It is enshrined in the First Amendment of the US constitution. It has been British Common law since 1688. It is a key element in the 1953 European Convention of Human Rights and the 2009 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It is Article Two of France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and Part of the UN Charter.
Freedom of the press and freedom of speech is—allegedly—chiselled in stone in almost every constitution in the world with the exceptions of self-recognised authoritarian states such as China, North Korea, Cuba and Saudi Arabia.
But according to the 2018 Press Freedom Index,released this week, this near universal commitment is observed more in the breach than the observance, and the breaches are occurring more often and—increasingly—in countries regarded as members of the democratic club.
Let’s start with the leader of the“The Free World”—the United States. America has fallen two places to 45th in the press freedom index. Reporters Without Borders, who produce the index, places the blame firmly at the door of the White House. What do you expect when the president emulates Stalin by referring to reporters as “enemies of the people?”
The EU—bastion of liberal democracy– is meant to be a democratic club. Support for democracy and a commitment to principles such as a free press are pre-conditions for membership. If a government backslides it faces fines, suspension of voting rights and—in extremis—expulsion from club membership.
But these deterrents have failed to stop an increasing number of EU governments. In Hungary (down two places to 73), Prime Minister Viktor Orban has accused Hungarian-born billionaire philanthropist George Soros of supporting independent media outlets in order to “discredit” Hungary in the international public’s eyes. Orban has branded him public enemy Number One.
In Austria, the leader of the far-right populist FPO party accused the public radio and TV broadcaster ÖRF of spreading lies. In Spain (down two at 31), the October independence referendum in Catalonia has resulted in government-fuelled harassment of pro-independence journalists.
In Slovakia, former Prime Minister Robert Fico set the tone by calling journalists “filthy anti-Slovak prostitutes” and “idiotic hyenas” . He then sued them. In the Czech Republic (down 11 places to 34), President Milos Zeman brandished a dummy Kalashnikov inscribed with the word “journalists” at a press conference after previously calling reporters “manure” and “hyenas” and suggesting they should be “liquidated.” He was speaking whilst standing alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In Poland, anti-corruption investigative reporter Tomasz Piatek was threatened with prison after the exposing the defence minister’s murky links with Russian-organised crime.
In Italy, 11 journalists are currently under round-the-clock police protection because of death threats from the Mafia.
Harassment, name-calling, threats of imprisonment and actual imprisonment are one thing. But they don’t hold a candle to the ultimate form of censorship: Death.
In two EU countries that was the fate suffered in the space of five months by journalists investigating politicalcorruption.
Malta plunged 18 places to 65th in the Index. Journalist and blogger Daphne Caruana Galizia’s targeted car bomb death lifted the veil on judicial harassment and intimidation to which journalists are routinely subjected in the island state. Caruana Galizia had been threatened for years and at the time of her death was the target of 42 civil suits and five criminal cases.
Slovakia, down ten places to 27th, is still reeling from the murder of a 27-year-old investigative reporter Jan Kusiak who had been covering alleged corrupt links between politicians and the mafia.
Out of the 28 EU countries, only six of them are awarded top marks in this year’s Press Freedom Index. Britain, remains unchanged at 43rd on the list because of its traditionally tough libel laws.
Press freedom is more than a check on political excess and criminal activities. It stimulates debate and disseminates information across the entire spectrum of human endeavour. The free exchange of ideas and comments is a driving force behind the advancement of human society and there is a clear and established link between political and philosophical debate and commercial and scientific success. It is no coincidence that the most developed countries in the world are the ones who have enjoyed the freest press for the longest time.
* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice. He also contributes to “The New World” magazine and lectures on world affairs. He is the author of “America Made in Britain,” two editions of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “The Falklands Crisis.”
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The pine martens of Shropshire
The shame of Liverpool Labour councillors taking their allowances but not turning up to do the work
Should Labour reconsider the Brexit red lines?
Raising a flap about letterboxes
Restrained
David Allen
Simon McGrath
Peter Davies
Rob Heale
Kira Collins
9 Comments
Had Ed Miliband have got in, we’d have huge control of the press by socialists. His attacks on foreign ownership, breaking up ownership and Murdoch in particular were very concerning.
Corbyn and friends would be even worse – imagine a situation where we could not criticise junior doctors, black cabbies or rail workers engaging in highly offensive strikes and disruptive behaviour.
Freedom to call governments and other powerful bodies to account cannot be taken for granted. It is made more complicated when media organisations themselves are amongst those powerful bodies.
In deference to journalistic freedom, as expressed by Tom, Liberal Democrats pull their punches and too often fail to challenge the UK press, television, radio and internet.
If we believe that the BBC is failing to ask the important questions, makes negligent assumptions, reports irresponsibly and lazily counts any opposition as all the same, Liberal Democrats should not be afraid to attack and challenge with vigour. So long as the BBC and other outlets feel it is safe to ignore the voice of Liberal Democrats, they will continue to do so.
It is not the job of Liberal Democrats to give the BBC and others an easy ride, they should be made to account for themselves. In fact, not to do so would pose a threat to Liberal Democracy.
You really should have provided the link: https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2018
I am very concerned that this party, both centrally and in LDV, has lost sight of the real issue of the day. Every day we see articles on secondary issues, sometimes an article on Brexit or a specific issue, but nowhere is there a general attack on the competence of this government and what we would do about it.
This thread is just an example
Just look at the record this week.
Amber Rudd, Windrush and other commonwealth citizens at risk
Urgently needed doctors refused visas
Government in chaos over Brexit
No Technical Solution for the NI border pursued
Train Franchise mess, with gormless Grayling in charge
Violent crime, drug use with pollution and poverty on increase
The list goes on, and we can add an incompetent Labour opposition.
Where is our message of hope?
Why is it not on our website
Why is it not broadcast from central office to local parties
Why does it not feature in LDV on a regular basis.
Is it possibly because we do not have one?
Simple questions, are we relavent at all/anymore, what purpose are we serving, is there a need for a new force which would be relavent and have a purpose the public can understand, within which could operate?
You tell me
A prime duty of every political party is to speak truth to power.
We failed to do this when in coalition and we still fail in this duty, without which freedom dies.
We were once a party of protest. We were then told that we were a party of power instead.
We are now neither a party of protest nor power.Thank you Sir N Clegg.
We were once trusted because we spoke informed protest to power as over the Iraq war. Thank you Mr C Kennedy.
LDV could be a powerful tool for informed enquiry, unorthodoxy and protest. In its lack of coverage of vital matters listed in previous posts, as well as others, it is failing in fundamentals of party and national politics.
The price of freedom includes eternal vigilance and the interrogation of the powerful.
@Stimpson,
There is freedom of the press and there is fake news. Upholding the former should not include defending the latter. The fact is, the dominance in the UK of a small number of non-domiciled billionaire media moguls is not good for democracy. This is especially true when they all have a similar political slant and a penchant for printing large front page lies and small p.24 retractions if caught.
Had the Sun, Mail and Express been left wing and pro-EU we might well have a Corbyn government at this moment. We would almost certainly not be embarking on Brexit. Whatever you or I feel about either of those scenarios, neither they nor the current reality should be decided in this way.
Almost completely agree with David Beckett, although I thought Ed Davey did well on ‘Any Questions’ today.
It’s difficult to decide whether or not the Party leadership is in an empty space or a vacuum. There’s no evidence of any fire in the belly – and the needle seems to be stuck in the monotonous groove of Brexit.
As for LDV ??? With a very few exceptions, ditto……. and I’m concerned for Stimpson about his vivid and fevered imagination.
It’s not really surprising that freedom of speech is under threat, along with an unfettered press. We need stronger institutions that monitor and take real action against efforts to silence these foundations of democracy at both global and local levels. Social media can be a tool in this accountability.
Depressing and worrying, but all these examples are in Europe or North America. It’s easy to forget while genuine liberal democracy is under attack in these areas, it’s been making strides in Africa and Latin America. Of course these continents can provide many examples of a fettered or bullied press, but perhaps the direction of travel has been positive?