case the official has accepted a bribe, and I don't see how you can go after them for accepting the bribe unless you're also willing to go after the person who bribed them.
Yeah, sure. I have issues with some of these cases because the bribe is actually the journalist plying them with drinks and dinners which is, again, their job rather than a straight-up bribe.
However Elveden is a little wider in that it's 'misconduct in public office' which includes revealing personal data even if you do it gratuitously. Again there's nothing necessarily wrong with those prosecutions, I think there's something very wrong (which is why they've so far failed) in prosecuting journalists for 'conspiracy to cause misconduct in public office'. I also think there's a balance to be struck, that we're not getting right. It isn't in the public interest if police officers etc don't respect personal data or confidentiality, on the other I also don't think it's in the public interest if all contact except through official channels is severed. I think it's a real worry.
I think the situation with national security reporting in the US is somewhat similar in that, it seems to me, that the Obama administration is getting that public interest balance wrong.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 06:43:58 PM
Quote from: Viking on December 18, 2014, 02:56:42 PM
Publishing private information or state secrets is not an issue of the freedom of the press.
Sure it is - in general. In the UK I don't think there's any public interest in publishing details of someone's incarceration or health records. But in the case of crime reporting, or in the US national security reporting I think there is a public interest. What's more it's the journalists job.
Take the example of the co-conspirator. In that case a Fox News hack got solidly sourced information from a defence contractor (originally born in South Korea) about North Korea's nuclear program. I think it's probably appropriate to go after the leak. But I don't see what the journalist has actually done wrong. I certainly don't see what he's done that's enough to justify investigators getting access to a journalists call records or private emails.
We give that sort of thing a pass because the UK and the US have a history of a free press. In any other country I think we'd consider it state intimidation of the press.
The thing is the examples you point out are ones that a court can decree to be made public or the results of public courts of law. Traditionally the way stuff like this has been dealt with is by after the fact having the government decide if it can justify itself for prosecuting people who expose this stuff to their voters.
Freedom of the press is the freedom of conscience, not an exception from the law.
Quote from: Viking on December 19, 2014, 03:51:10 PM
The thing is the examples you point out are ones that a court can decree to be made public or the results of public courts of law. Traditionally the way stuff like this has been dealt with is by after the fact having the government decide if it can justify itself for prosecuting people who expose this stuff to their voters.
Sorry I don't follow this?
QuoteFreedom of the press is the freedom of conscience, not an exception from the law.
I don't think that's true anymore, if it ever was. I think the UK and the US generally get a pass on this from many because they're countries with a tradition of respecting the free press and of having a robust press. But there are all sorts of countries that use tax investigations, or audits of media companies, or investigations of a journalist's sources to restrict what information a journalist can print. I think the Obama administration's approach to national security leaks (and I'd exclude Manning and Snowden which are different) and Elveden isn't that far from that approach. Hopefully they're aberrations, but for now I think the US and UK have both restricted freedom of the press through the use of too wide criminal investigations into the media and I don't think it's in the public interest.