ACCESS TO INFORMATION
Does an independent media express a diversity of opinions, with government information accessible?
Access to information scores are weighted composites. Three qualitative policy assessments [ 
] each contribute one-third of this weighting.
Scores and methodology
] each contribute one-third of this weighting. Scores and methodology
Access to informationKey findings: Access to information
Each 
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.
Click country name in list or text for details.
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.Click country name in list or text for details.
Score distribution
10
1
10
9.4
3
9.4
9.3
5
9.3
8.4
7
8.3
8
8.3
The top performing countries in this category constitutionally or legally guarantee media freedom and access to government information. Exemptions to access of information, if they exist, are reasonable.
Ownership diversity is highest in Finland and the United States, while in most others (Norway, Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Germany), concentration is not perceived as a threat.
If public media are supervised by a politically elected board (Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Portugal), these bodies have proven their independence.
Denmark saw violent reactions following the publication of the so-called Mohammed caricatures. Complaints about infringement of German journalists' rights are rising.
Ownership diversity is highest in Finland and the United States, while in most others (Norway, Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Germany), concentration is not perceived as a threat.
If public media are supervised by a politically elected board (Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Portugal), these bodies have proven their independence.
Denmark saw violent reactions following the publication of the so-called Mohammed caricatures. Complaints about infringement of German journalists' rights are rising.
7.6
10
7.4
11
6.8
12
6.8
6.8
6.2
15
6.1
16
5.8
17
5.7
18
5.2
19
In the middle group, a highly concentrated media ownership structure is common. In some cases, government influence over the media can be seen, and all restrict access to government information to some extent.
Ireland respects media freedom, with relatively few major broadcasters, but regulatory control ensuring plurality of opinion.
Media diversity in many countries (New Zealand, Belgium, Czech Republic, UK, Australia, Japan) is falling, sometimes reaching near-oligopoly. Belgian broadcasters are highly politicized.
The UK government tried to withhold information about Iraq, while the Japanese media elites have close relationships with politicians. Slovakia's media shows signs of self-censorship.
Ireland respects media freedom, with relatively few major broadcasters, but regulatory control ensuring plurality of opinion.
Media diversity in many countries (New Zealand, Belgium, Czech Republic, UK, Australia, Japan) is falling, sometimes reaching near-oligopoly. Belgian broadcasters are highly politicized.
The UK government tried to withhold information about Iraq, while the Japanese media elites have close relationships with politicians. Slovakia's media shows signs of self-censorship.
4.8
20
4.8
4.5
22
4.5
4.3
24
4.3
3.8
26
3.7
27
3.7
2.6
29
2.1
30
In this group, media independence from government is not well-protected, and media ownership is often highly concentrated.
Public media groups are often subject to influence by governments (Austria, Hungary, Poland, and Greece, and to a lesser extent Iceland and South Korea). Some countries' media, while nominally free, depend on financial ties to the government or government figures (France, Mexico, Italy, Turkey).
Spain, which has a history of government media influence, has seen significant improvements under the Zapatero government.
Concentrated or oligopolistic ownership is common (Austria, France, Spain, Mexico (broadcast only), Italy, South Korea, Greece, Turkey). Hungary's media is deeply polarized.
Access to government information, though formally guaranteed, can be difficult in practice in this group.
Public media groups are often subject to influence by governments (Austria, Hungary, Poland, and Greece, and to a lesser extent Iceland and South Korea). Some countries' media, while nominally free, depend on financial ties to the government or government figures (France, Mexico, Italy, Turkey).
Spain, which has a history of government media influence, has seen significant improvements under the Zapatero government.
Concentrated or oligopolistic ownership is common (Austria, France, Spain, Mexico (broadcast only), Italy, South Korea, Greece, Turkey). Hungary's media is deeply polarized.
Access to government information, though formally guaranteed, can be difficult in practice in this group.
Rationale
Even in democracies, the media's role can be undermined by governmental or oligopolistic control.
Access to information examines government influence over the media (media freedom), and the media's ownership structure, under the assumption that diversified ownership is more likely to present a wide range of viewpoints (media pluralism). The criterion also examines the extent to which citizens can obtain official information (access to government information).
Media freedom can be limited when the government appoints a supervisory board, when organizational financing depends on the government, or when the government directly interferes in daily activity or with general guidelines.
The source of media financing (government subsidies, consumer fees, or advertisements) is also important in evaluating the strength of media pluralism.
Performance comparison
Use drop-down menus for selections. In all cases, higher scores reflect better performance.
