>Edit: ~~I think this out of 3 is the only comment that appears right now, so the translation is half, plus another comment with some extra information I added is missing. Give it a minute please, I asked the mods.~~ Thank you mods.
Translation:
​
The evaluation of the countries in the report of the Non-Governmental Organization RSF (Reporters Without Borders) was not done with the same strict or lenient criteria for all countries, nor by the same committee and this leads to wrong conclusions.
The report recently presented by the international organization RSF (Reporters Without Borders) shows, among other things, Greece’s position in the world ranking in terms of the level of press freedom. Greece scored very low in this survey. It is in 108th place out of the 180 countries examined below and of countries that have an established problem not only with freedom of the press but with freedoms in general. It should be noted that a special reference was made to the European Parliament for this report. This great visibility of the results of the research in question, which was even the subject of political controversy, is the motivation to study the report more deeply. In order to better understand its content, we will try to present the methodology used and we will also comment on Greece’s rating, considering that with these two we will be able to explain the reasons for this low performance that our country recorded.
​
**The indicators**
​
The research methodology is based on a questionnaire consisting of five parts, which reflect the state of press freedom in all its complexity: political context, legal context, economic context, socio-cultural context and security. Each country’s score is assessed based on these five indicators.
The questionnaire is structured and aims to evaluate in an objective and uniform way the state of press freedom in the countries. Who answers this questionnaire? RSF says it is being answered by experts including journalists, researchers, academics and human rights defenders. No mention is made either of how many responded to the questionnaire or how they were selected in each country. The difficulty in these surveys is to achieve uniformity in assessment. Because it is impossible to have a group that knows in depth the situation of ALL countries, the groups that will be selected must have uniform criteria. In the question eg “What is the degree of autonomy from the political power of the leaders of the regulatory body” the answers should have the same criteria to be comparable. Is the assessment of the British comparable to the assessment of the Turkish? This is a key issue.
Based on the answers, an index is created which allows the ranking of the countries.
​
First of all, what is this indicator and what does it express? The aim of the index is to convert a qualitative analysis into a quantitative one. The value of the index allows, on the one hand, easier comparison between countries and, on the other hand, if the survey is repeated at regular intervals, the evolution of the situation in a country.
When a questionnaire is used to be able to compare the results of two countries, the questionnaire should be exactly the same and the answers should be given by similar groups. In the case of RSF, the questionnaire is the same, but are the respondents a uniform base selected with exactly the same criteria? RSF does not provide information regarding the base. Only an abstract reference is made to journalists, academics, sociologists, NGOs, etc. without more specific criteria for selecting the specific base.
The process and especially the selection criteria of the people who will be invited to participate in the research is of great importance for its objectivity. If, for example, a survey is made about football and the sports fans who answer all support the same team, the results will certainly not be objective. The organization does not say where the selection came from, how the selection was made, or how many people participated in the survey. The number of people who participated in the research is also important. The reliability of the result is different if 20 people participated and another if 300 people participated.
​
**Are this year’s results comparable to last year’s?**
​
As the organization’s website informs us, the methodology was changed in 2022. Therefore, it is practically impossible to compare the results of 2022 that used the new method with those of 2021 that were based on the old method. When a change in methodology is made, both methodologies should be used in parallel for a transitional period. Since this did not happen the fact that Greece lost 38 places compared to last year seems to be a completely wrong and arbitrary conclusion.
Are the results comparable between different countries? It is practically impossible for the committee that analysed the situation in Burundi or New Zealand or Chile etc. to be the same for European countries. For each country there should have been a different group. How similar or different these groups are is something the steering committee should vouch for.
​
**Rating and comments**
​
The rating is done, as we mentioned above, in the following areas:
For each sector we quote the description that the report makes for Greece and the rating it gives with the description it makes for another country and its rating. Comparing the descriptions and the score allows us to see how consistent the results are.
​
​
**Politics**
​
**GREECE**: “The government representative is responsible for supervising the public media, which has undermined their editorial independence. The broadcasting regulator ESR has been accused of slow and inefficient decision-making but the current and previous governments have failed to significantly overhaul the way it operates.” **SCORE 60.5**
**TUNISIA**: “The political crisis rocking the country and Saied’s uncertain commitment to press freedom have significant implications. Since taking office in October 2019, the presidential palace has stopped receiving journalists despite protests from the National Union of Tunisian Journalists. The media do not declare their political beliefs, with the exception of the TV network Nessma, which is owned by the political actor Nabil Karoui, but the choice of guests and the treatment of certain issues reveal political leanings. The Independent Broadcasting Authority’s (HAICA) ban on combining media ownership with political leadership is being ignored by many owners.” **SCORE 61.82**
​
It is obvious that Tunisia has a bigger problem in this area than Greece, but Greece’s score is worse than Tunisia’s.
​
​
**Legal Framework**
Quoted description from RSF report
​
**GREECE**: “Recent amendments to the Criminal Code passed under the guise of combating the Covid-19 pandemic allow the disproportionate restriction of press freedom for shaky legal reasons. Punishing the offence of disseminating false information with a five-year prison sentence goes against Greece’s international commitments and European legal standards, constitutes a serious threat to the right of journalists to publish information in the public interest and increases the risk of self-censorship.” **SCORE 69.54**
**Occupied Territories in Cyprus** (Called Northern Cyprus): “The law protects freedom of the press but limits it to protect public order, national security and public decency. Defamation is a crime. A law on computer crimes with vague provisions on “illegal publications” and “terrorist activities” may pose a threat to press freedom. There are no laws to protect the sources. **SCORE 69.82**
​
Although the occupied territories have a higher score, nevertheless from the description we understand that the problem in the occupied territories is greater than Greece.
​
​
**Economic indicator**
Quoted description from RSF report
​
**GREECE**: “The economic crisis of the last decade combined with low readership rates and reduced advertising budgets has called into question the long-term survival of many media outlets. This made them more dependent on public funding. However, the process of allocating these funds lacked transparency and appeared to favour pro-government means. A parliamentary inquiry has investigated the criteria under which millions of euros were given to media organizations for a range of government advertising campaigns, including the government’s Covid awareness campaign. **SCORE 38.13**
**LEBANON**: “The media is suffering from the consequences of the historic economic crisis affecting the country. The Beirut Port explosion in August 2020 forced them to make massive budget cuts affecting both their operations and their workforce. A large number of journalists and news agencies based in the capital affected by the explosion depend on international aid to recover and deal with the crisis. Lack of fuel and power outages prevent them from reporting on the ground.” **SCORE 38.27**
​
Although the media in Lebanon are threatened with annihilation, they nevertheless have a higher score than Greece…
But, from the 5 indicators, Greece in the legislative and political indicator is 70th and 72th, the same positions as last year. So why did Greece lose 38 positions?
​
In economical and sociocultural indicators, and most importantly the security indicators.
Greece is **58 positions lower** than the last year average in the security indicator.
​
# This by itself shows that the RSF report is horrible.
Why?
Due to a hit on a police reporter in 2020, that hasn’t been solved (last killed journalist in 2010, again a professional hit) caused Greece to fall 58 positions.
​
**So that makes Greece 128th in reporter safety. And the Netherlands is 125th**, for the murder of a reporter as well.
Even though the problems described in these countries are far greater.
Brazil with 30 murdered reporters from 2010-2020 is SAFER than Greece.
Do we even need to talk about the UAE?
About Qatar?
​
Greece and the Netherlands are only **slightly safer that** [Saudi Arabia](https://rsf.org/en/country/saudi-arabia), a difference in 10 positions. Seriously?
Maybe these, as well as the things the article says, prove than the RSF research isn’t actually that good at least in the safety indicators, and doesn’t actually reflect the reality?
Press freedom is not bad in greece, but the media is owned by either shipping tycoons or oil tycoons. They preserve their own interests and this was not different during the leftist government. RSF may or may not be right in their assessment, there is a question mark here, since most journalists in greece are very leftist and willing to use the RSF against the current government.
Bro did you just make a whole ass topic just to explain an article in greek regarding the safety of a country to try to explain why said rating is wrong and that other countries are worse but somehow rate higher? No offence but nobody cares
4 comments
>Edit: ~~I think this out of 3 is the only comment that appears right now, so the translation is half, plus another comment with some extra information I added is missing. Give it a minute please, I asked the mods.~~ Thank you mods.
Translation:
​
The evaluation of the countries in the report of the Non-Governmental Organization RSF (Reporters Without Borders) was not done with the same strict or lenient criteria for all countries, nor by the same committee and this leads to wrong conclusions.
The report recently presented by the international organization RSF (Reporters Without Borders) shows, among other things, Greece’s position in the world ranking in terms of the level of press freedom. Greece scored very low in this survey. It is in 108th place out of the 180 countries examined below and of countries that have an established problem not only with freedom of the press but with freedoms in general. It should be noted that a special reference was made to the European Parliament for this report. This great visibility of the results of the research in question, which was even the subject of political controversy, is the motivation to study the report more deeply. In order to better understand its content, we will try to present the methodology used and we will also comment on Greece’s rating, considering that with these two we will be able to explain the reasons for this low performance that our country recorded.
​
**The indicators**
​
The research methodology is based on a questionnaire consisting of five parts, which reflect the state of press freedom in all its complexity: political context, legal context, economic context, socio-cultural context and security. Each country’s score is assessed based on these five indicators.
The questionnaire is structured and aims to evaluate in an objective and uniform way the state of press freedom in the countries. Who answers this questionnaire? RSF says it is being answered by experts including journalists, researchers, academics and human rights defenders. No mention is made either of how many responded to the questionnaire or how they were selected in each country. The difficulty in these surveys is to achieve uniformity in assessment. Because it is impossible to have a group that knows in depth the situation of ALL countries, the groups that will be selected must have uniform criteria. In the question eg “What is the degree of autonomy from the political power of the leaders of the regulatory body” the answers should have the same criteria to be comparable. Is the assessment of the British comparable to the assessment of the Turkish? This is a key issue.
Based on the answers, an index is created which allows the ranking of the countries.
​
First of all, what is this indicator and what does it express? The aim of the index is to convert a qualitative analysis into a quantitative one. The value of the index allows, on the one hand, easier comparison between countries and, on the other hand, if the survey is repeated at regular intervals, the evolution of the situation in a country.
When a questionnaire is used to be able to compare the results of two countries, the questionnaire should be exactly the same and the answers should be given by similar groups. In the case of RSF, the questionnaire is the same, but are the respondents a uniform base selected with exactly the same criteria? RSF does not provide information regarding the base. Only an abstract reference is made to journalists, academics, sociologists, NGOs, etc. without more specific criteria for selecting the specific base.
The process and especially the selection criteria of the people who will be invited to participate in the research is of great importance for its objectivity. If, for example, a survey is made about football and the sports fans who answer all support the same team, the results will certainly not be objective. The organization does not say where the selection came from, how the selection was made, or how many people participated in the survey. The number of people who participated in the research is also important. The reliability of the result is different if 20 people participated and another if 300 people participated.
​
**Are this year’s results comparable to last year’s?**
​
As the organization’s website informs us, the methodology was changed in 2022. Therefore, it is practically impossible to compare the results of 2022 that used the new method with those of 2021 that were based on the old method. When a change in methodology is made, both methodologies should be used in parallel for a transitional period. Since this did not happen the fact that Greece lost 38 places compared to last year seems to be a completely wrong and arbitrary conclusion.
Are the results comparable between different countries? It is practically impossible for the committee that analysed the situation in Burundi or New Zealand or Chile etc. to be the same for European countries. For each country there should have been a different group. How similar or different these groups are is something the steering committee should vouch for.
​
**Rating and comments**
​
The rating is done, as we mentioned above, in the following areas:
* Politics
* Legal framework
* Economic framework
* Socio-cultural framework
* Security
For each sector we quote the description that the report makes for Greece and the rating it gives with the description it makes for another country and its rating. Comparing the descriptions and the score allows us to see how consistent the results are.
​
​
**Politics**
​
**GREECE**: “The government representative is responsible for supervising the public media, which has undermined their editorial independence. The broadcasting regulator ESR has been accused of slow and inefficient decision-making but the current and previous governments have failed to significantly overhaul the way it operates.” **SCORE 60.5**
**TUNISIA**: “The political crisis rocking the country and Saied’s uncertain commitment to press freedom have significant implications. Since taking office in October 2019, the presidential palace has stopped receiving journalists despite protests from the National Union of Tunisian Journalists. The media do not declare their political beliefs, with the exception of the TV network Nessma, which is owned by the political actor Nabil Karoui, but the choice of guests and the treatment of certain issues reveal political leanings. The Independent Broadcasting Authority’s (HAICA) ban on combining media ownership with political leadership is being ignored by many owners.” **SCORE 61.82**
​
It is obvious that Tunisia has a bigger problem in this area than Greece, but Greece’s score is worse than Tunisia’s.
​
​
**Legal Framework**
Quoted description from RSF report
​
**GREECE**: “Recent amendments to the Criminal Code passed under the guise of combating the Covid-19 pandemic allow the disproportionate restriction of press freedom for shaky legal reasons. Punishing the offence of disseminating false information with a five-year prison sentence goes against Greece’s international commitments and European legal standards, constitutes a serious threat to the right of journalists to publish information in the public interest and increases the risk of self-censorship.” **SCORE 69.54**
**Occupied Territories in Cyprus** (Called Northern Cyprus): “The law protects freedom of the press but limits it to protect public order, national security and public decency. Defamation is a crime. A law on computer crimes with vague provisions on “illegal publications” and “terrorist activities” may pose a threat to press freedom. There are no laws to protect the sources. **SCORE 69.82**
​
Although the occupied territories have a higher score, nevertheless from the description we understand that the problem in the occupied territories is greater than Greece.
​
​
**Economic indicator**
Quoted description from RSF report
​
**GREECE**: “The economic crisis of the last decade combined with low readership rates and reduced advertising budgets has called into question the long-term survival of many media outlets. This made them more dependent on public funding. However, the process of allocating these funds lacked transparency and appeared to favour pro-government means. A parliamentary inquiry has investigated the criteria under which millions of euros were given to media organizations for a range of government advertising campaigns, including the government’s Covid awareness campaign. **SCORE 38.13**
**LEBANON**: “The media is suffering from the consequences of the historic economic crisis affecting the country. The Beirut Port explosion in August 2020 forced them to make massive budget cuts affecting both their operations and their workforce. A large number of journalists and news agencies based in the capital affected by the explosion depend on international aid to recover and deal with the crisis. Lack of fuel and power outages prevent them from reporting on the ground.” **SCORE 38.27**
​
Although the media in Lebanon are threatened with annihilation, they nevertheless have a higher score than Greece…
Some extra points, apart from the translation.
Greece last year was in 70th, [this year 108th](https://rsf.org/en/country/greece).
But, from the 5 indicators, Greece in the legislative and political indicator is 70th and 72th, the same positions as last year. So why did Greece lose 38 positions?
​
In economical and sociocultural indicators, and most importantly the security indicators.
Greece is **58 positions lower** than the last year average in the security indicator.
​
# This by itself shows that the RSF report is horrible.
Why?
Due to a hit on a police reporter in 2020, that hasn’t been solved (last killed journalist in 2010, again a professional hit) caused Greece to fall 58 positions.
​
**So that makes Greece 128th in reporter safety. And the Netherlands is 125th**, for the murder of a reporter as well.
​
According to the RSF, both Greece and the Netherlands are **more dangerous** for reporters than [Brazil](https://rsf.org/en/country/brazil), [United Arab Emirates](https://rsf.org/en/country/united-arab-emirates), [Qatar](https://rsf.org/en/country/qatar) and others.
Even though the problems described in these countries are far greater.
Brazil with 30 murdered reporters from 2010-2020 is SAFER than Greece.
Do we even need to talk about the UAE?
About Qatar?
​
Greece and the Netherlands are only **slightly safer that** [Saudi Arabia](https://rsf.org/en/country/saudi-arabia), a difference in 10 positions. Seriously?
Erdogan has [jailed 231 journalists from 2016](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_arrested_journalists_in_Turkey) plus dozens of attacks on reporters by extremists and nationalists but [Turkey](https://rsf.org/en/country/turkey) is 24 positions lower than Greece and the Netherlands.
[Hong Kong](https://rsf.org/en/country/hong-kong) is 23 positions lower than Greece and the Netherlands after everything China has done.
​
Maybe these, as well as the things the article says, prove than the RSF research isn’t actually that good at least in the safety indicators, and doesn’t actually reflect the reality?
Press freedom is not bad in greece, but the media is owned by either shipping tycoons or oil tycoons. They preserve their own interests and this was not different during the leftist government. RSF may or may not be right in their assessment, there is a question mark here, since most journalists in greece are very leftist and willing to use the RSF against the current government.
Bro did you just make a whole ass topic just to explain an article in greek regarding the safety of a country to try to explain why said rating is wrong and that other countries are worse but somehow rate higher? No offence but nobody cares