Western media
[3] Bosah Ebo writes that "during the Cold War, the United States and Soviet Union engaged in an intense media diplomacy aimed to create international image of each other.
[7] New Left Review editor Tariq Ali asserts that "the notion of a free press in the Western media in the 20 century evolved as a counterpoint to the monopolistic State-owned model of erstwhile Soviet Union with the aim of showing its superiority by accommodating diversity of voices.
In contrast to the common critiques of media coverage, even as elites in the United States were not publicly sparring, journalists turned to foreign officials for the anti-war perspective.
The study also found that "In a few places, global publicity is followed by more repression in the short term, exacerbating leaders' insecurity and prompting them to use terror, especially when armed opposition groups or elections threaten their monopoly on power.
"[17] Reporters Without Borders's Press Freedom Index scored the following countries the highest in 2018: Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland, Jamaica, Belgium, New Zealand, Denmark, and Costa Rica.
[20] Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, Hindu nationalists in India, and the Chinese authorities have all pressed for restrictions on Western media in their respective nations, viewing it as a possible threat to Asian values.
[20] In 2015, Arnab Goswami, the former editor-in-chief of India's most popular English news channel Times Now, criticised the hegemony of Western media has ruined the balance of power that is required.
[25] Human Rights Watch wrote in 2018 that the Russian Foreign Ministry has promoted conspiracy theories about "the Western media" and denounced critical news coverage.
[28][29] An article by Andrei P. Tsygankov on editorials in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal related to Russian domestic politics from 2008 to 2014 found that the editorials took an overwhelmingly negative view of the Russian government, based on such issues as "elections, opposition and minority rights, the justice system, protection of property rights, freedom of media, development of NGOs and civil society, protection of citizens against crime and terrorism, mechanisms for the transfer of power, attitudes of Putin and Medvedev, and relations with Western nations."
Tsygankov said that the editorials failed to adequately reflect "neutral and positive frames and such as those stressing the country's relative progress or objective difficulties faced in its development.
