Press Freedom, Economic Development, + Independence

If freedom of the press could be measured, what should be the criteria? Such a measure would be an important indicator of value, just as good governance is a prerequisite for the attraction of foreign investment to any nation. However, any ‘World Press Freedom Index’ can be attacked on the basis of cultural relativism, so it is no surprise that critics have questioned the methodology of this index.

Paris-based Reporters sans frontières —Reporters Without Borders— is an international nongovernmental organization interested in issues relating to freedom of the press. The excellent entry on them in Wikipedia explains: RWB draws its inspiration from Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that everyone has “the right to freedom of opinion and expression” and also the right to “seek, receive, and impart” information and ideas.

Worldwide Press Freedom Index

RWB compiles and publishes an annual ranking of most countries based upon the organization’s assessment of their press freedoms. The 2005 list was published in October 2005 and is indicative only of RWB’s opinion of press freedoms using their in-house methodology. The list is generated based on responses to surveys sent to a number of selected people from around the world: over a hundred journalists that are members of partner organizations of the RWB, as well as related specialists such as researchers, jurists, and human-rights activists solely determined by RWB.

Critics have questioned RWB’s methodology for ranking press freedoms and the lack of direct understanding of existing laws in ranked countries. Nowhere is this criticism more apparent than in the reason RWB gives for the disgraceful performance of the USA in 2005:

“The United States (44th) fell more than 20 places, mainly because of the imprisonment of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and legal moves undermining the privacy of journalistic sources.”

Mais, Pardonnez Moi, Reporters Sans Frontières?

Judith Miller, dubbed by Maureen Dowd, a co-worker at the New York Times, as “that woman of mass destruction” for her complicity in advancing the agenda of the now notorious Ahmad Chalabi in her alarming articles in 2001 and 2002, not only on the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but Saddam Hussein’s determination to use them. Ms. Miller subsequently went to jail over the Valerie Plame affair for refusing to name a source in the U.S. administration even though that source had released her from any obligation to protect his identity. The “martyrdom” of Judith Miller was widely seen as an attempt at grandstanding to raise the stakes for a potential book advance.

The New York Times is known for its journalistic solidarity, and it is rare for its journalists to break the code of silence regarding the actions of fellow journalists. Maureen Dowd was not alone in breaking that code, and Ms. Miller no longer works at the paper.

RWB had enough information on these developments at the time of their survey in October of 2005, but by their methodology, Ms. Miller’s imprisonment—regardless of the circumstances— equates to any journalist anywhere in the world spending time in Club Fed, less comfortably in a “rendition” center or gulag. But you can see the full rankings and draw your own conclusions at www.rsf.org.