measurement of media freedom
Idea: Freedom of the press is one of the cornerstones for the survival of modern democracies. Empirical evidence and observation suggests that democracy grows in tandem with the ever-expanding freedom of the press.
Idea: Freedom of the press is one of the cornerstones for the survival of modern democracies. Empirical evidence and observation suggests that democracy grows in tandem with the ever-expanding freedom of the press.
Concept: freedom of the press
Organization:
In my opinion, freedom of the press has three basic indicators. A country with freedom of press should satisfy all the following requirements:
1. No existing de facto law, regulation or censorship agency should make media succumb to prior restraint
2. Basic laws or constitution protect free speech (political) and they are actually enforced
3. Media should not be largely (50% or higher) state-owned
1. No existing de facto law, regulation or censorship agency should make media succumb to prior restraint
2. Basic laws or constitution protect free speech (political) and they are actually enforced
3. Media should not be largely (50% or higher) state-owned
First, prior restraint is a classic indicator of freedom of the press. The supreme court of the United States established this legal precedent in Near v. Minnesota, which recognized the freedom of the press by roundly rejecting prior restraints on publication, a principle that was applied to free speech generally in subsequent cases. I hold the opinion that this prior restraint test is very significant and effective in restricting government control over media. Under prior restraint rule, government does not have any excuses to establish censorship institutions such as propaganda department to pre-screen media content.
Second, rule of law is a basic safeguard which is designed for political liberty protection. And a confirmation in the constitution or basic laws that guarantees political free speech is the prerequisite of the freedom of the press, which can effectually limit government power abuses in subsequent punishment, if any.
Third, media ownership is also an crucial indicator of freedom of the press. Hayek's proposition in The Road to Serfdom is very incisive when explaining the side-effect of state monopoly, which also applies to state-owned media. State's direct involvement and bias in the media industry will crush the natural competitiveness in free market and eventually it will impinge on the freedom of the press.
I hold a minimalist view of freedom of the press which classify media freedom only in regard to its observable institutional procedure and ownership rather than some specific violation cases and outcomes. A minimalist view is more objective and reliable. I also hold a dichotomous view toward the freedom of the media. If a country does not satisfy all three indicators, then it will be classified as not free. If a country meets all three indicators, then it will be classified as free. There is no middle zone in my method. As a result, the measurement level in my standard is nominal measure.
About validity, reliability and replicability:
First of all, three indicators rely on each other and every one is indispensable. Without prior restraint this specific practise requirement, the definition of free speech will be too ambiguous. Without the guarantee of free speech, prior restraint restriction will be meaningless because state can implement subsequent punishment anyway. Without free media market, in state monopoly media do not have incentive to practise their freedom so that the preceding two requirements will be futile. So as far as I am concerned, my measurement is valid.
All my three indicators are based on subjective observation rather than objective speculation. Related fact and statistics can be found in pertinent laws, regulations and media reports, and my measurement is not specific-case-violation oriented. So my measurement is reliable and replicable.
Second, rule of law is a basic safeguard which is designed for political liberty protection. And a confirmation in the constitution or basic laws that guarantees political free speech is the prerequisite of the freedom of the press, which can effectually limit government power abuses in subsequent punishment, if any.
Third, media ownership is also an crucial indicator of freedom of the press. Hayek's proposition in The Road to Serfdom is very incisive when explaining the side-effect of state monopoly, which also applies to state-owned media. State's direct involvement and bias in the media industry will crush the natural competitiveness in free market and eventually it will impinge on the freedom of the press.
I hold a minimalist view of freedom of the press which classify media freedom only in regard to its observable institutional procedure and ownership rather than some specific violation cases and outcomes. A minimalist view is more objective and reliable. I also hold a dichotomous view toward the freedom of the media. If a country does not satisfy all three indicators, then it will be classified as not free. If a country meets all three indicators, then it will be classified as free. There is no middle zone in my method. As a result, the measurement level in my standard is nominal measure.
About validity, reliability and replicability:
First of all, three indicators rely on each other and every one is indispensable. Without prior restraint this specific practise requirement, the definition of free speech will be too ambiguous. Without the guarantee of free speech, prior restraint restriction will be meaningless because state can implement subsequent punishment anyway. Without free media market, in state monopoly media do not have incentive to practise their freedom so that the preceding two requirements will be futile. So as far as I am concerned, my measurement is valid.
All my three indicators are based on subjective observation rather than objective speculation. Related fact and statistics can be found in pertinent laws, regulations and media reports, and my measurement is not specific-case-violation oriented. So my measurement is reliable and replicable.
Existing concepts and measures:
In Press Freedom Index issued by Reporters Without Borders, there are 6 indicators that reflect media freedom:
1. PHYSICAL VIOLENCE
2. NUMBER OF JOURNALISTS MURDERED, DETAINED, PHYSICALLY ATTACKED OR THREATENED, AND ROLE OF AUTHORITIES
3. INDIRECT THREATS, HARASSMENT AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION
4. CENSORSHIP AND SELF-CENSORSHIP
5. CONTROL OF MEDIA, JUDICIAL, BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PRESSURE,
6. INTERNET AND NEW MEDIA
The Press Freedom Index is more based on subjective individual perceptions, and there are often wide contrasts in a country's ranking from year to year. So the reliability of this Press Freedom Index is questionable. In my opinion, my measurement has succinctly included these indicators and more based on objective observation.
In Press Freedom Index issued by Reporters Without Borders, there are 6 indicators that reflect media freedom:
1. PHYSICAL VIOLENCE
2. NUMBER OF JOURNALISTS MURDERED, DETAINED, PHYSICALLY ATTACKED OR THREATENED, AND ROLE OF AUTHORITIES
3. INDIRECT THREATS, HARASSMENT AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION
4. CENSORSHIP AND SELF-CENSORSHIP
5. CONTROL OF MEDIA, JUDICIAL, BUSINESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PRESSURE,
6. INTERNET AND NEW MEDIA
The Press Freedom Index is more based on subjective individual perceptions, and there are often wide contrasts in a country's ranking from year to year. So the reliability of this Press Freedom Index is questionable. In my opinion, my measurement has succinctly included these indicators and more based on objective observation.
没有评论:
发表评论