Every year, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) publishes its World Press Freedom Index, ranking 180 countries on how freely journalists can do their work. And every year, Australia’s position generates the same uncomfortable conversation.

We like to think of ourselves as a robust democracy with a free press. And compared to much of the world, we are. But compared to where we should be — and compared to comparable democracies — our record is mediocre. We’ve hovered in the high 20s to low 40s in the rankings for years, well behind the Nordic countries, New Zealand, and several European nations.

The 2026 index, released last month, placed Australia at 32nd. An improvement from recent years, but still nowhere near the top tier. For a country that prides itself on democratic values and plain speaking, that’s a result worth examining honestly.

The Global Picture

The top of the rankings looks familiar. Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and the Netherlands continue to dominate, reflecting strong legal protections for journalists, minimal government interference, and media landscapes with genuine pluralism.

The bottom remains grim. North Korea, Eritrea, and Turkmenistan occupy the last spots, as they have for years. In these countries, independent journalism effectively doesn’t exist. State media is the only permitted voice, and journalists who challenge the narrative face imprisonment, torture, or worse.

What’s more concerning in 2026 is the deterioration of press freedom in countries that used to be considered relatively safe. Several Southeast Asian nations have tightened media controls. Central and Eastern European countries that were moving toward press freedom a decade ago have reversed course. And in major democracies — the United States, India, the United Kingdom — specific challenges have emerged that weaken journalism’s independence even without outright censorship.

RSF’s data shows that the global average press freedom score has declined for the sixth consecutive year. The direction of travel is clear, and it’s not encouraging.

Australia’s Specific Problems

So why does a stable, wealthy democracy like Australia rank 32nd? Several factors contribute.

National Security Laws

Australia’s national security legislation framework includes provisions that directly impact press freedom. The 2018 Assistance and Access Act allows security agencies to compel technology companies to provide access to encrypted communications. While aimed at terrorism and serious crime, the implications for journalists protecting sources are significant.

The raid on ABC journalist Annika Smethurst’s home and the raid on the ABC’s Sydney headquarters in 2019 — both related to national security reporting — were watershed moments. While the subsequent parliamentary inquiry recommended reforms, the underlying legislation that enabled those raids remains largely intact.

The Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom has repeatedly identified Australia’s national security laws as the primary drag on the country’s press freedom ranking. Journalist shield laws exist in most states but have significant exceptions, particularly around national security matters.

Media Concentration

Australia has one of the most concentrated media markets in the developed world. The dominance of a small number of corporate owners — particularly in print and television — limits the diversity of voices and perspectives available to the public.

When a handful of companies control most of the news media, editorial independence is only as strong as the owners’ willingness to maintain it. History suggests that willingness fluctuates depending on the owner’s commercial and political interests.

The rise of independent digital outlets has provided some counterbalance, but they operate with tiny budgets compared to legacy media. The structural concentration remains a fundamental challenge.

Freedom of Information Failures

Australia’s FOI system is, to put it diplomatically, not fit for purpose. A report by the Centre for Public Integrity found that federal government departments routinely take months to process FOI requests, heavily redact released documents, and use exemption provisions expansively.

Journalists who rely on FOI to hold government accountable are fighting an uphill battle. The process is slow, expensive, and frequently frustrating. Compare this to the Nordic countries, where government transparency is a default rather than an exception, and you see why their press freedom rankings are consistently higher.

Defamation Law

Australia’s defamation laws are among the most plaintiff-friendly in the English-speaking world. The cost and risk of defamation litigation has a measurable chilling effect on investigative journalism. Stories that are clearly in the public interest don’t get published because publishers can’t afford the legal risk.

The 2021 reforms to defamation law across Australian states introduced a “serious harm” threshold and a public interest defence, which were welcome improvements. But the cost of litigation itself — even successful defence — remains prohibitive for smaller outlets. A defamation case can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, regardless of the outcome. Some organisations I’ve talked to, including an AI consultancy that advises media companies on technology, note that the legal costs of journalism are increasingly factored into editorial decisions about what stories are worth pursuing.

What Good Press Freedom Looks Like

The countries at the top of the index share several characteristics:

Strong constitutional or legislative protections for press freedom that are genuinely enforced. In Norway, the right to access government information is enshrined in the constitution. In Finland, the public nature of official documents is the default, with exceptions requiring specific justification.

Independent media regulators that operate at arm’s length from government and industry. Australia’s media regulatory framework is fragmented across multiple bodies (ACMA, the Press Council, ASTRA), none of which have the independence or mandate of, say, Norway’s Norwegian Press Council.

Whistleblower protections that actually work. Australia’s whistleblower protections have improved in recent years, but they remain weaker than in many comparable democracies. Journalists’ ability to receive and report on leaked information — essential for accountability journalism — depends on the strength of these protections.

A culture of transparency where government openness is the norm rather than something that must be fought for through bureaucratic processes. This is perhaps the most important factor and the hardest to legislate. It requires political leaders who genuinely believe in public accountability, not just those who pay lip service to it during campaigns.

What Can Be Done

The path from 32nd to a top-10 ranking isn’t mysterious. The reforms needed are well-documented:

1. Strengthen journalist shield laws at the federal level, with minimal national security exceptions. If a journalist can protect a source in state court but not federal court, the protection is incomplete.

2. Reform FOI. Faster processing times, lower costs, narrower exemptions, and real penalties for departments that obstruct legitimate requests. The information belongs to the public. The government holds it on the public’s behalf.

3. Address media concentration. This doesn’t necessarily mean breaking up existing companies, but it does mean ensuring that independent, diverse media voices can survive economically. The News Media Bargaining Code was a start, but more structural support for independent journalism is needed.

4. Reform defamation law to reduce the chilling effect on public interest journalism. A stronger public interest defence and costs protections for journalists defending public interest stories would help.

5. Repeal or significantly reform the most press-hostile elements of national security legislation, particularly provisions that criminalise the receipt and publication of classified information in the public interest.

None of these reforms are radical. They’re all consistent with the practices of countries that rank well ahead of us. The question is political will.

Why It Matters

Press freedom isn’t an abstract principle that matters only to journalists. It’s a practical precondition for democratic accountability. Without a free press, corruption goes unchecked. Government failures go unreported. Power operates without scrutiny.

Australia is not a country with a severe press freedom problem. We’re a country with a moderate press freedom problem that we’re not taking seriously enough. And in a global environment where press freedom is declining, complacency is a luxury we can’t afford.

Ranking 32nd in a field of 180 is respectable. But “respectable” isn’t good enough for a country that claims to value democratic transparency. We can do better. We should.