As Zack Whittaker and I finalize a report on the threats faced by security researchers and journalists, recent events underscore a troubling rise in risks to journalists and the integrity of journalism itself. The recent arrests of Don Lemon and Geraldine Fort for reporting on a church protest appear to be a clear attempt to deter journalists from covering demonstrations against ICE, despite being framed as a measure to protect worshippers. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi remarked, “Make no mistake, under President Trump’s leadership and this administration, you have the right to worship freely and safely. And if I haven’t been clear already, if you violate that sacred right, we are coming after you.” While the Department of Justice emphasizes the First Amendment right to worship, the same protection appears to be denied to journalists reporting on significant public issues. This contradiction raises serious concerns.
Such arrests serve as a stark warning, but they are merely one facet of the diverse threats journalists face today. For instance, previous reports from DataBreaches highlighted the use of superinjunctions from UK courts aimed at censoring discussions on data breaches. Italian journalists Marco A. De Felice of SuspectFile have also documented the repercussions of such legal maneuvers within their own work.
Injunctions, superinjunctions, and DMCA takedowns represent just a few of the legal mechanisms used to suppress critical reporting. Another significant concern is the rise of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) suits, which are increasingly utilized in the EU to intimidate journalists. A report by Bertrand Borg reveals a disturbing trend in the misuse of the EU’s data protection regulations to compel journalists to retract inconvenient stories. This annual SLAPPs Report, now in its fourth edition, evaluates incidents across 29 European countries and shows that in 2024, 167 new SLAPP cases were opened, with Italy dominating the list at 21 suits, followed closely by Germany with 20 cases and Serbia with 13.
Of particular note is the emerging tactic of employing GDPR regulations, specifically the ‘right to erasure’ provisions, in SLAPP cases. Over two-thirds of new SLAPP actions were brought forth by business professionals or politicians, primarily targeting reports on corruption and environmental concerns. This shift away from traditional defamation arguments highlights a worrying trend where the intent appears to be stifling journalistic discourse rather than seeking accountability.
This escalating pattern of threats against journalism speaks volumes about the precarious environment in which journalists operate today. The intersection of legal intimidation and the ever-present risk of arrest creates an atmosphere that could chill critical reporting on vital societal issues. As the journalism landscape becomes increasingly hostile, the need for robust protections and awareness regarding such tactics cannot be overstated.
For further insights, refer to the comprehensive findings available in the Times of Malta and the 2025 SLAPP report.