Equatorial Guinea vs Palestine, State of: Key media freedoms
Equatorial Guinea
-1.89
in 2025
Palestine, State of
-1.96
in 1948
Equatorial Guinea rank
155th
Palestine, State of rank
158th
Key media freedoms over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Palestine, State of
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports -1.89 against -1.96 in Palestine, State of, a difference of 0.07.
Across all 31 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 155th and Palestine, State of ranks 158th of 175 countries.
Equatorial Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Palestine, State of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1910s | -1.52 | -1.96 | 0.433 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1920s | -1.52 | -1.96 | 0.433 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1930s | -1.52 | -1.96 | 0.433 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 1940s | -1.52 | -1.96 | 0.433 | Equatorial Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher key media freedoms, Equatorial Guinea or Palestine, State of?
- Equatorial Guinea, at -1.89 against -1.96 in Palestine, State of as of 2025.
- What is the difference in key media freedoms between Equatorial Guinea and Palestine, State of?
- 0.07, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Palestine, State of?
- 31 years are reported by both, from 1918 to 1948.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Palestine, State of rank globally for key media freedoms?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 155th and Palestine, State of ranks 158th of 175 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- V-Dem (2026) β processed by Our World in Data, published as Key media freedoms. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Central estimate of the extent to which the government directly or indirectly attempts to censor political content in print and broadcast media, through formal restrictions or indirect pressures such as financial control, licensing, or access to distribution channels.