This is how Reporters Without Borders lies, the geopolitical tool of progressivism

In recent days, an evident campaign coordinated by numerous Argentine media outlets attempted to establish the false narrative that in Argentina freedom of the press is being restricted.

The focus of this operation was the publication of the new ranking by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), a European organization with questionable impartiality funding, which placed our country in 87th place out of 180 in terms of "freedom of the press."

The striking aspect is not just the number itself, which lacks empirical support, but the speed with which the main local media, many of them historical beneficiaries of official advertising, eliminated by the Government of Javier Milei, rushed to reproduce exactly the same headlines.

The RSF report is not just a report, but it reflects the fact that Argentina is in the sights of international left-wing organizations, which clearly seek to destabilize the current Argentine Government.

Reporters Without Borders, which presents itself as a defender of journalists' rights, is funded by entities like George Soros's Open Society Foundations and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the latter supported for years by the democratic administration of Joe Biden.

The NED is so questioned that even Elon Musk, an official of Donald Trump's Government, decided to withdraw its funding considering it a tool of ideological manipulation and corruption.

The double standard of Reporters Without Borders

The most paradoxical aspect is that this same ranking placed Argentina in 47th place in 2011, during the corrupt and authoritarian government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. At that time, Kirchnerism used children in demonstrations to spit on images of critical journalists, spied from intelligence services, and exerted systematic pressure on media and communicators. However, for RSF, that was more “free” than the present.

Today, in Argentina governed by Javier Milei, no journalist has been censored, persecuted, or prevented from publishing what they wish. On the contrary: every day, criticisms, falsehoods, and even insults toward the President and his team are disseminated, without any consequence.

The only thing that has changed is that now they have a response. The militant journalism accustomed to discursive impunity can't tolerate being confronted with data, arguments, and replies from the government and even the president himself.

The Brazilian case is even more illustrative of this hypocrisy. In that country, under the administration of Lula da Silva, a judge went so far as to ban the social network X (formerly Twitter) and persecute dissenting voices. Even so, Brazil ranks above Argentina in the ranking, evidencing that Reporters Without Borders seems to be a geopolitical tool to delegitimize governments that do not align with global progressivism.

If there is something that has been demonstrated in recent years, it is that a large part of Argentine journalism has not only lost its credibility but today acts more as a political actor than a communicator.

In this context, the government of Javier Milei has not restricted any freedom. What it has done is denounce the privileges, the double standard, and the dark interests that hide behind some microphones.