Skip to footer

5 big losers in press freedom: Mali and ... Japan?

Each year, the World Press Freedom Index ranks the world’s nations – 179 of them – on how easy they make the work of journalists, scoring them in categories like media independence, the physical safety of reporters, free speech laws, and transparency. The resulting list reads much like a primer for understanding global conflict: Safe and prosperous countries like Finland and Norway do best, while war-torn dictatorships like Iran, Eritrea, and Syria are among the world’s worst spots to be not only a citizen, but a journalist as well.

But while the index suggests that press freedom is frequently a casualty of war – take for instance Mali, which plummeted 74 spots on the list during the past year – it also indicates that those wounds are not always fatal. This year saw massive growth in press freedom in several countries with bloody recent histories, including Ivory Coast, Afghanistan, and Myanmar. These countries can serve as a bellwether for Middle Eastern and North African states struggling to remake themselves in the wake of the 2011 uprisings in that region, says Delphine Halgand, Washington director for the French NGO Reporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontières, or RSF), which released the index for 2012 today.  

“In these Arab Spring countries we’re still waiting on the promise of new freedoms,” Ms. Halgand says. “This is a really sensitive time for the future of the press there.”

Elsewhere in the world, however, shifts in journalistic freedom have happened more quietly. Malawi, for instance, marched upward 71 places in a single year on the back of government reform there, while Japan dipped 31 spots based on the government’s handling of press coverage of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor disaster.

Here are five of the notable winners and losers on this year’s list.

Joe Penney/Reuters
Malian soldiers heading to Gao arrive in the recently liberated town of Douentza January 30.

#32: The United States

After tumbling 27 places in the rankings between 2011 and 2012, the United States recovered significant ground this year, rising 15 slots to 32nd. Last year’s downgrade was the result of police crackdown on reporters covering the Occupy Wall Street movement, which led to the imprisonment and beating of more than two dozen journalists, according to RSF. This was not the first time the American position in the ranking took a sudden nosedive – the US fell 20 places between 2004 and 2005 at the height of government-media tensions over the war on terror. “Even the US media climate reflects [political upheaval],” Halgand notes. 

But just as the US began to right itself this year, Canada dropped 10 spots to 20th as a result of press difficulties in covering the widespread student protests there. But neither the US nor its northern neighbor came close to the press freedom enjoyed in the Western Hemisphere’s highest ranked nation, tiny Jamaica, which clocked in at 13th.

1 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.