S'pore has more press freedom than M'sia... huh??
Singapore has been ranked higher than Malaysia in the "Freedom of the Press 2004" survey carried out by the Washington-based Freedom House.
Singapore, which has backed the US' "war on terror", is in 135th place, 19 slots higher than Malaysia (in 155th place).
Huh? Look, we all know that there is very little press freedom in Malaysia. But to say that Singapore has more freedom than Malaysia? Hello?
Compare this to the 2004 press freedom rankings prepared by the Paris-based RSF (Reporters Without Borders), in which Singapore is ranked 25 places below Malaysia.
RSF ranking 2004
57 Timor Leste
59 Thailand
109 Cambodia
111 Philippines
117 Indonesia
122 Malaysia
147 Singapore
153 Laos
161 Vietnam
165 Burma
Anyone familiar with the press freedom (or lack of it!) situation in Malaysia and Singapore will know exactly which country has less press freedom.
In Malaysia, though the mainstream media are largely controlled by the ruling parties and their friends, there is a small number of lively opposition/independent publications and popular critical websites. There is Malaysiakini.com, which has a large following, Harakah (large print circulation and popular web edition), Rocket, Berita Keadilan/Suara PRM, Aliran Monthly plus a lively band of critical websites and blogs.
What alternative or independent media (apart from a token critical presence) do they have in Singapore to counter the dominance of Singapore Press Holdings?
There is no contest. Malaysia, despite the pathetic amount of press freedom that we have, has more press freedom than Singapore. As far as these two countries go, the RSF press freedom index has got it right.
Why, the Freedom House index even places the United States a generous 15th place, despite the US media’s utter failure to expose President Bush’s lies over the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and other pretexts for the illegal invasion and occupation of that country. There were hardly any dissenting voices in the major US television stations and newspapers in the runup to the illegal invasion. The leading dissident in the US, Noam Chomsky, is shunned by the US mainstream media. In contrast, Freedom House ranked France, which opposed the Iraq invasion, a lowly 37th place.
Contrast that with the RSF ranking, which places France in 19th place ahead of the US in 22nd place.
Freedom House also ranked Australia, a US ally in the invasion of Iraq, in 18th place, 23 slots higher than the ranking of 41st place that the RSF gave Australia.
I don’t know about you, but I think the RSF rankings seem to be more accurate especially with regards to Malaysia and Singapore.
posted by Media Monitors @ 2:59 PM
8 Comments
8 Comments:
Aye, aye to RSF. At least we know they're impartial. Anything that comes out of the US media should be taken with a pinch of salt. Cannot be swallowed whole.One also has to watch it when it comes to BBC World Service reports. Despite, their apparent 'democracy' the inclination to be led by government policy is quite obvious and this was so in the run up to the illegal invasion of Iraq. It is good to know that the Western English language media cannot fool some of us in Malaysia.
Ha ha, I never really trust the Freedom House stuff, just like any human rights report released by the US state department has to be taken with a pinch of salt. I always prefer thye Amnesty International, for obvious reasons.
By the way, anti-americanism never really has a place in the Singapore media. So, should we be surprised at the better position accorded by the Freedom House? :)
Stop being grumpy lah! Just let the island state congratulate itself on its better performance than Malaysia. We have our real fight for press freedom right before us, or?
Dunno whether you relly did listen to B.B.C.,the reporter and the director general both lost their jobs due to the report and the refusal to apologise to the Bri. government.
I agree with your main point that Malaysia has a little bit more press freedom than Singapore.
However, I don't find it surprising that USA has a lot of press freedom. I lived there for 14 years and experienced it myself. The press there can, and do, openly criticize the government with impunity.
Anyone with money can set up their own newspaper, TV, or radio station which can then put forth their own political views with impunity.
The fact that you don't like the current American news coverage of the invasion of Iraq isn't an indication of lack of press freedom -- it's an indication of your disagreement with the viewpoint of the major press agencies available.
Remember, it was AMERICAN news sources that also exposed the abuse of the Abu Ghraib prisoners.
Response from Media Monitors
Regarding the American media, check this out:
Check this out:
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney11292004.html
"CBS depiction of the war is no different than ABC, CNN, NBC or FOX. We can see from this brief summary of one week's news that American media is little more than the "information arm" of the US military. In every case, the events are shaped to create a favorable impression of our involvement. The allusions to weapons caches, anthrax labs and torture rooms are invoked to feed ethnic and racial hatred and to rationalize the horrific punishment we are visiting on the innocent civilians of Falluja. The real story of Falluja is nowhere to be found in American media."
And regarding our assertion that Freedom House's ranking of Singapore as having more press freedom than Malaysia is wrong, check this out;
"Is Singapore racist?" asked fired journalist
http://www.jeffooi.com/archives/2004/11/is_singapore_ra.php
East Timor was 57th? Does it even have a press?
ummm, quite clearly RSF ranks malaysia higher than singapore 122 vs 147?
DId u read it wrongly? I don't know why anyone missed it.
ANd yes Timor Lorasae has a press, despite how you see them as "backward"
Yes, we know RSF ranked Malaysia higher than Singapore, but the question was: why did Freedom House rank Singapore ahead of Malaysia. Did you miss that?
Post a Comment
<< Home