Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday April 28 2017, @08:41AM   Printer-friendly
from the british-values dept.

Journalists in the UK are less free to hold power to account than those working in South Africa, Chile or Lithuania, according to an index of press freedom around the world.

Laws permitting generalised surveillance, as well as a proposal for a new espionage act that could criminalise journalists and whistleblowers as spies, were cited by Reporters Without Borders as it knocked the UK down two places from last year, to 40th out of 180 countries in its World Press Freedom Index.

In the past five years, the UK has slipped 12 places down the index. Rebecca Vincent, RSF's UK bureau director, said this year's ranking would have been worse were it not for a general decline in press freedom around the world, making journalists in Britain comparatively better off than those in countries such as Turkey and Syria.

[...] Among the concerns raised by RSF was the passage of the UK's "menacing" Investigatory Powers Act last November, which met only token resistance within parliament, despite giving UK intelligence agencies and police the most sweeping surveillance powers in the western world.

RSF said the act was a possible "death sentence" for investigative journalism in Britain, owing to its lack of protections for whistleblowers, journalists and their sources, and that it set a damaging precedent for other countries to follow.

Source: The Guardian


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by zocalo on Friday April 28 2017, @10:22PM

    by zocalo (302) on Friday April 28 2017, @10:22PM (#501332)
    It's *exactly* those policies and her track record of over a decade trying to pass "Snooper's Charter" legislation like the IPA that I'm talking about. "Brexit means Brexit" is looking increasingly like it's going to be towards the "hard exit" end of the scale. "Getting on with BrExit" means the UK should cease being bound by EU legislation collectively set by the member states in 2019. The Leave campaign's "taking our country back" pledge was *all* about passing whatever legislation the UK wants to, without any oversight or boundaries being set by the EU. "Making a success of it" is all in the eye of the beholder, which in this case is the Conservatives.

    Hence my conclusion: Whoever wins the next general election - which is presumably going to be the Conservatives under Theresa May - should be in power until 2022. 2022-2019 = 3 years, during which time the Conservatives under May will be able to pass any legislation they (and Theresa May in particular) can get through the Houses of Commons and Lords. I don't hate Britain at all, it's what the Conservatives (and Theresa May in particular) are almost certainly going to *do* to it that's concerning me.
    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2