Hah, I win again.

Why is Canada not at number 1? This makes me mad. I think they need to [CENSORED FOR YOUR PROTECTION], and fast.

Yeah I guess that would be it. On one hand I can see how they are good, but an the other hand... freedom of speech is still more important, and stopping someone from saying something doesn't stop them from thinking it. So really those laws don't help at all.

Dammit.

Why is America #56? Someone obviously has an agenda. It's pretty easy to see that's unadulterated bull****.

Why is America #56? Someone obviously has an agenda. It's pretty easy to see that's unadulterated bull****.

The United States (53rd) has fallen nine places since last year, after being in 17th position in the first year of the Index, in 2002. Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of “national security” to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his “war on terrorism.” The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 US states, refuse to recognise the media’s right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism.

Freelance journalist and blogger Josh Wolf was imprisoned when he refused to hand over his video archives. Sudanese cameraman Sami al-Haj, who works for the pan-Arab broadcaster Al-Jazeera, has been held without trial since June 2002 at the US military base at Guantanamo, and Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein has been held by US authorities in Iraq since April this year.

:words:

Reporters Without Borders or RWB is a french origin international non-governmental organization that advocates freedom of the press.

That explains it!

France (35th) slipped five places during the past year, to make a loss of 24 places in five years. The increase in searches of media offices and journalists’ homes is very worrying for media organisations and trade unions. Autumn 2005 was an especially bad time for French journalists, several of whom were physically attacked or threatened during a trade union dispute involving privatisation of the Corsican firm SNCM and during violent demonstrations in French city suburbs in November.

They have? I dunno. You can pick up the L.A./NY Times and still see some unpleasant news about Bush. If not that, then there's not really glorifying praise either.

Edit: If Freelancer, and I have the same feeling about this then something has to be fishy.

It is based solely on events between 1 September 2005 and 1 September 2006. It does not look at human rights violations in general, just press freedom violations.

The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 US states, refuse to recognise the media’s right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism.

The index should in no way be taken as an indication of the quality of the press in the countries concerned.

And in other news tonight. While our glorious Imperator was slaying the evils of the Empire and bringing us to victory and new heights, three people were gunned down after a failed robbery attempt. The Stormpolice, created by the Imperator, shot the would-be robbers. There was much rejoycing.

But...how can it be taken any other way? If the government it shutting up the press to keep those in power remaining in power, does that not show that the quality of the press is poor? How good is it to have the press to continually praise the dictator/oligarchy?

Fallout from the row over the "Mohammed cartoons”

Denmark (19th) dropped from joint first place because of serious threats against the authors of the Mohammed cartoons published there in autumn 2005. For the first time in recent years in a country that is very observant of civil liberties, journalists had to have police protection due to threats against them because of their work.

10 Hungary

uhm ... no?

What worries me is that some of you guys in the US think that this is a mistake.

What worries me is that some of you guys in the US think that this is a mistake. I was somewhat suprised that the UK is as low as it is but i'm not suprised about the position of the US.

Aye. That was pretty funny. "The results don't satisfy me, so the results must be wrong." Well, I have no doubt that if some other agency did the similar kind of research, the placements might vary considerably, even +10/-10 or more wouldn't surprise me at all. It's not like that kind of research was natural sciences of mathematical truths.

But right now if the USA had been placed considerably higher, then obviously starting from the beginning many countries would have been off the scale. That would look odd.

Freelance journalist and blogger Josh Wolf was imprisoned when he refused to hand over his video archives.

Sudanese cameraman Sami al-Haj, who works for the pan-Arab broadcaster Al-Jazeera, has been held without trial since June 2002 at the US military base at Guantanamo...

...and Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein has been held by US authorities in Iraq since April this year.

Okay. Let me see if I got it right.

Nation A could have a very free society in which everyone's happy but the government shuts the press up because it continually criticizes its policies on x,y, and z and calls the leader a fatty. Ergo it's low on the index.

Nation B could be a brutal dictatorship but the press is allowed to say whatever it wants about the government. Although the constant *****ing does nothing because the government doesn't really care about you. Therefore it is high on the index.

Okay. Let me see if I got it right.

Nation A could have a very free society in which everyone's happy but the government shuts the press up because it continually criticizes its policies on x,y, and z and calls the leader a fatty. Ergo it's low on the index.

Nation B could be a brutal dictatorship but the press is allowed to say whatever it wants about the government. Although the constant *****ing does nothing because the government doesn't really care about you. Therefore it is high on the index.

Press and politics go hand in hand. So if the press is being silenced, then the political climate is not a very pleasant one and vice versa.

I don't excuse or justify the detention of these people, but it seems that their association with the news media is either irrelevant or of almost no relation in the cases of their arrest.

Forcing the press to reveal its sources (even in cases that don't have anything to do with terrorism), is a very serious issue that harms the functioning of the press. This is chewing on the basis of a free democratic constitutional state.