The Freedom of Press: A Contentious Social Issue
Freedom of the Press is a contentious social issue that affects every country in the world. The Freedom of the Press is defined as “the right to circulate opinions in print without censorship by the government” (Dictionary.com). In America, the First Amendment of the Constitution protects this freedom and it has become one of the foundations of our democracy, however, this freedom is not enjoyed by countries everywhere. Studies have shown that only 13% of the world’s population enjoys a free press that is without government restrictions.
Argument for a Free Press
As an American it is hard to understand what it would be like to live in a place where the press is under the control of the government that is constantly altering the information of its constituents. The Founding Fathers knew the importance of a free press as Thomas Jefferson explained, “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” Americans are constantly reminded of the great benefits that a free press can bring about to its country as well as the government. The freedom of the press is an essential component of a democracy and keeps the government accountable to itself and the people it serves. The media conveys information about government activities to the people to keep them educated and up-to-date on the happenings of their country.
Argument against a Free Press
“Fewer than one in seven people live in countries where coverage of political news is robust, the safety of journalists is guaranteed, state intrusion in media affairs is minimal, and the press is not subject to onerous legal or economic pressures” (Freedomhouse.org). Governments who do not want their constituents to have access to a free press want to have total control and want their people to be oblivious to the corruption present in their country. Typically these countries are run by a dictatorship who has remained in power because they have control over the media and are able to interfere with the elections. These rulers severely sensor their media by demanding that all news be positive and condemning any negative coverage. They claim that by doing so they are protecting their people from any distress and are trying to maintain their country’s happiness.
Bias on both sides of the argument on the Freedom of Press
There is a concept called worldview backfire effect which explains that people seek and process information that confirms their beliefs and identity. This is evident in the Freedom of the Press argument because people want to believe that the type of press they have had access to is the best one for their country and wellbeing. The Freedom of the Press is a contentious social issue because there are numerous biases present in the argument that makes it difficult for people, especially from different countries, to agree on the matter. The first bias is if the person is in a country where there is a free press they are likely to be in favor of the freedom of the press; likewise, if a person grew up with a restricted media then they may be against the freedom of the press. Another bias is if a person is apart of the government they may be partial to having control over the media to protect themselves and their actions, while a constituent may advocate for a free press so they can be be properly informed. There are also specific bias that are present in each side of the argument (biases extracted from the List of Cognitive Bias Wikipedia page):
Bias for a free press:
- Illusion of control is the “tendency to overestimate one’s degree of influence over other external events.” The media may experience this because they believe that by educating the people about the happenings of the government they could be “world-changers” and really help their country.
- Reactance is the “urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice.” If the media were to discover breakthrough information about the government they may be more inclined to share that information to spite the government and expose their corruption.
- Self-serving bias is the “tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way beneficial to their interests.” The goal of the media is to stay engaged in the happenings of the government and keep the public informed. They may be biased to spin certain events to make them seem more dramatic or intense in order to engage more readers and attain more views on their article.
Bias against a free press:
- Empathy gap is the “tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others.” The government may not understand how much of an effect they have on their constituents and how limiting the dissemination of information may have a significant impact on their country. Typically these rulers were born into their privileged position and don’t understand the experiences of the common man.
- Authority bias is the “tendency to attribute greater accuracy to the opinion of an authority figure (unrelated to its content) and be more influenced by that opinion.” Government officials are partial to control and may be inclined to take advantage of their powerful position and lie to their constituents in order to maintain their reputation. They do so knowing that their position adds to their credibility and their constituents trust their word.
- Naïve realism is the “belief that we see reality as it really is — objectively and without bias; that the facts are plain for all to see; that rational people will agree with us; and that those who don’t are either uninformed, lazy, irrational, or biased.” People in any country tend to lean towards optimism and want to trust that the information they are being presented in the media is true. In countries with a restricted media this bias and way of thinking can be increasingly detrimental.
Examining Data Related to the Freedom of Press
After researching the two sides of the contentious social issue of the Freedom of the Press I found two interesting datasets on Kaggle so that I could look into the difference between countries that have a free press and those that do not. The first dataset, Freedom of the Press 2001–2015, was released by the Freedom House in 2016 which analyzes 200+ countries’ press freedom and then assigns them a score. “The level of press freedom in each country and territory is evaluated through 23 methodology questions divided into three broad categories: the legal environment, the political environment, and the economic environment” (Kaggle.com). The second dataset, Human Freedom Index, was released by the CATO Institute in 2018 and “presents a broad measure of human freedom, understood as the absence of coercive constraint. It uses 79 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom” (Kaggle.com). I merged these two datasets using the country name and performed an explorative analysis on the data to see if I could locate any interesting findings between the top 10 most free presses, and the top 10 presses with the most restrictions.
The top 10 countries with the highest freedom of the press score are: Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand. The top 10 countries with the most restricted press (lowest press score) are: Belarus, Myanmar, Iran, Syria, Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Kazakhstan. United States was ranked #25 on the list of the most free presses so they will be excluded from my analysis.
The first interesting finding I discovered relates to the Freedom of Movement score given to each country. The Freedom of Movement is the right for a person to freely travel within their own country as well as to places outside of the country. For the countries with the most free press, the people are able to have complete freedom to travel wherever they would like, with all countries receiving a score of 10/10. For the countries with the most restrictive press, the average score for the Freedom of Movement was 3.44/10 which means that they are not able to travel freely and there is a lot of government restrictions on travel. This is interesting because the governments with the restrictive press want to control any exposure their constituents may have to the outside world in an attempt to have total control over their worldviews. They go so far with this control as to place severe restrictions on travel which is significantly different than the restrictions of the countries with the most free press who seemingly encourage their constituents to travel and expand their knowledge of the world.
The next interesting finding relates to the various components of the Freedom of Association which is the right for individuals to form groups with those who share similar interests without interference by the government. There is a significant difference between the countries with the most free press and the least free press when considering their freedom to form groups without government interference. For countries with the most press there is little to no interference with the people’s ability to peacefully assemble with the average score for the various components falling between 9.9/10 and 10/10. For countries with the least free press there is a great deal of restrictions of their right to peacefully assemble without interference, with the average score for the components occurring between 2.4/10 and 3.2/10. This is a fascinating finding because it shows that not only are the governments fearful of what could occur if their constituents had access to extensive information, they are also fearful of what could transpire if their people were able to come together freely and form their own social groups.
The last interesting finding which supports the information I presented above about government’s control over the media relates to the scores given to the countries on their Freedom of Expression. CATO gave each country a score for laws and regulations that influence media content, political pressures and controls on media content, and an overall score for Freedom of Expression. This section was very eye-opening because it is very apparent that there are differences between the media access and control for countries with a free press and those without, however, to see data relating to these instances makes the differences even more evident. For countries that have the most free press, there are no instances of reporters being killed or placed in jail and there are minimal laws, regulations, or political pressure influencing the press. Overall, the top countries for free press have a Freedom of Expression score of 9.6/10. For countries with the most restrictive press, there are several instances of press being killed or put in jail, and there is an abundance of laws and political restrictions on the press. Overall, these countries received an average Freedom of Expression score of 5.5/10.
Conclusion
To sum it up, the Freedom of the Press is a highly debated social issue across the world. The government of each country is able to establish whether their country will be able to enjoy a free press or if the government will have control over the dissemination of information. There is a lot of biases that contributes to people’s views about the press and whether they should have control over their content, including illusion of control, empathy gap, and confirmation bias. Finally, there is significant differences between the countries with the top 10 most free presses and those with the top 10 most restrictive presses. These differences are especially apparent when considering the country’s Freedom of Movement, Association, and Expression.
