POLITICS: Australia ranks 25th in Press Freedom

Reporters Without Boarders: 2015 World Press Freedom Index

Australia (25th) came in at almost half that of the US (49th) as ranked by 'Reporters Without Boarders' (RWB), however countries like Ghana (22nd), Namibia (17th) and New Zealand (6th) show there is still a long way to go.

Before we start, let's take a step back for a second and ask, what does "press freedom" actually mean. Freedom of the press is supposed to give a voice to the voiceless and hold the government to account. It means being bold, daring and taking on challenging stories domestically and internationally. At a time when technology is connecting us our press seems to be disconnecting us.

Freedom of the press however is complicated, to analyse it one must look at government and media organisations independently.

The RWB released their 2015 report, and largely condemns the Australian government. This comes as no surprise when you take into consideration leaked Wikileaks documents, new laws that threaten journalists reporting on classified information, the government secrecy around refugees and 'Operation Sovereign Boarders', and Australia's involved in the ubiquitous mass surveillance program conducted by the 5eyes alliance. These examples are why the Australian government engages in practices that divest press freedom.

To stop there however ignores the responsibility of media organisations in relation to press freedom. From Rupert Murdochs 'News of the World' hacking scandal, to the American media championing of the Iraq invasion (which Australia played a significant role), and even simply the partisan support of the certain political party, much of the media landscape is a megaphone for the concerns of rich oligarchs.

How can Australia claim press freedom when organisations best equipped to inform society, fail to do so? 

That said, I was genuinely surprised that the UK (38th) and America (49th) were not lower on the list in light of the Snowden revelations. To give an one example of how this impacts press freedom I'll take the UK spy agency GCHQ:

"Emails from the BBC, Reuters, the Guardian, the New York Times, Le Monde, the Sun, NBC and the Washington Post were saved by GCHQ and shared on the agency’s intranet as part of a test exercise by the signals intelligence agency.

"The journalists’ communications were among 70,000 emails harvested in the space of less than 10 minutes on one day in November 2008 by one of GCHQ’s numerous taps on the fibre-optic cables that make up the backbone of the internet." reported The Guardian. 

So how does this relate to Australia?

While the media - 4th estate - is supposed to keep the government in check, the government (i.e. the people) is supposed to keep the media in check, which in turn promotes press freedom.

Three problems with the above analysis. The first problem lies in the fact Australia (as with many western countries) has a runaway government that does not answer to it's people and thus results in a lack of media oversights. The second is that most media (aside from nonpartisan state media) is eiher monopolised or run by capitalists oligarchs and thus results in government cooperation rather than criticism. Thirdly, this type of press freedom does not provide balanced and diverse voices. If the control of the media is in the hands of a few rich individuals, than the information disseminated will reflect that by the monopolised media machine.

In a recent interview with TeleSUR, John Pilger was asked what is the "immediate responsibility of leftists" outside of Venezuela:

"My sense is that people who live on the edge and struggle against US-backed forces in Latin America understood the true meaning of the word, just as they identify a common enemy. If we share their principles, and a modicum of their courage, we should take direct action in our own countries, starting, I would suggest, with the propagandists in the media. Yes, it's our responsibility, and it has never been more urgent."