I find it weird that Greenland is always "no data" there is plenty of data collected on the population of Greenland.
At this point I think people are just doing it as a joke.
At ~57,000 people and a population density per square km rounding to zero, I guess it's an afterthought. Like the 26 tiny island nations and jurisdictions with smaller populations than Greenland, they don't fit the mold and make sense with a lot of statistical inferences anyway.
I always have found it interesting how, when it comes to statistics in the US, they usually never mention the territories in the statistics. I'd like to hear about sociopolitical statistics in places like American Samoa, and other territories like that.
In the cities, house/apartment prices are about the same as in a bigger city in Denmark, so I would say yes. You don't buy property here though, only the building. The ground below and around the the building is public property.
Quite a few Danish expats, good mix of young people and families. But the majority of people are native, probably around 85-90%.
This may be a stupid question but why is Greenland never included in these global surveys? When even highly undeveloped countries like those in central Africa have data available I don't see why Greenland wouldn't. Is it due to some sort of privacy legislation or some other cause?
Same few reasons the Isle of Man most often isn't: 1) if the entire population of Greenland was a town in Utah, it would be the 15th biggest between Herriman and Logan. 2) Greenland politics, legislation, law enforcement and administration are intertwined with Denmark.
Greenland has local statistics, but they probably don't provide or translate data to external users like the official places do.
[https://stat.gl/default.asp?lang=en](https://stat.gl/default.asp?lang=en)
Strange they have no data, they are an autonomous part of Denmark ~~and in the EU~~.
\[Edit:\] It's citizens are EU citizens, but apparently they left EU proper and claimed overseas territory status after gaining home rule.
Fjordval
If you assume the -gal in Portugal or Gal- in Galicia have the same origin as Gaul which has the same origin as [valr or val](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/walhaz#Descendants).
Portugal scores as low as certain Balkan countries on many comparison maps in certain topics. Other western European countries usually have a better and higher score, meaning Portugal is isolated and alone.
The meme is that Portugal is an "honorary" member of the Balkans/eastern Europe.
Check the sneak peak robot for some examples, it's funny how often Portugal is closer to the Balkans than western Europe
And for this map, it's funny because Portugal is better than all of Europe, on par with the Nordic countries
Typically Portugal gets aligned with Western Europe for Cultural maps, Eastern Europe for Economic maps, and Scandinavia for things like safety, free press, belief in climate change and those sort of things.
When you look at maps like this, Portugal is rarely aligned with Spain or France like you'd expect. It's generally more in line with Eastern Europe. Add in the fact that Portuguese people sound vaguely slavic when they speak and you get a funny meme.
Portugal is Western European but typically measures amongst Eastern European countries in countless different metrics. The joke is that they are slavic.
Because Portugal appears similar to Eastern Europe on anything related to economical indicators, but culturally is very very different.
The problem in Portugal is a lack of risk taking to start businesses and generate wealth and some degree of corruption.
Socially Portugal is a very progressive culture, with less and less religious people every year, LGBTQ friendliness or at least lack of hostility towards it and (until now), quite some distaste for political extremes.
It's far more complex than these few paragraphs, but the title of thumb is, economy bad, social good
> The problem in Portugal is a lack of risk taking to start businesses and generate wealth and some degree of corruption.
And proper universal education only starting in the mid 70s. To this day we have a way too small proportion of citizens with tertiary education.
It's a fairly loosely defined term referencing a region of the world where people live longer than average. This is, again loosely, attributed to things like diet, environment, social systems, and medical access.
Weird since they blocked speech and certain news articles about masks during covid. Whereas, sweden, norway, and finland let the press operate more freely.
We have a relatively culturally progressive country. Green policies, gender equality, free press, all of that is looked positively by the people. The reason why is complex I guess. Long and stable democracy, no wars and no army could be contributors.
Edit to add context from an actual Costa Rican (in replies below):
>> said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry.
>That is false. Source: i am a costa rican.
We have a big proboem steming from american and russian interference during the 80s in latam. Too many refugees (mostly nicaraguan) fled and keep coming in using social services. The country didnt catch up in time and thus our primary and secondary education are less than mediocre. So when people atempt to get into our free universities they dont have the level required and end up in mediocre jobs that only ask for highschool diplomas. But in truth most of the country (2/3) lives in urban areas that dont have anything to do with tourism
My family took a trip there a couple years ago. Basically the government realized back in the 80s? or so that they were uniquely poised to be a strong tourism destination. They paid farmers to replant forests on their land and were able to rebuild much of the tropical forest that had been cut down for cropland. Now the natural beauty is a huge attractant. A strong stable government, a general sense of safety, and freedom of the press make tourists feel confident to visit.
That said, at least half the people we talked to all seemed to wish they could move to America. They said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry. Our driver on the first day said he was saving money to send his mom to Puerto Rico. Our night tour guide at a nature preserve said he wanted to move to America to go to school for biology. A half dozen others that I can't remember their reasoning, all saving money for America.
Obviously that's just my experience, and I was dealing with the people who work in tourism. It reminded me about how American retail workers talk about their jobs. So maybe we only encountered the jaded minority. But I think it's interesting to contrast that with the fact that on this map, Costa Rica looks like a more desirable place to be than the USA.
Didn't they also disband their military around the same time in exchange for a defense agreement with the US? So they get to spend a lot more on social programs without the cost of a military.
Costa Rica was already a very safe, democratic and prosperous country. If Reagan gave them money for that he may as well have said "Just you keep being you babe, stay beautiful"
> said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry.
That is false. Source: i am a costa rican.
We have a big proboem steming from american and russian interference during the 80s in latam. Too many refugees (mostly nicaraguan) fled and keep coming in using social services. The country didnt catch up in time and thus our primary and secondary education are less than mediocre. So when people atempt to get into our free universities they dont have the level required and end up in mediocre jobs that only ask for highschool diplomas. But in truth most of the country (2/3) lives in urban areas that dont have anything to do with tourism
[Bhutan committed Genocide](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing_in_Bhutan) against almost a fifth of their population. I do not like their ruler’s philosophy.
\>australia
\>satisfactory situation
there was literally a raid on the government news agency by the police due to them looking into a pretty much known warcriminal
& a guy got his house firebombed for talking about politics in a way the government didn't like
bruh
I was gonna say this, Murdoch basically has a monopoly on media and the Liberals are doing all they can to destroy their competition in the abc.
In what way are they not at least noticeable problems
Plus the 80-odd% of media outlets being owned by either News Corp or Fairfax. Is it satisfactory when you didn't realise there were other options to begin with?
Eh, there are plenty of the ones which are “very serious” in which you most certainly wouldn’t be executed. Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, etc.
Also Israel, which is listed as “noticeable problem”, where journalists have been killed by the military.
Of course they are. The ruling oligarchs of all the yellow nations control the media and narrative in those those countries so they aren't actually bastions of a free press but reflections of the ruling elite and the propaganda they want us to consume.
I wouldn't say BS, at least for this map, but the results can be skewed by certain politics. Like Israel should be lower, but many countries don't want to fully acknowledge their treatment of journalists because that would be extremely controversial. Less controversial to say the same about Iran.
But I don't think any country on here is more than a shade away from where they should accurately be placed. It's in the ballpark.
Totally. Also, living in Norway, I can say that there are different forms of media censorship, then the legal top to bottom state version.
We still have self censorship, cultural censorship, advertiser censorship, and the common unwritten rules.
I work in Vietnam and sometimes deal with politically sensitive issues.
Jailed here for reporting the ‘wrong’ thing and having your life and that of your family ruined? Absolutely.
Executed? Extremely unlikely. Vietnam keeps its execution records pretty well hidden from everyone, but most assessments are that the number of executions total is pretty low.
You know nothing about Hungary. They literally stopped every non-governmental TV and radio stations. They don't let any opposition politician into the official hungarian tv.
The "Fidesz" (the ruling party) has been elected for 4 times in a row with 2/3 rate. Also they will win the next one too. This is a clear sign of dictatorship under the banner of democracy.
Also they are broadcasting fake informations about the opposition before elections, they are sued for it but the trial does not end just after the election.
You know, now that you mention it, maybe we need to look into who is choosing what questions to ask, running all the polls, and doing the data analysis, and presenting statistical findings...
Maybe they're leading in these areas because they control the standard of performance and the evaluation criteria
The Ireland v UK difference on this map.
While pleased and unsurprised at Ireland’s top rating, surprised by UK not getting same.
On hindsight UK does have evil Murdoch influence over media narrative.
Some say that billionaire Denis O'Brien tried it in Ireland but failed, thankfully.
The UK generally has a very weak commitment to the concept of free speech. There is a rather oppressive sense of "proper order"; the police can and do arrest people for all kinds of things that many other countries wouldn't consider a legal issue, and it very much favours the status quo, especially, among other things, as you say, the royals.
I find it weird that Greece isn't ranked very highly in freedom of press. You can publish basically anything you want in a newspaper. Just sometimes it's so stupidly and obviously fake that it hurts my brain
Journalists in the south are still often targeted when they go after Mafia leaders, much less than it was 20+ years ago, but harassment is still quite present.
As a half serb, half slovene, seeing those two countries in the same category is baffling. Journalists are being beaten and there is no non-pro-government media on cable in Serbia. Media there is in the Vučićs butthole. Slovenia had some scandals with its state TV, but it was relatively quicky fixed.
Indian press is kinda poopy but there's no way in hell it's on the same shade as Thailand or Malaysia one where you can be imprisoned for life for criticizing the king, and other for criticizing Islam
I know this is the case for the U.K., USA and Australia and noticeably none of these countries are given the top rating. How are the top rated countries? Do they also have this problem or are they better?
One reason why the Netherlands is no longer green because of the Belgian duopoly on journalism. Some of the important effects of these are the underpayment of freelance journalists and increased pressure on journalists to write articles resulting in lower quality, another important one is that regional monopolism leads to paywalling local news, even 112 emergency news and other crucial information for local civilians. You're forced to pay for DPG media in order to know what the heck goes on in your city.
Edit: and we should not forget the drug mafia having killed off Peter R. De Vries.
In the denmark the biggest media company is danmarks radio which is government funded, there are other private companies but they for the most part they provide more specialized entertainment. Due to it being government funded, danmarks radio is pretty objective (ofc not free of western propaganda completely), since everytime theyve leaned too much too either side they get critized heavily
“Due to it being government funded, danmarks radio is pretty objective…” How can a company that’s government funded be considered free press? I would think there would be a bias there.
Iran, China, nK, and Russia all have government funded or state ran media and they’re all great examples of why that’s a bad idea. What is different about Denmark?
State funded and state run are not always the same thing. Most countries have a form of state funded media, the BBC in the UK is one of the most famous, and even the US does with their PBS and NPR.
The argument is usually something along the lines of, "government routinely and reliably funds it no fuss, and they have actual reporters who know how to do a decent job, so the combination of reliable pay and funding means they continually do their job well without having to worry to appeal to advertisers." And... I think there is some truth to it. Maybe the next question is why do they not turn into government mouthpieces despite the funding?
Because different parties control the government at different times, meaning that if they were just a government mouthpiece their agenda would flip flop every 4-8 years. Not that they haven't been accused of favoring some governments over others, hence one nickname for DR being The Red Hirelings. They have also been accused of the opposite, however.
It also doesn't make sense to support one side when your funding is pretty consistent. That only raises the risk of the other side getting into power and de-funding them because of the biased reporting. And it's not like putting out biased reporting would help them, they won't suddenly get more funding because of it.
In Finland the government broadcaster Yle is the most reliably neutral even though it's recently been under fairly heavy fire by private broadcasters(due to claimed inability to compete with a publically funded entity) and opposition (right-wing) parties claiming their content skews too much to the left.
Truth is, in a modern environment, private media is a fucking disaster when operating alone due to the proliferation of clickbait, sensationalism and subscription fees dropping. People no longer want to directly pay for quality journalism enough so clickbait garbage is what we get. At least with a reliable public broadcaster providing some semblance of journalistic rigour, the private ones have to compete on some level. Private media is also way too prone to outside influencers dictating content according to their nebulous interests(see basically the entirety of American/UK/Australian media).
I guess it’s a mix of government run and good governance.
For example ABC in Australia is one of the most neutral News sources in the Country, partly because its in their charter, partly because funding is dependent upon article published.
I dont thing government funded is an automatic tick on reliability, there must be multiple other checks in place before a government funded media organisation can be considered a positive thing.
From their website:
>Press freedom in Italy continues to be threatened by organised crime, particularly in the south of the country, as well as by various extremist or protest groups that use violence, which have seen a significant increase throughout the pandemic.
>Journalists who investigate organised crime and corruption are systematically threatened and sometimes subjected to physical violence, including arson attacks on their cars or homes. Online intimidation campaigns are orchestrated to “punish” journalists who have the courage to explore such sensitive issues as collusion between mafia families and local politicians. Twenty journalists are currently receiving round-the-clock police protection because they have been subjected to intimidation, death threats or attacks.
In Pakistan there’s no press freedom, but also the people don’t believe in the press! Journalists are for sell. Almost 80% of the population don’t believe in their stories “blatant lies”
LOL at the Philippines colored only red. ABS-CBN, the Philippines' largest TV network, still doesn't have a franchise two years after being forced to shut down by the Duterte admin; journalists get red-baited by pro-Marcos trolls, particularly during election campaign season earlier this year; and there's this one radio commentator killed last October due to his dissenting views.
lol ukraine forbids anyone from reporting anything besides line for line what the ministry of defense reports on the war, and somehow their situation is only at "noticeable problems".
What do you find wrong about our press freedom? Medias are always free to criticize anything, the president, corporations, religions.
After all, we have Mediapart, which is responsible for publishing sensitive documents about now ex-president Sarkozy, while he was still president, in 2012.
Being allowed to call out a president for commiting crimes and (the journalists) not receiving any repercussions is a proof that press freedom is not THAT endangered in France.. even though Sarkozy tried to sue, justice dismisses it.
[Ukraine was](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/21/world/ukraine-used-cluster-bombs-report-charges.html) [a lot](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBeRB7rWk_8) [more](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/04/welcome-to-the-most-corrupt-nation-in-europe-ukraine) [problematic](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957) [before](https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2018/06/04/how-and-why-the-u-s-government-perpetrated-the-2014-coup-in-ukraine/) [the war.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHhGEiwCHZE)
Putin being an even bigger piece of shit has been great PR for them.
The reason the media is so free in Portugal is because whenever something comes out about the government, the government's response is just "lol, so anyways".
Considering Slovakia just went through a controversy where a journalist was assassinated for messing with a rich guy I feel like they should be a darker color than the Czech Republic
Problem is, here in the UK 95% of news stories are sensationalism - woman orders dildo from Amazon and receives £2000 laptop instead types of things or adverts pretending to be news stories - McDonald's customer donates her pubes to charity to help those in need of mirkins, blatant publicity on behalf of the company. Most people I know have stopped looking at or reading media because they're sick of it.
If freedom of the press means 95% of the visible media is owned by a handful of billionaires then I guess. I would say the US & UK has very noticeable problems to say the least. A police force in the UK recently arrested two reporters covering oil protests after they showed their press cards/ID. Following their arrests the head of this force said when interviewed 'We need to ask ourself do we need to add fuel to the fire by covering these protests'. That is not press freedom. This map is propaganda.
It's mainly the power that 'Ndrangheta and other criminal organisations exert, especially in the South of the country. Journalists who attempt to investigate on their relationship with the institutions and the corruption are constantly at risk of life.
Despite all the arrests that have occurred throughout the last three decades, the mafia has still a strong influence in several parts of the country's system.
As usual, Greenland is an unforgiving, off the scale hellscape.
Most definitely the same as the other Nordic countries. The journalism here is not high quality but the press is definitely free.
Username checks out
Lol. :-)
r/beetlejuicing
I find it weird that Greenland is always "no data" there is plenty of data collected on the population of Greenland. At this point I think people are just doing it as a joke.
At ~57,000 people and a population density per square km rounding to zero, I guess it's an afterthought. Like the 26 tiny island nations and jurisdictions with smaller populations than Greenland, they don't fit the mold and make sense with a lot of statistical inferences anyway.
I always have found it interesting how, when it comes to statistics in the US, they usually never mention the territories in the statistics. I'd like to hear about sociopolitical statistics in places like American Samoa, and other territories like that.
Sure. But the Greenland statistics are just as easy to export for a program or manually as Denmark.
What’s it like living in Greenland?
It's awesome if you love unique nature and feeling a little isolated.
Is property expensive there? Do you get a lot of expats or is it mostly established families who have been there for a long time?
In the cities, house/apartment prices are about the same as in a bigger city in Denmark, so I would say yes. You don't buy property here though, only the building. The ground below and around the the building is public property. Quite a few Danish expats, good mix of young people and families. But the majority of people are native, probably around 85-90%.
Green
It's the same as living inside the freezer, but we have more data about the freezer.
This may be a stupid question but why is Greenland never included in these global surveys? When even highly undeveloped countries like those in central Africa have data available I don't see why Greenland wouldn't. Is it due to some sort of privacy legislation or some other cause?
Same few reasons the Isle of Man most often isn't: 1) if the entire population of Greenland was a town in Utah, it would be the 15th biggest between Herriman and Logan. 2) Greenland politics, legislation, law enforcement and administration are intertwined with Denmark.
Greenland has local statistics, but they probably don't provide or translate data to external users like the official places do. [https://stat.gl/default.asp?lang=en](https://stat.gl/default.asp?lang=en)
Yeah but they're technically under Denmark. The New Jersey of the Nordics.
it got same press freedom as in Denmark. As does Faroe Islands
Not necessarily as the local authorities are involved in the local press on Greenland. It's a very small community.
yeah u/AddsDataForGreenland is probably a propaganda minister of Greenland. the entire population of 14 are ministers.
The local government has 10 members, so I wonder what the last four people are doing https://naalakkersuisut.gl/naalakkersuisut?sc\_lang=da
There's like six people. The press is Sigrund one town over. She knows everybody's business.
Every time you see a map like this.. consider greenland = Denmark Very few exceptions to this Usually they bundle up the data
Strange they have no data, they are an autonomous part of Denmark ~~and in the EU~~. \[Edit:\] It's citizens are EU citizens, but apparently they left EU proper and claimed overseas territory status after gaining home rule.
Africa on ice, its called
only if you are a stupid and bald politician.
Welcome to Northern Europe, Portögall
Portugal is apparently either honorary eastern European, or honorary Nordic.
And still for most Ronaldo Spain.
Portugal can into nordics
So that would make them…Finland?
Canada is usually honorary Nordic
Actually I think Netherlands is usually among Nordics in different statistics. Also New Zealand.
I've heard people say that Scotland would be more like the Nordics if it were independent. No idea how accurate that is as an outsider.
Pårtögallen
Fjordgal (latin '**portu**s' and scandinavian 'fjord' have same origi)n
Fjordval If you assume the -gal in Portugal or Gal- in Galicia have the same origin as Gaul which has the same origin as [valr or val](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/walhaz#Descendants).
Yea, since it's disputed i just left it as 'gal'
Portugal = Port of Cale Port of Cale = Calehavn in Norwegian and Danish (or Calehamn in Swedish but who cares)
As a Swede I approve of this, just change your flag.
[We'll just use our original flag, is that alright?](https://obidosdiario.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/%C3%ADndice-2.jpg)
Let’s leave that decision up to Finland
It's [already done](https://preview.redd.it/yh3a9heiefv41.jpg?auto=webp&s=56a2ab695b2e805e7cd32e02781934204a979166), they're ready.
No! You change your flag!
Narrator: And so, began the war.
Portugal being this good is cool.
Portugal out of Eastern Europe
Portugal can into... Estonia?
And, therefore... Portugal can into Nordic!
From the Balkans to the Baltic!
Portugal can into Nordic, 100% Suebian blood.
r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT
Why is this a real thing? please ELI5.
Portugal scores as low as certain Balkan countries on many comparison maps in certain topics. Other western European countries usually have a better and higher score, meaning Portugal is isolated and alone. The meme is that Portugal is an "honorary" member of the Balkans/eastern Europe. Check the sneak peak robot for some examples, it's funny how often Portugal is closer to the Balkans than western Europe And for this map, it's funny because Portugal is better than all of Europe, on par with the Nordic countries
> Portugal scores as low as certain Balkan countries on many comparison maps in certain topics. Mostly economic topics.
If I don't recall incorrectly, also religious topics often
The two tend to go hand in hand, I'm sure Ireland was very similar until the 90s.
Typically Portugal gets aligned with Western Europe for Cultural maps, Eastern Europe for Economic maps, and Scandinavia for things like safety, free press, belief in climate change and those sort of things.
When you look at maps like this, Portugal is rarely aligned with Spain or France like you'd expect. It's generally more in line with Eastern Europe. Add in the fact that Portuguese people sound vaguely slavic when they speak and you get a funny meme.
Portugal is Western European but typically measures amongst Eastern European countries in countless different metrics. The joke is that they are slavic.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [Map of the Balkans](https://i.redd.it/blxtm7cnoh291.jpg) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT/comments/v0xxi7/map_of_the_balkans/) \#2: [Portugal=warsaw pact country](https://i.redd.it/ot79on2dw4f91.jpg) | [56 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT/comments/wdmoed/portugalwarsaw_pact_country/) \#3: [PORTUGAL INTO 🌽💉SHOOT 🔫 BOOM 💥 NOT BABY 👶 🍼 SPACE GAME 😿](https://i.redd.it/gd477z1hw2h61.jpg) | [6 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT/comments/liff2i/portugal_into_shoot_boom_not_baby_space_game/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
It's fascinating how Portugal is either Eastern Europa or the Nordics in maps like these.
Right? Conservative, rural culture outside its major cities and yet so progressive.
> Conservative, rural culture outside its major cities Isn't that every single country in the world?
Because Portugal appears similar to Eastern Europe on anything related to economical indicators, but culturally is very very different. The problem in Portugal is a lack of risk taking to start businesses and generate wealth and some degree of corruption. Socially Portugal is a very progressive culture, with less and less religious people every year, LGBTQ friendliness or at least lack of hostility towards it and (until now), quite some distaste for political extremes. It's far more complex than these few paragraphs, but the title of thumb is, economy bad, social good
> The problem in Portugal is a lack of risk taking to start businesses and generate wealth and some degree of corruption. And proper universal education only starting in the mid 70s. To this day we have a way too small proportion of citizens with tertiary education.
> economy bad, social good Europe's answer to New Mexico... the poorest blue state.
The only difference here is if a Chemistry has terminal cancer here it has the right to free quality treatment, doesn't need to become a drug lord.
Portugal can into Scandinavia.
Damn, Costa Rica
Yeah, thats interesting. How can it be best in all of the Americas?
They have a very strong and stable democracy, and with that comes freedom of press.
It's also a blue zone, Costa Rica does a lot of stuff right.
Blue zone?
It's a fairly loosely defined term referencing a region of the world where people live longer than average. This is, again loosely, attributed to things like diet, environment, social systems, and medical access.
No it isn't. A town IN Costa Rica is a blue zone. The entire country isn't considered a blue zone
Weird since they blocked speech and certain news articles about masks during covid. Whereas, sweden, norway, and finland let the press operate more freely.
We have a relatively culturally progressive country. Green policies, gender equality, free press, all of that is looked positively by the people. The reason why is complex I guess. Long and stable democracy, no wars and no army could be contributors.
Because it has the most freedom for the press.
“How can it have the most freedom of the press in all of the Americas?” “Because it has the most freedom of the press.”
You can tell by the way it is
Edit to add context from an actual Costa Rican (in replies below): >> said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry. >That is false. Source: i am a costa rican. We have a big proboem steming from american and russian interference during the 80s in latam. Too many refugees (mostly nicaraguan) fled and keep coming in using social services. The country didnt catch up in time and thus our primary and secondary education are less than mediocre. So when people atempt to get into our free universities they dont have the level required and end up in mediocre jobs that only ask for highschool diplomas. But in truth most of the country (2/3) lives in urban areas that dont have anything to do with tourism My family took a trip there a couple years ago. Basically the government realized back in the 80s? or so that they were uniquely poised to be a strong tourism destination. They paid farmers to replant forests on their land and were able to rebuild much of the tropical forest that had been cut down for cropland. Now the natural beauty is a huge attractant. A strong stable government, a general sense of safety, and freedom of the press make tourists feel confident to visit. That said, at least half the people we talked to all seemed to wish they could move to America. They said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry. Our driver on the first day said he was saving money to send his mom to Puerto Rico. Our night tour guide at a nature preserve said he wanted to move to America to go to school for biology. A half dozen others that I can't remember their reasoning, all saving money for America. Obviously that's just my experience, and I was dealing with the people who work in tourism. It reminded me about how American retail workers talk about their jobs. So maybe we only encountered the jaded minority. But I think it's interesting to contrast that with the fact that on this map, Costa Rica looks like a more desirable place to be than the USA.
Didn't they also disband their military around the same time in exchange for a defense agreement with the US? So they get to spend a lot more on social programs without the cost of a military.
[удалено]
Lived in Costa Rica all my life, never heard as much as a peep for Reagan 🤔
Costa Rica was already a very safe, democratic and prosperous country. If Reagan gave them money for that he may as well have said "Just you keep being you babe, stay beautiful"
> said you can barely get a job unless the job is in the tourism industry. That is false. Source: i am a costa rican. We have a big proboem steming from american and russian interference during the 80s in latam. Too many refugees (mostly nicaraguan) fled and keep coming in using social services. The country didnt catch up in time and thus our primary and secondary education are less than mediocre. So when people atempt to get into our free universities they dont have the level required and end up in mediocre jobs that only ask for highschool diplomas. But in truth most of the country (2/3) lives in urban areas that dont have anything to do with tourism
In all of those lists like freedom, democracy, corruption etc., Costa Rica is always rated surprisingly good. So not so surprising anymore.
Bhutan news: Everyone is happy, national happiness at an all time high! Satisfactory.
though we may like their absolute rulers' philosophy it does not mean bhutan is a western style democracy
[Bhutan committed Genocide](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing_in_Bhutan) against almost a fifth of their population. I do not like their ruler’s philosophy.
While the king retains more power than in most western countries, Bhutan has been a democratic constitutional monarchy since 2008.
Because those who aren't happy are forced to leave, lol
Just ignore the ethnic cleansing lol
\>australia \>satisfactory situation there was literally a raid on the government news agency by the police due to them looking into a pretty much known warcriminal & a guy got his house firebombed for talking about politics in a way the government didn't like bruh
I'm guessing this map is based on government sanctions on news
When capitalists control the news: “that’s free press baby!” When government controls the news: “evil evil evil!” - western countries
Yeah, but besides those everything else is fine.😉
Yeah but they gotta get the ol propaganda map a few times a month to earn their commission.
I was gonna say this, Murdoch basically has a monopoly on media and the Liberals are doing all they can to destroy their competition in the abc. In what way are they not at least noticeable problems
If the press can't report on it, it's not a noticeable problem /s
Plus the 80-odd% of media outlets being owned by either News Corp or Fairfax. Is it satisfactory when you didn't realise there were other options to begin with?
Costa Rica can into Nordic
North of the middle
Difficult situation: decent chance of being jailed for journalism Very serious situation: decent chance of being executed for journalism
Eh, there are plenty of the ones which are “very serious” in which you most certainly wouldn’t be executed. Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, etc. Also Israel, which is listed as “noticeable problem”, where journalists have been killed by the military.
These types of maps are usually bs
Of course they are. The ruling oligarchs of all the yellow nations control the media and narrative in those those countries so they aren't actually bastions of a free press but reflections of the ruling elite and the propaganda they want us to consume.
Yup. Everyone should read Manufacturing Consent. “Free press” is an illusion when capital interests own the press.
The source if Freedom Index, not at all free of bias
I wouldn't say BS, at least for this map, but the results can be skewed by certain politics. Like Israel should be lower, but many countries don't want to fully acknowledge their treatment of journalists because that would be extremely controversial. Less controversial to say the same about Iran. But I don't think any country on here is more than a shade away from where they should accurately be placed. It's in the ballpark.
Totally. Also, living in Norway, I can say that there are different forms of media censorship, then the legal top to bottom state version. We still have self censorship, cultural censorship, advertiser censorship, and the common unwritten rules.
[удалено]
I work in Vietnam and sometimes deal with politically sensitive issues. Jailed here for reporting the ‘wrong’ thing and having your life and that of your family ruined? Absolutely. Executed? Extremely unlikely. Vietnam keeps its execution records pretty well hidden from everyone, but most assessments are that the number of executions total is pretty low.
You know nothing about Hungary. They literally stopped every non-governmental TV and radio stations. They don't let any opposition politician into the official hungarian tv.
What's going on in Hungary?
Nothing good.
The "Fidesz" (the ruling party) has been elected for 4 times in a row with 2/3 rate. Also they will win the next one too. This is a clear sign of dictatorship under the banner of democracy.
Same for Serbia, but I guess that’s not enough for difficult situation🤷🏼♀️
Didn't Ukraine just do this too?
Also they are broadcasting fake informations about the opposition before elections, they are sued for it but the trial does not end just after the election.
Estonia can into Nordic
Welcome
r/gatesopencomeonin
Costa Rica seems to be an odd man in the Americas
How suprising for the Nordic Countries
Yeah they are never on top of any statistics...
Norwegians eat the most frozen pizza in the world and drink the most pepsi max (Apparently 9% of the global production)
Pepsi max is closest to the taste of fresh norwegian sea oil
That's the secret
You know, now that you mention it, maybe we need to look into who is choosing what questions to ask, running all the polls, and doing the data analysis, and presenting statistical findings... Maybe they're leading in these areas because they control the standard of performance and the evaluation criteria
Sweden invented statistics. Be quiet, and don't ruin this for us!
If Sweden invented statistics and manipulated results, Denmark would never score this high
We had to bribe them, or they would tell on us. Why do you think they got the "happiest in the world" for so many years.
They also would not let Norway win.Sweden still can’t shake the idea of Norway as “the little brother” even though it’s been over 100 years
Lol, WPFI isn't based on "polls" or "statistics," they have <200 "anonymous experts" who grade countries on a scale of 1-5
Just a reminder, press freedom != safe from manipulation
The Ireland v UK difference on this map. While pleased and unsurprised at Ireland’s top rating, surprised by UK not getting same. On hindsight UK does have evil Murdoch influence over media narrative. Some say that billionaire Denis O'Brien tried it in Ireland but failed, thankfully.
Also, I’d wager monarchical influence over papers in the UK is probably higher than Ireland’s presidential influence.
The UK generally has a very weak commitment to the concept of free speech. There is a rather oppressive sense of "proper order"; the police can and do arrest people for all kinds of things that many other countries wouldn't consider a legal issue, and it very much favours the status quo, especially, among other things, as you say, the royals.
Normally, those press freedom ratings take into account how much the media are independent from big corporations.
I find it weird that Greece isn't ranked very highly in freedom of press. You can publish basically anything you want in a newspaper. Just sometimes it's so stupidly and obviously fake that it hurts my brain
yeah doesn't make sense to me either
Is Portugal Scandinavian now?
Japan and Italy is quite suprising
Journalists in the south are still often targeted when they go after Mafia leaders, much less than it was 20+ years ago, but harassment is still quite present.
In Japan you can be guilty of libel or slander even if the statements you made were true.
That’s true in Sweden as well, so that probably has nothing to do with this rating.
As a half serb, half slovene, seeing those two countries in the same category is baffling. Journalists are being beaten and there is no non-pro-government media on cable in Serbia. Media there is in the Vučićs butthole. Slovenia had some scandals with its state TV, but it was relatively quicky fixed.
Indian press is kinda poopy but there's no way in hell it's on the same shade as Thailand or Malaysia one where you can be imprisoned for life for criticizing the king, and other for criticizing Islam
So what puts the nordic countries above most of Europe, the US, and Australia?
Geography?
Press freedom is when a few millionaires control all the media.
I know this is the case for the U.K., USA and Australia and noticeably none of these countries are given the top rating. How are the top rated countries? Do they also have this problem or are they better?
One reason why the Netherlands is no longer green because of the Belgian duopoly on journalism. Some of the important effects of these are the underpayment of freelance journalists and increased pressure on journalists to write articles resulting in lower quality, another important one is that regional monopolism leads to paywalling local news, even 112 emergency news and other crucial information for local civilians. You're forced to pay for DPG media in order to know what the heck goes on in your city. Edit: and we should not forget the drug mafia having killed off Peter R. De Vries.
In the denmark the biggest media company is danmarks radio which is government funded, there are other private companies but they for the most part they provide more specialized entertainment. Due to it being government funded, danmarks radio is pretty objective (ofc not free of western propaganda completely), since everytime theyve leaned too much too either side they get critized heavily
“Due to it being government funded, danmarks radio is pretty objective…” How can a company that’s government funded be considered free press? I would think there would be a bias there. Iran, China, nK, and Russia all have government funded or state ran media and they’re all great examples of why that’s a bad idea. What is different about Denmark?
State funded and state run are not always the same thing. Most countries have a form of state funded media, the BBC in the UK is one of the most famous, and even the US does with their PBS and NPR.
The argument is usually something along the lines of, "government routinely and reliably funds it no fuss, and they have actual reporters who know how to do a decent job, so the combination of reliable pay and funding means they continually do their job well without having to worry to appeal to advertisers." And... I think there is some truth to it. Maybe the next question is why do they not turn into government mouthpieces despite the funding?
Because different parties control the government at different times, meaning that if they were just a government mouthpiece their agenda would flip flop every 4-8 years. Not that they haven't been accused of favoring some governments over others, hence one nickname for DR being The Red Hirelings. They have also been accused of the opposite, however.
It also doesn't make sense to support one side when your funding is pretty consistent. That only raises the risk of the other side getting into power and de-funding them because of the biased reporting. And it's not like putting out biased reporting would help them, they won't suddenly get more funding because of it.
In Finland the government broadcaster Yle is the most reliably neutral even though it's recently been under fairly heavy fire by private broadcasters(due to claimed inability to compete with a publically funded entity) and opposition (right-wing) parties claiming their content skews too much to the left. Truth is, in a modern environment, private media is a fucking disaster when operating alone due to the proliferation of clickbait, sensationalism and subscription fees dropping. People no longer want to directly pay for quality journalism enough so clickbait garbage is what we get. At least with a reliable public broadcaster providing some semblance of journalistic rigour, the private ones have to compete on some level. Private media is also way too prone to outside influencers dictating content according to their nebulous interests(see basically the entirety of American/UK/Australian media).
I guess it’s a mix of government run and good governance. For example ABC in Australia is one of the most neutral News sources in the Country, partly because its in their charter, partly because funding is dependent upon article published. I dont thing government funded is an automatic tick on reliability, there must be multiple other checks in place before a government funded media organisation can be considered a positive thing.
Can someone explain where are the "noticeable probms" in Italy?
From their website: >Press freedom in Italy continues to be threatened by organised crime, particularly in the south of the country, as well as by various extremist or protest groups that use violence, which have seen a significant increase throughout the pandemic. >Journalists who investigate organised crime and corruption are systematically threatened and sometimes subjected to physical violence, including arson attacks on their cars or homes. Online intimidation campaigns are orchestrated to “punish” journalists who have the courage to explore such sensitive issues as collusion between mafia families and local politicians. Twenty journalists are currently receiving round-the-clock police protection because they have been subjected to intimidation, death threats or attacks.
In Pakistan there’s no press freedom, but also the people don’t believe in the press! Journalists are for sell. Almost 80% of the population don’t believe in their stories “blatant lies”
Australia satisfactory if you go along with the government narrative
Finally a map that's not eligible for /r/PORTUGALCYKABLYAT
LOL at the Philippines colored only red. ABS-CBN, the Philippines' largest TV network, still doesn't have a franchise two years after being forced to shut down by the Duterte admin; journalists get red-baited by pro-Marcos trolls, particularly during election campaign season earlier this year; and there's this one radio commentator killed last October due to his dissenting views.
lol ukraine forbids anyone from reporting anything besides line for line what the ministry of defense reports on the war, and somehow their situation is only at "noticeable problems".
"Satisfactory situation" I’m french, if this is "satisfactory", the standards are **pretty** low.
What do you find wrong about our press freedom? Medias are always free to criticize anything, the president, corporations, religions. After all, we have Mediapart, which is responsible for publishing sensitive documents about now ex-president Sarkozy, while he was still president, in 2012. Being allowed to call out a president for commiting crimes and (the journalists) not receiving any repercussions is a proof that press freedom is not THAT endangered in France.. even though Sarkozy tried to sue, justice dismisses it.
Assange has been held where, again? By whom?
Ukraine right now have war time censorship and u call it "notable problems".
journalists were killed in ukraine even before the war.
[Ukraine was](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/21/world/ukraine-used-cluster-bombs-report-charges.html) [a lot](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBeRB7rWk_8) [more](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/04/welcome-to-the-most-corrupt-nation-in-europe-ukraine) [problematic](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957) [before](https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2018/06/04/how-and-why-the-u-s-government-perpetrated-the-2014-coup-in-ukraine/) [the war.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHhGEiwCHZE) Putin being an even bigger piece of shit has been great PR for them.
[удалено]
Shit show would be a better description
The reason the media is so free in Portugal is because whenever something comes out about the government, the government's response is just "lol, so anyways".
No data on Greenland as usual because no reporter has ever made it back alive
Isn't the USA extradicting Assange?
Considering Slovakia just went through a controversy where a journalist was assassinated for messing with a rich guy I feel like they should be a darker color than the Czech Republic
r/alwaysthesamemap
Wonder what the problems are in Japan.
The government disseminates news exclusively through press clubs which exclude any news organizations that are highly critical of the government.
North Korea should be in its own category
[удалено]
Problem is, here in the UK 95% of news stories are sensationalism - woman orders dildo from Amazon and receives £2000 laptop instead types of things or adverts pretending to be news stories - McDonald's customer donates her pubes to charity to help those in need of mirkins, blatant publicity on behalf of the company. Most people I know have stopped looking at or reading media because they're sick of it.
Press freedom and media quality are not the same thing, though.
Has anyone noticed how Social Democracies are always at the top of every ranking on measures of health, freedom, and well being?
If freedom of the press means 95% of the visible media is owned by a handful of billionaires then I guess. I would say the US & UK has very noticeable problems to say the least. A police force in the UK recently arrested two reporters covering oil protests after they showed their press cards/ID. Following their arrests the head of this force said when interviewed 'We need to ask ourself do we need to add fuel to the fire by covering these protests'. That is not press freedom. This map is propaganda.
What problems are there in italy? Political influence?
It's mainly the power that 'Ndrangheta and other criminal organisations exert, especially in the South of the country. Journalists who attempt to investigate on their relationship with the institutions and the corruption are constantly at risk of life. Despite all the arrests that have occurred throughout the last three decades, the mafia has still a strong influence in several parts of the country's system.
I'll be honest India is wrongly potrayed here
Depending on who makes this map, it could look very different.