Not too long ago, the only journalists working in conflict areas who might be afforded protection were those working for wealthy, predominantly Western news organizations.
These journalists would attend expensive courses run by former special forces personnel, who trained them to navigate hostile environments. They would be furnished with flak jackets and helmets, and given first aid kits.
However, journalists elsewhere have rarely benefited from this culture of safety. From Mexico and Brazil to Pakistan and Somalia, journalists are often murdered with impunity.
More often than not, when the messenger is silenced, so is the message.
For the past 15 years, the International News Safety Institute has been collating a list of journalists who have died on the job.
What we have found is shocking: For every 10 reporters killed, nine died while on assignment in their home country. Countless others have had to abandon their homes, jobs and countries. Those who do stay often live in constant fear for their safety.
In places where corrupt regimes or militant groups want to control the flow of information, journalists have long had to risk being kidnapped or killed, but in recent years, this threat has become so great that some countries are effectively no-go zones for international media organizations.
Western correspondents are aware of these risks when they travel abroad to cover active war zones, but now they confront similar dangers at home.
Wherever journalists work — whether online or offline — they need to be mindful of more physical, psychological and digital risks than ever before.
Terrorist attacks have affected news organizations, particularly in Europe, in unexpected ways.
Many of those who arrived first at the scene of the Manchester Arena bombing or the massacre at the Bataclan concert hall in Paris had not received the physical training for such eventualities, nor were they emotionally prepared to cover stories where they would be exposed to that degree of trauma.
In response to these events, some newsrooms have started preparing for what they will do if a domestic terrorist attack directly affects their operations.
Organizations — including the BBC, the Dutch public service broadcaster NOS and others across Europe — have plans in place for journalists responding to incidents in their home cities or those directly targeting their newsrooms.
Beyond bullets and bombs, journalists also face increasing psychological threats at home.
In July, a report I coauthored for the International News Safety Institute put a name to one such threat, a phenomenon known as “moral injury.”
The report, published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, examined the effects of covering the refugee crisis in Europe on members of the media.
Reporting on a traumatic story, we found, can have a profound effect on a journalist’s mental health.
Our research found that feelings of guilt and helplessness can be overwhelming when events “transgress personal moral and ethical values or codes of conduct.”
To guard against the risks of moral injury, we highlighted the importance of education, saying: “Journalists need to understand that this is the ‘new’ terrain, part of the mental landscape of the profession.”
Our report also said that organizations should look to provide support to those who need it, bearing in mind that people respond to and recover from trauma in different ways.
In the US, journalists face another kind of psychological threat: harassment from their own government.
Although journalists are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution, US President Donald Trump has nevertheless used his social-media bully pulpit to vilify the entire news media.
Trump’s disdain for free speech mirrors that of authoritarian governments, from Turkey to the Philippines, where journalists have been arrested, imprisoned and harassed in record numbers.
Journalists are also increasingly vulnerable online, where anonymity has created a culture of trolling and harassment. Female journalists have had to bear the brunt of digital attacks, which can rapidly escalate into threats of sexual violence.
In response, many journalists have abandoned social media and others have left the profession altogether.
The world is a risky place for journalists, which is precisely why we must do everything that we can to protect them.
Never before has the role of journalism been so important. In today’s noisy, confusing, multi-channel news landscape, where “fake news” is sold as fact, we need accountable, analytical, responsible reporting more than ever.
A free press delivers truth, holds power to account and calls out threats to liberty and justice, but the press can never be free if its members are not kept safe.
Hannah Storm is director of the International News Safety Institute.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
French firm DCI-DESCO in April won a bid to upgrade Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates, which has strained ties between China and France. In 1991, France sold Taiwan six Lafayette frigates and in 1992 sold it 60 Mirage 2000 fighter jets. To prevent arms sales between the nations, China negotiated an agreement with France and in 1994 in a joint statement, France promised that there would be no future arms sales to Taiwan. From China’s point of view, the DCI-DESCO deal constitutes a breach of the agreement, but the French stance is that it is not selling Taiwan new weapons, but instead providing a
Chung Yuan ChristiaN University is clearly in bed with the People’s Republic of China. This can be the only explanation why the school’s authorities have done their utmost to shield a student, who lodged a complaint against an associate professor, and then used thuggish tactics to compel the teacher to issue two separate apologies to China. The original complaint, filed by an unnamed Chinese student, was for remarks by associate professor Chao Ming-wei (招名威) during a class on the origin of COVID-19. A second complaint was filed by the same student after Chao, during an apology, stated that he was a
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in her inaugural address on May 20 firmly said: “We will not accept the Beijing authorities’ use of ‘one country, two systems’ to downgrade Taiwan and undermine the cross-strait status quo.” The Chinese government was not too happy, and later that day, an opinion piece on the Web site of China’s state broadcaster China Central Television said: “While Tsai’s first inaugural address four years ago was read by Beijing as an ‘unfinished answer sheet,’ the one she presented this time was even more below-par.” Speaking to the China Review News Agency, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies vice president
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to wreak havoc worldwide. Despite countries being under pressure economically and from the novel coronavirus, China’s National People’s Congress last month passed national security legislation for Hong Kong, a decision that has shocked the world. Let there be no doubt: This move is the beginning of the end of China’s plans for “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Proposed amendments to extradition laws last year ignited massive protests in Hong Kong, with millions of participants, shocking the world and making confrontation between government forces and those who opposed the change a permanent part of Hong