Notes from Freedom of the Press in Asia by Shelton A. Gunaratne
Asian values as a justification for controlling the press?
Inadequacies of Western definitions and measures of press freedom
Combining political frameworks with philosophical and religious backgrounds? political categories cut across Asia’s major philosophies and religions
three-dimentional measure of press freedom: the world system, the nation-state, the individual.
Can the world system inject news and opinion into a nation-state despite restrictions on internal communication outlets in that nation-state?
Can individuals within a nation-state access external communication outlets despite restrictions on internal communication outlets in a nation-state?
The concept of the free press “cannot mean the same in every society and at all times” (Hocking, 1947). “measuring freedom of the press on the basis of a set of criteria relevant to one society at a given time is bound to produce questionable results” (Gunaratner, 2003, p. 120).
The Western measures of freedom of communication outlets appear to overestimate the freedom in Western countries and underestimate the freedom in non-Western countries (Gunaratne, 2003, p. 122).
Freedom House’s measures of press freedom correlates neither with human development nor with political participation (Gunaratner, 2003, p. 117).
“… the individual’s right to communicate should receive high priority because it is a human right supported by both Oriental and Occidental philosophies” (Gunaratne, 2003, p. 117).
“… the established communication outlets are more concerned with capital accumulation than with enlightening public opinion. Extreme libertarianism devoid of social responsibility can be as inimical as extreme authoritarianism. The answer may lie in Buddha’s “middle path,” Aristotle’s “pursuit of the mean,” (Gunarate, 2003, p. 122).
Posted by Xiaoge 
