Press freedom is a pillar of American democracy. But political attacks on US-based journalists and news organisations pose an unprecedented threat to their safety and the integrity of information.

Less than 48 hours before election day, Donald Trump, now President-elect for a second term, told a rally of his supporters that he wouldn’t mind if someone shot the journalists in front of him.

“I have this piece of glass here, but all we have really over here is the fake news. And to get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news. And I don’t mind that so much,” he said.

A new survey from the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) highlights a disturbing tolerance for political bullying of the press in the land of the First Amendment. The findings show that this is especially true among white, male, Republican voters.

We commissioned this nationally representative survey of 1020 US adults, which was fielded between June 24 and July 5 2024, to assess Americans’ attitudes to the press ahead of the election. We are publishing the results here for the first time.

More than one-quarter (27 percent) of the Americans we polled said they had often seen or heard a journalist being threatened, harassed or abused online. And more than one-third (34 percent) said they thought it was appropriate for senior politicians and government officials to criticise journalists and news organisations.

Tolerance for political targeting of the press appears as polarised as American society. Nearly half (47 percent) of the Republicans surveyed approved of senior politicians critiquing the press, compared to less than one-quarter (22 percent) of Democrats.

Our analysis also revealed divisions according to gender and ethnicity. While 37 percent of white-identifying respondents thought it was appropriate for political leaders to target journalists and news organisations, only 27 percent of people of colour did. There was also a nine-point difference along gender lines, with 39 percent of men approving of this conduct, compared to 30 percent of women.

It appears intolerance towards the press has a face — a predominantly white, male and Republican-voting face.

Press freedom fears
This election campaign, Trump has repeated his blatantly false claim that journalists are “enemies of the people”. He has suggested that reporters who cross him should be jailed, and signalled that he would like to revoke broadcast licences of networks.

Relevant, too, is the enabling environment for viral attacks on journalists created by unregulated social media companies which represent a clear threat to press freedom and the safety of journalists. Previous research produced by ICFJ for Unesco concluded that there was a causal relationship between online violence towards women journalists and physical attacks.

While political actors may be the perpetrators of abuse targeting journalists, social media companies have facilitated their viral spread, heightening the risk to journalists.

We’ve seen a potent example of this in the current campaign, when Haitian Times editor Macollvie J. Neel was “swatted” — meaning police were dispatched to her home after a fraudulent report of a murder at the address — during an episode of severely racist online violence.

The trigger? Her reporting on Trump and JD Vance amplifying false claims that Haitian immigrants were eating their neighbours’ pets.

Trajectory of Trump attacks
Since the 2016 election, Trump has repeatedly discredited independent reporting on his campaign. He has weaponised the term “fake news” and accused the media of “rigging” elections.

“The election is being rigged by corrupt media pushing completely false allegations and outright lies in an effort to elect [Hillary Clinton] president,” he said in 2016. With hindsight, such accusations foreshadowed his false claims of election fraud in 2020, and similar preemptive claims in 2024.

His increasingly virulent attacks on journalists and news organisations are amplified by his supporters online and far-right media. Trump has effectively licensed attacks on American journalists through anti-press rhetoric and undermined respect for press freedom.

In 2019, the Committee to Protect Journalists found that more than 11 percent of 5400 tweets posted by Trump between the date of his 2016 candidacy and January 2019 “. . . insulted or criticised journalists and outlets, or condemned and denigrated the news media as a whole”.

After being temporarily deplatformed from Twitter for breaching community standards, Trump launched Truth Social, where he continues to abuse his critics uninterrupted. But he recently rejoined the platform (now X), and held a series of campaign events with X owner and Trump backer Elon Musk.

The failed insurrection on January 6, 2021, rammed home the scale of the escalating threats facing American journalists. During the riots at the Capitol, at least 18 journalists were assaulted and reporting equipment valued at tens of thousands of dollars was destroyed.

This election cycle, Reporters Without Borders logged 108 instances of Trump insulting, attacking or threatening the news media in public speeches or offline remarks over an eight-week period ending on October 24.

Meanwhile, the Freedom of the Press Foundation has recorded 75 assaults on journalists since January 1 this year. That’s a 70% increase on the number of assaults captured by their press freedom tracker in 2023.

A recent survey of hundreds of journalists undertaking safety training provided by the International Women’s Media Foundation found that 36 percent of respondents reported being threatened with or experiencing physical violence. One-third reported exposure to digital violence, and 28 percent reported legal threats or action against them.

US journalists involved in ongoing ICFJ research have told us that they have felt particularly at risk covering Trump rallies and reporting on the election from communities hostile towards the press. Some are wearing protective flak jackets to cover domestic politics. Others have removed labels identifying their outlets from their reporting equipment to reduce the risk of being physically attacked.

And yet, our survey reveals a distinct lack of public concern about the First Amendment implications of political leaders threatening, harassing, or abusing journalists. Nearly one-quarter (23 percent) of Americans surveyed did not regard political attacks on journalists or news organisations as a threat to press freedom. Among them, 38 percent identified as Republicans compared to just 9 percent* as Democrats.

The anti-press playbook
Trump’s anti-press playbook appeals to a global audience of authoritarians. Other political strongmen, from Brazil to Hungary and the Philippines, have adopted similar tactics of deploying disinformation to smear and threaten journalists and news outlets.

Such an approach imperils journalists while undercutting trust in facts and critical independent journalism.

History shows that fascism thrives when journalists cannot safely and freely do the work of holding governments and political leaders to account. As our research findings show, the consequences are a society accepting lies and fiction as facts while turning a blind eye to attacks on the press.

*The people identifying as Democrats in this sub-group are too few to make this a reliable representative estimate.

Note: Nabeelah Shabbir (ICFJ deputy director of research) and Kaylee Williams (ICFJ research associate) also contributed to this article and the research underpinning it. The survey was conducted by Langer Research Associates in English and Spanish. ICFJ researchers co-developed the survey and conducted the analysis.

Dr Julie Posetti, Global Director of Research, International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) and Professor of Journalism, City St George’s, University of London and Waqas Ejaz, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Oxford Climate Journalism Network, University of Oxford. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji journalist Felix Chaudhary recalls how the harassment began: “Initially, I was verbally warned to stop.”

“And not only warned but threatened as well. I think I was a bit ‘gung-ho’ at the time and I kind of took it lightly until the day I was taken to a particular site and beaten up.

“I was told that my mother would identify me at a mortuary. That’s when I knew that this was now serious, and that I couldn’t be so blasé and think that I’m immune.”

Pressing risks of Chaudhary’s early career
Felix Chaudhary, now director of news, current affairs and sports at Fiji TV, and former deputy chief-of-staff at The Fiji Times, was detained and threatened several times during the period of government led by former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama from 2007 to 2022.

Commodore Bainimarama, as he was known at the time, executed his military coup in December 2006 against Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase and President Josefa IIoilo.

Although some media outlets were perceived as openly supporting the government then, not all relinquished their impartiality, Chaudhary explains.

“Some media organisations decided to follow suit. The one that I worked for, The Fiji Times, committed to remaining an objective and ethical media organisation.

“Everyone who worked there knew that at some point they would face challenges.”

Military impact on sugar industry
During the early days of the coup, Chaudhary was based in Viti Levu’s Western Division in the city of Lautoka, reporting about the impact of the military takeover of the sugar cane industry. It was there that he experienced some of his most severe harassment.

“It was just unfortunate that during the takeover, I was one of the first to face the challenges, simply because I was writing stories about how the sugar cane industry was being affected,” he says.

“I was reporting about how the military takeover was affecting the livelihoods of the people who depend on this industry. There are a lot of people who depend on sugar cane farming, and not necessarily just the farmers.

“I was writing from their perspective.”

A lot of countries, including Australia, in an effort to avoid appearing sympathetic to a government ruling through military dictatorship, turned their backs on Fiji, Chaudhary explains.

“These countries took a stand, and we respect them for that,” he says.

“However, a lot of aid that used to come in started to slow down, and assistance to the sugar industry, from the European Union, didn’t come through.

“The industry was struggling. But the Fijian government tried to maintain that everything was fine as they were in control.

‘Just not sustainable’
“It was just not sustainable. They didn’t have the resources to do it, and people were feeling the impact. This was around 2009. The military had been in power since 2006.”

Chaudhary chose to focus his writing on the difficulties faced by the locals: a view that was in direct contention with the military’s agenda.

He experienced a series of threats, including assurances of death if he continued to report on the takeover. His first encounter with the military saw him seized, driven to an unknown location, and physically assaulted.

Chaudhary soon realised this was not an isolated case and the threats on his life were far from empty.

“Other people, in addition to journalists, were taken into custody for many reasons. Some ended up dead after being beaten up. That’s when I knew that could happen to me,” he says.

“I figured I’d just continue to try and be as safe as possible.”

Chaudhary was later again abducted, threatened, and locked in a cell. No reason was given, no charges were laid, and he was repeatedly told that he might never leave.

Aware of military tactics
Having served in the Fiji military in 1987–1988, Chaudhary was aware of common military tactics, and knew what these personnel were capable of. Former army colleagues had also tried to warn him of the danger he was in.

“When I was taken in by the military, I was visited by two of my former colleagues. They told me if I didn’t stop, something was going to happen,” he says.

“That set the tone. It reminded me that I needed to be more careful.”

On another occasion, military personnel entered The Fiji Times offices and proceeded to forcefully arrest both Chaudhary, and his wife, the newspaper’s current chief-of-staff, Margaret Wise.

“The military entered the newsroom while we were both at work, demanded our phones and attacked [Margaret] physically. I came to her defence, and I was also attacked. These threats were not only to me, but to her as well.”

Chaudhary admires Margaret Wise’s incredible tenacity.

“She’s a very strong woman. Any other person might have wanted to run away from it all, but we both knew we had a responsibility to be the voice for those that didn’t have one,” he says.

Dictatorships have a ‘limited lifespan’
“She also knew that governments come and go, and that dictatorships only have a limited lifespan. On the other hand, media organisations have been here for decades, in our case, a century and a half. We knew we had to get through it.”

The pair supported each other and decided to restrict their social life in an effort to protect not only themselves, but their families as well.

Looking back, Chaudhary acknowledges the danger of that period, and questions whether he would have done the same thing again, if presented with a similar situation.

“I think I might have changed the way that I did things if I had thought about the livelihoods of the people working for The Fiji Times,” he says.

“I didn’t think about that at the time. Some people might say that was a bit reckless, and maybe it was.

“I kept thinking about my family, but then you have to think about the other families as well. Sometimes you have to make a stand for what is right, no matter what the consequences are.

“People think that’s bravery. It’s not really. It’s just doing what is right, and I’m glad I’m here today.

“I have a lot of respect for other people who went through what I went through and are still alive to tell the tale.”

Chaudhary maintains that anyone in a similar situation would do the same.

“What I do know is everybody, regardless of who they are, has the wanting to do what is right. And I think if presented with this sort of situation, people would take a stand,” he says.

Fiji TV dealing with harassment
Although journalists continue to experience incidents of harassment, the form of harassment has changed, with women often receiving the worst of it, Chaudhary explains.

“Harassment now is different. Back then, they had a licence to harass you, and your policies meant nothing, because they had the backing of the military,” he says.

“Nowadays, harassment is different in the sense that there is a lot of male leaders who feel like they have the right to speak to females however they want.”

Chaudhary, through his position at Fiji TV, has used his past experiences to shape the way he deals with cases of harassment, and especially when his female journalists are targeted.

“For us at Fiji TV, it’s about empowering the female journalists to be able to face these situations in a diplomatic way. They don’t take things personally, even if the attack is verbal and personal,” he says.

“Our journalists have to understand that these individuals are acting this way because the questions being asked are difficult ones.

“I’ve tried to make changes in the way they ask their questions. They are told not to lead with the difficult questions. You ask the more positive questions and set them in a good mood, and then move to the more difficult questions.

“The way you frame the questions has a lot to do with it as well.

“When the females ask, especially these sources get personal, they use gender as a way to not answer the question and just deflect it. So, now we have to be a bit more creative in how we ask.”

Things are improving
Nevertheless, Chaudhary maintains that things are improving, citing the professionalism of his female journalists.

“We are able to break a lot of stories, and it’s the female journalists doing it,” he says.

“They are facing this new era with this new government with the hope that things are more open and transparent.

“I’m really blessed to have four women who are very strong. They understand the need to be diplomatic, but they also understand the need to get answers to the questions that need to be asked.

“They are kind of on their own, with a little bit of guidance from me. We worked out how to handle harassment, and how to get the answers. They have kind of done it on their own.”

While asking the tough questions may be a daunting exercise, it is imperative if Fiji is to avoid making the same mistakes, Chaudhary explains.

“I think for me now, it’s just about sharing what happened in the past, and getting them to understand that if we don’t ask the right questions now, we could have a situation similar to that of the last 16 years.

“This could happen if we don’t hold the current government to account, and don’t ask the hard questions now.”

Fiji’s proposal to end sexual harassment
A 2022 research report, ‘Prevalence and Impact of Sexual Harassment on Female Journalists’, revealed that more than 80 per cent of Fijian female journalists have experienced physical, verbal and online sexual harassment during the course of their work.

The report by The University of the South Pacific’s Journalism Programme and Fiji Women’s Rights Movement also proposes numerous solutions that prioritise the safety and wellbeing of female journalists.

Acknowledging the report’s good intentions, Chaudhary argues that it hasn’t created any substantial change due to long-standing Fijian culture and social norms.

“The report was, for many people, an eye opener. For me, it wasn’t,” he says.

“Unfortunately, I work alongside some people who hold the view that because they have been in the industry for some time, they can speak to females however they want.

“There wasn’t necessarily any physical harassment, but in Fiji, we have a lot of spoken sexual innuendo.

“We have a relationship among Fijians and the indigenous community where if I’m from a certain village, or part of the country and you are from another, we are allowed to engage in colourful conversation.

“It’s part of the tradition and culture. It’s just unfortunate that that culture and tradition has also found its way into workplaces, and the media industry. So that was often the excuse given in the newsroom.

Excuse that was used
“Many say, ‘I didn’t mean that. I said it because she’s from this village, and I’m from there, so I’m allowed to.’ The intent may have been deeper than that, but that was the excuse that was used,” he says.

Chaudhary believes that the report should have sparked palpable policy change in newsrooms.

“It should have translated into engagement with different heads of newsrooms to develop policies or regulations within the organisation, aimed at addressing those issues specifically. This would ensure that young women do not enter a workplace where that culture exists.

“So, we have a report, which is great, but it didn’t turn into anything tangible that would benefit organisations.

“This should have been taken on board by government and by the different organisations to develop those policies and systems in order to change the culture because the culture still exists,” he says.

Maxim Bock is a student journalist from the Queensland University of Technology who travelled to Fiji with the support of the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Mobility Programme. Published in partnership with QUT.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

This raised the question: is enough being done to protect female reporters in the Pacific region?

In 2022, the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement, in partnership with the University of the South Pacific Journalism Programme, launched a research report on the “Prevalence and impact of sexual harassment on female journalists: A Fiji case study”.

Of the 42 respondents in the survey, the youngest was 22, and the oldest was 51, with an average age of 33.2 years. The average amount of work experience was 8.3 years.

Most respondents (80.5 percent) worked in print, with the others choosing online and/or broadcasting. Most respondents answered that they were aware of sexual harassment occurring.

The ABC’s Fiji reporter, Lice Monovo is an experienced journalist who has worked for RNZ Pacific and The Guardian.

She said she was not surprised by the findings and such incidents were familiar to her.

“There were things I had encountered, and some close friends had, and they were things I had seen but what I did also feel was shock that it was still happening and shock that it was more widespread.”

After reading the preliminary results of the report, she realised that although women did take steps, including reporting harassment and approaching their employers or asking for help, still not enough was being done to protect female journalists.

“Their concerns and worries, and the things they went through were invalidated, they were told to ‘suck it up’, they were told to put it behind them.”

Movono added that often the burden and responsibility for the harassment were shifted to them, the victims.

“So no, I don’t think enough was done,” she said.

Fiji Women’s Rights Movement’s Laisa Bulatale said many of the women in the research experienced verbal, physical, gestural, and online harassment at work. She said it was not only confined to the workplace.

“A lot of the harassment was also experienced when they went and did assignments or when they had to do interviews with high-ranking officials in government, MPs, even rugby personalities or people in the sports industry,” she said.

She said they were justifiably hesitant to report these problems.

“They [female reporters] feared victim blaming and a lot of shame so a lot of the female journalists that we spoke to in the survey said they carried that with them, and they didn’t feel they knew enough to be able to report the incident.

“And if they did, they were not confident enough that the complaint processes or the referral pathways for them within the organisations they were working in would hear the case or address it.”

Georgina Kekea is an experienced Solomon Islands journalist and editor of Tavali News. She completed a survey of female reporters in the Solomon Islands’ newsroom.

“When I got the responses back, I guess for someone working in the industry, it just validated also what you have been through in your career. What all of us are going through as female journalists,”

Kekea said that there was not much support coming from the superiors in the newsroom.

“Mostly because I think we have males who are leading the team, not understanding issues which women face, and of course, being a Melanesian society, the culture plays a big part, and also obstacles men face when it comes to addressing women’s issues,” Kekea said.

Alex Rheeney is former editor of both PNG’s Post-Courier and the Samoa Observer.

He said he was not surprised by the panel’s discussion.

“Our female colleagues, female reporters, female broadcasters, they go through some very, very huge challenges that those of us who were working in the newsroom as a reporter before didn’t go through simply because of the fact we were male, and it’s unacceptable.”

“Why do we have to have those challenges today?”

He said that newsrooms should develop policies to look after the welfare and safety of female reporters.

“We just have to look at the findings from the survey that was done in Fiji.”

He was positive that the Fijian survey had been done but queried what the follow-up steps should be in terms of putting in place mechanisms to protect female reporters.

“I can only think back to the time when I was the editor of the Post-Courier, I had to drive one of my female reporters to the Boroka police station to get a restraining order against her husband.

“I got personally involved because I knew that it was already affecting her, her children and her family.”

Rheeney said that the media industry needed to do more.

The personal intervention he had undertaken, was a response to an individual problem. However, the industry needed to be able to do more, as harassment and violence against female journalists were in a state of crisis.

“We can’t afford to sit back and just wait for it to happen; we need to be proactive.”

Rheeney believed that the media industry across the Pacific needed to put more measures in place to protect female journalists and staff both in the newsroom and when out on assignment.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz