Guyana slips to ‘partly free’ in press freedom ranking

Guyana has slipped from ‘Free’ to ‘Partly Free’ in the Freedom House rankings for freedom of the press in 2011, in a period that has seen countries moving positively along the index following social media-goaded upsurges resulting in democracy taking hold there.

Guyana placed 70th along with Hong Kong and Italy, which also scored 33 points, earning them the ‘Partly Free’ ranking.

The report said that of the 197 countries and territories assessed during 2011, including the new country of South Sudan, a total of 66 (33.5 per cent) were rated ‘Free,’ 72 (36.5 per cent) were rated ‘Partly Free’, and 59 (30 per cent) were rated ‘Not Free’. It said that this balance marks a shift toward the ‘Partly Free’ category compared with the edition covering 2010, which featured 68 ‘Free’, 65 ‘Partly Free’, and 63 ‘Not Free’ countries and territories.

According to the study, only 14.5 per cent of the world’s inhabitants live in countries with a free press, while 45 per cent had a ‘Partly Free’ press and 40.5 per cent live in ‘Not Free’ environments.

“The population figures are significantly affected by two countries—China, with a ‘Not Free’ status, and India, with a ‘Partly Free’ status—that together account for over a third of the world’s nearly seven billion people,” the report said.

The top-ranking countries on the index – with a score of between 0 and 30 – are Finland, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Switzerland, St Lucia, Jamaica, Barbados, United States, Canada, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, St. Kitts and Nevis, Suriname, and Grenada, among others.

Those countries scoring between 62 and 68 points have been classified as ‘Not Free’  and include Algeria, Central African Republic, Honduras, Mexico, Malaysia, Cambodia, Jordan, Madagascar, Pakistan, Armenia, Angola, Qatar, Singapore and Cameroon.

The report explained that 197 countries and territories are given a total score from 0 (best) to 100 (worst) on the basis of a set of 23 methodology questions divided into three subcategories, assigning numerical points allows for comparative analysis among the countries surveyed and facilitates an examination of trends over time.

It said that the degree to which each country permits the free flow of news and information determines the classification of its media as ‘Free’, ‘Partly Free’, or ‘Not Free’. It noted that countries scoring 0 to 30 are regarded as having ‘Free’ media; 31 to 60, ‘Partly Free’ media; and 61 to 100, ‘Not Free’ media.

“Our examination of the level of press freedom in each country currently comprises 23 methodology questions and 109 indicators divided into three broad categories: the legal environment, the political environment, and the economic environment. For each methodology question, a lower number of points are allotted for a freer situation, while a higher number of points are allotted for a less free environment. Each country is rated in these three categories, with the higher numbers indicating less freedom. A country’s final score is based on the total of the three categories: A score of 0 to 30 places the country in the ‘Free’ press group; 31 to 60 in the ‘Partly Free’ press group; and ‘61 to 100’ in the Not Free press group,” the report said.

For the legal environment category, the body examines both the laws and regulations that could influence media content and the government’s inclination to use these laws and legal institutions to restrict the media’s ability to operate.

“We assess the positive impact of legal and constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression; the potentially negative aspects of security legislation, the penal code, and other criminal statutes; penalties for libel and defamation; the existence of an ability to use freedom of information legislation; the independence of the judiciary and of official media regulatory bodies; registration requirements for both media outlets and journalists; and the ability of journalists’ groups to operate freely,” the report said.

With regard to the political environment category, Freedom House evaluates the degree of political control over the content of news media. “Issues examined include the editorial independence of both state-owned and privately owned media; access to information and sources; official censorship and self-censorship; the vibrancy of the media and the diversity of news available within each country; the ability of both foreign and local reporters to cover the news freely and without harassment; and the intimidation of journalists by the state or other actors, including arbitrary detention and imprisonment, violent assaults, and other threats,” Freedom House said.

“Our third category examines the economic environment for the media. This includes the structure of media ownership; transparency and concentration of ownership; the costs of establishing media as well as of production and distribution; the selective withholding of advertising or subsidies by the state or other actors; the impact of corruption and bribery on content; and the extent to which the economic situation in a country impacts the development and sustainability of the media,” the report said.