Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
spartan max2

U.S press freedom drops from rank 13 to 46

69 posts in this topic

So in one year 2013 we dropped from ranked 13 for press freedom in the world and now we are down to 46 :td:

http://www.huffingto..._b_4770182.html

According to a new report from Reporters Without Borders, there was a profound erosion of press freedom in the United States in 2013.

After a year of attacks on whistleblowers and digital journalists and revelations about mass surveillance, the United States plunged 13 spots in the group's global press freedom rankings to number 46.

Reporters Without Borders writes that the U.S. faced "one of the most significant declines" in the world last year. Even the United Kingdom, whose sustained campaign to criminalize the Guardian's reporters and intimidate journalists has made headlines around the world, dropped only three spots, to number 33. The U.S. fell as many spots as Paraguay, where "the pressure on journalists to censor themselves keeps on mounting."

Citing the Justice Department's aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers, including its secret seizure of Associated Press phone records, the authors write that "freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result."

The threats facing newsgathering in the U.S. are felt by both longstanding journalists like New York Times national security reporter James Risen, who may serve jail time for refusing to reveal a source, and non-traditional digital journalists like Barrett Brown.

Edited by spartan max2
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happens when the government is getting ready to start to oppress its citizens.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in one year 2013 we dropped from ranked 13 for press freedom in the world and now we are down to 46 :td:

http://www.huffingto..._b_4770182.html

According to a new report from Reporters Without Borders, there was a profound erosion of press freedom in the United States in 2013.

After a year of attacks on whistleblowers and digital journalists and revelations about mass surveillance, the United States plunged 13 spots in the group's global press freedom rankings to number 46.

Reporters Without Borders writes that the U.S. faced "one of the most significant declines" in the world last year. Even the United Kingdom, whose sustained campaign to criminalize the Guardian's reporters and intimidate journalists has made headlines around the world, dropped only three spots, to number 33. The U.S. fell as many spots as Paraguay, where "the pressure on journalists to censor themselves keeps on mounting."

Citing the Justice Department's aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers, including its secret seizure of Associated Press phone records, the authors write that "freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result."

The threats facing newsgathering in the U.S. are felt by both longstanding journalists like New York Times national security reporter James Risen, who may serve jail time for refusing to reveal a source, and non-traditional digital journalists like Barrett Brown.

The tyrant in chief demands 100% support from the lapdog press. Isn't it amazing that they are still all in for Obama after his severe mistreatment of them? Self-induced censorship coupled with government sponsored suppression means we are actually rated higher than we should be.

Edited by Merc14
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the UK had more strict press rules, nobody trusts the press here

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tyrant in chief demands 100% support from the lapdog press. Isn't it amazing that they are still all in for Obama after his severe mistreatment of them? Self-induced censorship coupled with government sponsored suppression means we are actually rated higher than we should be.

Government sponsored suppression is the frisbee now?

Okay, so Free Bradley Manning, right Merc?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the UK had more strict press rules, nobody trusts the press here

You don't get it do you Richard.
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Government sponsored suppression is the frisbee now?

Okay, so Free Bradley Manning, right Merc?

I didn't realize Brad was a reporter, I thought he was in the military. :unsure2: Hey, you are getting crazier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize Brad was a reporter, I thought he was in the military. :unsure2: Hey, you are getting crazier

So you have a double standard for the military again. I'm stunned.

Sorry to expose you as thinking that having principle is "crazy".

How the hell are you going to rely on non-military reporters and their special constitutional rights to report on government suppression in the military when they're not in the government/military to witness it? You don't ask yourself questions like that because you don't care. You love your preferred forms of government sponsored suppression.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have a double standard for the military again. I'm stunned.

Sorry to expose you as thinking that having principle is "crazy".

How the hell are you going to rely on non-military reporters and their special constitutional rights to report on government suppression in the military when they're not in the government/military to witness it? You don't ask yourself questions like that because you don't care. You love your preferred forms of government sponsored suppression.

Yeah, making an oath is pretty much the epitome of principle so yeah, I distinguish between a reporter and a soldier. Also, a military member signs up to a different set of laws when he takes that oath, It is called the UCMJ and you sign away many of your constitutional rights when you take that oath.

I really have to ask, what in the hell are you doing? Yes, it is fun embarrassing you, to a point, but it is getting tiresome to say the least. This is petty basic stuff yet you didn't even bother to research it before posting your drivel. Step up or shut up as you are wasting my time NNs. You are attacking me across multiple threads and getting a little less cogent as you go along.

Edited by Merc14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, making an oath is pretty much the epitome of principle so yeah, I distinguish between a reporter and a soldier. Also, a military member signs up to a different set of laws when he takes that oath, It is called the UCMJ and you sign away many of your constitutional rights when you take that oath.

They're sworn to defend the Constitution. When does that not apply?

This is very disturbing news about the military you're bringing up. I think that's something we should address right away in the interest of keeping this government constitutional. I think provisions should be made where soldiers do NOT "sign away their constitutional rights" at all, if that's indeed what they do (source, please).

“So many vows … they make you swear and swear. Defend the king. Obey the king. Keep his secrets. Do his bidding. Your life for his. But obey your father. Love your sister. Protect the innocent. Defend the weak. Respect the gods. Obey the laws. It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or another.” ~ Jaime Lannister

At best, you caught Bradley Manning getting crossed up with his vows.

And the only vows that you care about, are the vows that you care about. So I don't let your little detail-oriented bureaucratic excuses disturb my greater reasoning. The limits of my thinking are not housed in your government-shaped box.

"Making an oath is the epitome of principle"? That's absurd.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're sworn to defend the Constitution. When does that not apply?

This is very disturbing news about the military you're bringing up. I think that's something we should address right away in the interest of keeping this government constitutional. I think provisions should be made where soldiers do NOT "sign away their constitutional rights" at all, if that's indeed what they do (source, please).

“So many vows … they make you swear and swear. Defend the king. Obey the king. Keep his secrets. Do his bidding. Your life for his. But obey your father. Love your sister. Protect the innocent. Defend the weak. Respect the gods. Obey the laws. It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or another.” ~ Jaime Lannister

At best, you caught Bradley Manning getting crossed up with his vows.

And the only vows that you care about, are the vows that you care about. So I don't let your little detail-oriented bureaucratic excuses disturb my greater reasoning. The limits of my thinking are not housed in your government-shaped box.

"Making an oath is the epitome of principle"? That's absurd.

I just lost 23,450, 320 brain cells reading this and I didn't even get the chance to get high, like you, when you were writing this. May all my enemies in life be as easy to deal with as you.

Edited by Merc14
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just lost 23,450, 320 brain cells reading this and I didn't even get the chance to get high, like you, when you were writing this. May all my enemies in life be as easy to deal with as you.

How is having a single standard both for the government and the people easy for you to deal with? I think that presents an enormous challenge for you that you don't even recognize. You just showed no interest whatsoever in whether soldiers have Constitutional rights or if they should. I think I've exposed you again, unfortunately.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just lost 23,450, 320 brain cells reading this and I didn't even get the chance to get high, like you, when you were writing this. May all my enemies in life be as easy to deal with as you.

Couple more of these and a rabbit will eat ya huehuehue

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A free, informed press means critical thinking.

Critical thinking means no mental slavery.

No mental slavery means they can't control you.

If they can't control you, then they won't be able to get away with an excessive, overly-gross wealthy lifestyle paid by you, the subservient menial worker.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're sworn to defend the Constitution. When does that not apply?

This is very disturbing news about the military you're bringing up. I think that's something we should address right away in the interest of keeping this government constitutional. I think provisions should be made where soldiers do NOT "sign away their constitutional rights" at all, if that's indeed what they do (source, please).

“So many vows … they make you swear and swear. Defend the king. Obey the king. Keep his secrets. Do his bidding. Your life for his. But obey your father. Love your sister. Protect the innocent. Defend the weak. Respect the gods. Obey the laws. It’s too much. No matter what you do, you’re forsaking one vow or another.” ~ Jaime Lannister

At best, you caught Bradley Manning getting crossed up with his vows.

And the only vows that you care about, are the vows that you care about. So I don't let your little detail-oriented bureaucratic excuses disturb my greater reasoning. The limits of my thinking are not housed in your government-shaped box.

"Making an oath is the epitome of principle"? That's absurd.

Maybe, that is why Christ said don't swear on anything.

The press military or not is suppose to keep the government in check. It cant do this if the government suppress it. But reporting on stuff that is top secret or higher carries a two egde sword. Meaning if you report on it you might get troops killed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the hell does that happen in a country with literally enshrined laws about press freedom?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, that is why Christ said don't swear on anything.

The press military or not is suppose to keep the government in check. It cant do this if the government suppress it. But reporting on stuff that is top secret or higher carries a two egde sword. Meaning if you report on it you might get troops killed.

In theory anything's possible but I think the results of what's come out in these leaked documents is the opposite. That is, if you don't report on it, it might get troops killed.

Manning, for all of his gay prison sex, has a big silver lining in all of this. He cleaned up the systems. To think of the volumes of all that expensive nonsense that was uncovered.

Manning didn't take an oath not to get other troops killed. That's the kind of oath that would end promotions of commanders in the military. He took an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. But everyone's fine with what we're doing. It's just a g'damned piece of paper.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the hell does that happen in a country with literally enshrined laws about press freedom?

iPads and MTV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the UK had more strict press rules, nobody trusts the press here

If you think about it, the more rules there are for the press, the worse it gets.

Hence the term "freedom of the press", closely allied with "freedom of speech." Rather a foreign concept and distasteful for the Crown, but an essential part of a free and democratic society.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Control the information and knowledge and you control the people.

From re-writing the subtle nuances of real history to science and technology blackouts to media coverage of wars, terrorism and violence.

You are being programmed to respond the way they want you to.

Paranoid...no...I'm not...

it's called being observant and aware of what is going on around you rather than being distracted with smart phones and Duck Dynasty...

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Plummets in Global Press Freedom Rankings

Wednesday, 12 February 2014 12:52 By Josh Stearns, Free Press | Report

"Citing the Justice Department’s aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers, including its secret seizure of Associated Press phone records, the authors write that “freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result.”"

"The United States’ new press freedom ranking comes on the heels of a new and dangerous campaign against Glenn Greenwald and other journalists who have reported on the documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

In recent weeks, high-ranking members of the intelligence community and members of Congress have called NSA journalists “accomplices” to Snowden’s leaks, and accused them of trafficking in stolen goods. And as Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation points out, these comments are only the most recent in a long line of attacks."

http://truth-out.org...reedom-rankings

What are your thoughts on this?

Do you think that alternative news sources help get the truth out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Plummets in Global Press Freedom Rankings

Wednesday, 12 February 2014 12:52 By Josh Stearns, Free Press | Report

"Citing the Justice Department’s aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers, including its secret seizure of Associated Press phone records, the authors write that “freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result.”"

"The United States’ new press freedom ranking comes on the heels of a new and dangerous campaign against Glenn Greenwald and other journalists who have reported on the documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

In recent weeks, high-ranking members of the intelligence community and members of Congress have called NSA journalists “accomplices” to Snowden’s leaks, and accused them of trafficking in stolen goods. And as Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation points out, these comments are only the most recent in a long line of attacks."

http://truth-out.org...reedom-rankings

What are your thoughts on this?

Do you think that alternative news sources help get the truth out?

personally I think the more independent news sources the better

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally I think the more independent news sources the better

The problem is not the news source, it is the source getting to the news.

The biggest attack on the freedom of the press was to undermine free reporting on military campaigns... and that was copied by everybody.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the news source, it is the source getting to the news.

The biggest attack on the freedom of the press was to undermine free reporting on military campaigns... and that was copied by everybody.

Cant disagree there. I also think one of the problems is that now that our government defined what a "journalist" Is, now whistleblowers can only go to certain people to tell their stories, because if they go to others they wont be protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the news source, it is the source getting to the news.

The biggest attack on the freedom of the press was to undermine free reporting on military campaigns... and that was copied by everybody.

Bujt we shouold know about those military campaigns, once they are done. If they make a mistake, great or small, we should indeed know about it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.