Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Australia’s rank in the World Press Freedom Index has plummeted from 25 to 39 this year. Reasons given for the decline include “ultra-concentrated media ownership” and “growing official pressure”.

The World Press Freedom Index is compiled yearly by the media watchdog organisation, Reporters Without Borders. It uses an extensive questionnaire considering five contextual indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety.

Reporters Without Borders is considered a reliable source with a left-wing bias by Media Bias Fact Check.*

“Press Freedom is Fragile”: A Bleak Outlook for Australia

The 2022 report observes that “Press freedom is fragile” in Australia. The most notable result was the legislative indicator, on which Australia scored a chilling 96 (out of 180). According to the methodology, the legislative indicator refers to:

“… the legislative and regulatory environment for journalists, in particular:

• the degree to which journalists and media are free to work without censorship or judicial sanctions, or excessive restrictions on their freedom of expression;

• the ability to access information without discrimination between journalists, and the ability to protect sources;

• the presence or absence of impunity for those responsible for acts of violence against journalists.”

The report identifies “draconian tendencies concerning the free practice of journalism” in some Australian states.

Overall, Australia’s ranking has fallen from 25th in the world to 39th.

Among the other problematic features, the report flagged concerns around “the independence of the process for appointing members of ABC’s board of directors” and editorial integrity in light of the “concentration of media ownership”.

Defamation Rulings & Security Laws

Other media groups have highlighted further issues with Australia’s freedom of the press. A 2019 media release by the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance, Australia’s union for journalists, criticised Australia’s defamation laws.

According to the MEAA, “Australia’s defamation laws are being used as a weapon to threaten and attack legitimate reporting”. The Alliance’s federal director, Marcus Strom, said the following:

“Media outlets and their employees are tied up for months or years on costly legal proceedings. The damages being won threaten the viability of media businesses. Plaintiffs can be awarded vast sums of money without ever demonstrating they have a reputation, let alone one that has been substantially harmed. The old regime did not anticipate the nature of modern digital journalism/publishing nor the massive disruption that has taken place in the media industry…”

Similarly, the Human Rights Watchdog has flagged Australia’s new National Security Laws as problematic. The group’s Australian director, Elaine Pearson, observed:

“Australia’s national security laws shouldn’t be used to intimidate the media or those holding the government to account. The government seems intent on sending a message to officials not to share information with journalists.”

All of these problems have sparked concern over the future of free journalism in Australia.

Blind Spots: Independent Journalism

Unfortunately, the Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom index has its limits. Its definition of what constitutes a journalist is unclear, and it does not appear that the treatment of independent and alternative outlets is even considered in the Index.

Moreover, the increasingly dominant role played by powerful “fact-checking” organisations — often used to de-platform (or dismiss out of hand) opinions or reporting that contradicts academic or government consensus — is left untouched.

Nonetheless, the Index does flag important issues around the freedom of the press and free speech in Australia today. Freedom of the press is hard-won, and it cannot be taken for granted.

Additionally, it highlights the important role that alternative voices — whether professional or amateur — play in keeping big media (whether commercial and government) honest. All kinds of journalism, discourse and commentary have a role to play in public discourse.

–––

*In the interests of transparency, it is worth noting that Media Bias Fact Check’s methodology is labelled in “no way scientific” by behemoth fact-checker Poynter. The site is also strongly favoured by left-leaning outlets, who most commonly feature it on their websites.

___

Photo by cottonbro.