Canada slips to 21st in Freedom of Press Index

[Ldvs]

Well if they really want to make an index like this then I guess there can only be one nation at #1. The differences could be very small for a nation to drop down several spots so I dont think anyone should get hung up on what the exact spot their nation is in. If USA is #44 then I would say that at least from 44 and above there are not that big problems.

Then, the USA being ranked 137th for the coverage of the operations in Iraq means that the 136 countries above (out of 167) face no big problems with press freedom? For a country boasting about its liberty and democracy there's something amiss.

[Redleg]

Then, the USA being ranked 137th for the coverage of the operations in Iraq means that the 136 countries above (out of 167) face no big problems with press freedom? For a country boasting about its liberty and democracy there's something amiss.

Not at all - this is a poll ranking based upon journalist wants and desires for the freedom of the press. Nothing amiss at all unless want wants to believe the ranking is 100% accurate. I doubt that its even very scientific in how its ran

an international media advocacy group says in an annual report.

Oh and by the way the USA is not ranked 137th according to the article

The U.S. dropped more than 20 spots to 44th place, mainly due to the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and judicial action that was “undermining the privacy of journalistic sources,” the statement said.

Again that shows the nature of the report. All one has to do is read why Judith Miller was sent to jail and the after story to realize that.

Edit: to fix quote tag

[Ldvs]

Oh and by the way the USA is not ranked 137th according to the article

They definitely are for the coverage in Iraq, check the ranking. Does "embedded journalists" mean something to you? I don't think a better way of controling what journalists want to say or show exists, short of censoring.

Not at all - this is a poll ranking based upon journalist wants and desires for the freedom of the press.

Since when should it be considered a bad thing?

[CBR]

The pdf file on MiddleEast says about USA and Iraq:

The US army (United States in Iraq, 137th) also violated press freedom, as it did in 2003 and 2004. Six journalists were jailed in Abu Ghraib prison without explanation and not allowed to receive visits from their
lawyers, families or employers. Four journalists were killed by US army gunfire between September 2004 and September 2005.

So I doubt the low rating has anything to do with embedded journalists. Something that actually did give the press more freedom compared to the first Gulf war that didnt have any AFAIK.


CBR

[Ronin]

So I doubt the low rating has anything to do with embedded journalists. Something that actually did give the press more freedom compared to the first Gulf war that didnt have any AFAIK.
CBR

i´d say that the embedded journalists aren´t the main point....but they sure help....

the step to create the position of embedded journalists was clearly a way to try to control what those journalists would see and report.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

They definitely are for the coverage in Iraq, check the ranking

The rankings have the US 44th . Where are you getting this stuff?

Since when should it be considered a bad thing?

Its like asking prisoners their thoughts on their jailers. Its ridiculos as I stated from the start. Again just look at the excuse for our dropping in the index. The woman wanted to go to jail so ahe would get a book deal and look like a hero to these morons.

[Ldvs]

The rankings have the US 44th . Where are you getting this stuff?

http://www.rsf.org/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=554
I begin to wonder whether you do it on purpose. Is it that hard to scroll down the ranking and check the 137th place?

Its like asking prisoners their thoughts on their jailers.

I couldn't have thought of a better metaphor myself, really. Gawain, you're a poet.

So I doubt the low rating has anything to do with embedded journalists. Something that actually did give the press more freedom compared to the first Gulf war that didnt have any AFAIK.

Compared to what is reported, systematically embedding journalists is less grave of course, but if it's an improvement compared to the first Gulf War, it's hardly satisfying, for it is rarely a guarantee of objectivity.

[Tribesman]

Oh and by the way the USA is not ranked 137th according to the article


The rankings have the US 44th . Where are you getting this stuff?

Red and Gawain , it is in the article just as Ldvs says it is

As he says......In Iraq ..... you see America is classed as an occupier in that territory according to that report , so it gets its own little extra slot .

[Redleg]

Oh and by the way the USA is not ranked 137th according to the article


The rankings have the US 44th . Where are you getting this stuff?

Red and Gawain , it is in the article just as Ldvs says it is

As he says......In Iraq ..... you see America is classed as an occupier in that territory according to that report , so it gets its own little extra slot .

Oh but it seems you both fall into the same category - its a report based upon Iraq as you both noted - not about the United States itself. So yes indeed the United States is not ranked 137th it is ranked 44th - its actions in Iraq are rated 137th - which happens to be a war zone. So I wouldn't be surprised if a journalist thought his life was at risk there.


Tsk Tsk you should be smarter then that there Tribesman falling for the same trap of logic in wanting to find fault with the United States or a someone who posts from the United States.

[Tribesman]

Tsk Tsk you should be smarter then that there Tribesman falling for the same trap of logic in wanting to find fault with the United States or a someone who posts from the United States.
Rubbish Red , I stated quite clearly IN IRAQ .
As you clearly read , as you state...its a report based upon Iraq as you both noted ....but you wish to play the "you hate America and Americans" card , Tsk Tsk .
Though obviously you must also have noted that it is the United States in Iraq , not Iraq , as Iraq also has its own listing . In the same way as the report has had seperate listings for Israel , Israel in Palestine and Palestine .

So yes indeed the United States is not ranked 137th it is ranked 44th - its actions in Iraq are rated 137th -
Ah so you agree that what was stated was correct , yet wish to try and find fault with statements that are correct ....interesting eh ?
Try again

[Redleg]

They definitely are for the coverage in Iraq, check the ranking. Does "embedded journalists" mean something to you? I don't think a better way of controling what journalists want to say or show exists, short of censoring.

LOL - the statement says the United States in Iraq is rated 137th not the United States itself. Try again.

Since when should it be considered a bad thing?

Not necessarily a bad thing - but a thing that must be considered when review such reviews and polls. To take at face value is all that it is worth. It is what the journalists who partaked in the report believe.

[Ldvs]

LOL - the statement says the United States in Iraq is rated 137th not the United States itself. Try again.

Because the USA acting in Iraq shouldn't be considered responsible, perhaps? Whose troops are occupying Iraq, then?

Tsk Tsk you should be smarter then that there Tribesman falling for the same trap of logic in wanting to find fault with the United States or a someone who posts from the United States.

I think however many times one could prove you that the USA are at fault you wouldn't acknowledge it.

[Redleg]

Because the USA acting in Iraq shouldn't be considered responsible, perhaps? Whose troops are occupying Iraq, then?

Several nations in fact - The United States, and the United Kingdom. Again the report states in Iraq - you are attempting to make a correlation between the freedom of press in two different areas as being the same.

Tsk Tsk - to bad your logic is flawed - the correlation does not exist. The Freedom of Press index does not even try to draw that correlation. It states something very clearly that you seem not to understand.

The situation in Iraq (157th) deteriorated further during the year as the safety of journalists became more precarious. At least 24 journalists and media assistants have been killed so far this year, making it the mostly deadly conflict for the media since World War II. A total of 72 media workers have been killed since the fighting began in March 2003.

Edit to add this quote from the article

The United States (44th) fell more than 20 places, mainly because of the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and judicial action that is undermining the privacy of journalistic sources. Federal courts are getting increasingly bold about subpoenaing journalists and trying to force them to disclose their confidential sources

Your attempt at a correlation is based upon false logic.

I think however many times one could prove you that the USA are at fault you wouldn't acknowledge it.

You might want to try some of our actions in South America - I find fault with a lot of those. Or how about our aid to Israel - I find fault with that because we don't use our influence to force Israel to do some of the right things. It seems your making generalizations based upon false assumptions and logic once again.

[Ldvs]

Several nations in fact - The United States, and the United Kingdom. Again the report states in Iraq - you are attempting to make a correlation between the freedom of press in two different areas as being the same.

Obviously, I'm not the only one who suffers from flawed logic here, because according to yours, in zones where war is going on, violations to press freedom shouldn't be considered as important. Journalists voluntarily go there, and I assume they know the risks. This argument is therefore not valid.

You might want to try some of our actions in South America - I find fault with a lot of those. Or how about our aid to Israel - I find fault with that because we don't use our influence to force Israel to do some of the right things. It seems your making generalizations based upon false assumptions and logic once again.

I apologise for this hasty generalisation, then.

[CBR]

Then, the USA being ranked 137th for the coverage of the operations in Iraq means that the 136 countries above (out of 167) face no big problems with press freedom? For a country boasting about its liberty and democracy there's something amiss.

Although it is definitely not good for freedom of the press to detain journalists, it is afterall happening in a semi warzone and are the actions of the US army. It is USA's responsibility but cannot be compared with USA itself as a nation.

Nothing amiss at all unless want wants to believe the ranking is 100% accurate. I doubt that its even very scientific in how its ran

I think we can discuss for ages about how to rate different events for such an index. From what I can read in the links they generally dont like journalist getting killed or imprisoned and one can hardly blame them for that.


CBR