68% of threatened journalists say their attackers dread global investigations – survey

MANILA, Philippines – A Forbidden Stories survey of 204 threatened journalists from 53 countries found that 68% of those journalists said they considered their attackers feared global journalistic investigations more than legal action (17%) or statements by non-governmental organizations (15%).

Forbidden Stories’ global survey, fielded from February 28 to April 7, asked questions of 204 journalists targeted by attacks — whether these were threats or physical acts of violence — for their work.

According to the survey, 77% of respondents had been threatened by what they believe to be representatives of public authorities (such as public officials, local elected officials, national elected officials, or law enforcement). This is twice as many as criminal or armed groups, which is at 36%. The survey also said 37% of respondents have already been physically attacked, abducted, or arrested.

Further, 88% of respondents did not file a complaint (58%), or filed one, but the complaint was unsuccessful (30%).

Corruption, human rights investigations most threatened

The survey also tried to take a snapshot of what these journalists were investigating and, essentially, learn what they were being threatened for.

The survey said 63% were being threatened for investigating corruption, while 59% were investigating human rights violations.

Meanwhile, organized crime (34%), environmental crimes (30%), elections and money laundering (22% each) were also among the most notably threatened.

Journalists working together brings ‘dread’ to those being looked into

The survey also asked, “In your opinion, which of the following three situations would the people threatening you dread the most?”

To this, 68% of journalists surveyed said a global journalistic investigation is likely what their attackers would dread the most, followed by legal action at 17%, and NGO statements at 15%.

Further when the survey asked, “In your opinion, could the people who threaten you or are bothered by your investigations be afraid that an international network of journalists might investigate their possible “interests” abroad? (real estate assets, bank accounts, supply chains, foreign clients, political connections),” 83% of those surveyed said those targeting them could be concerned about international investigations into their assets and activities abroad.

Attack one, face many: The Safebox Network

As part of their survey, Forbidden Stories also asked respondents about a mechanism they developed — the Safebox Network — allowing threatened journalists to publicly make known their ongoing investigations are safely held by a global consortium of reporters.

Of the 204 respondents to the Forbidden Stories survey, 78% of them or 159 respondents came from the Safebox Network.

In the event a journalist is assassinated or jailed, Forbidden Stories will continue their work through their international network of partners in media and publish their findings worldwide, amplifying information that aggressors tried to silence or bury.

This makes it clear to aggressors that these journalists are not alone, and that the work to investigate an entity will continue despite attempts to silence them.

According to the respondents, 65% of them who were Safebox members noticed a change in the attacks against them after they made their affiliation known, including a decrease in threats and a less aggressive attitude from those being investigated.

Respondents also reported feeling more protected and less isolated as a result of being part of a network of similarly minded peers.

Additionally, 70 respondents said that thanks to the support of the network, they were able to conduct investigations and tell stories that would have otherwise been untold due to the dangers involved.

Sharing information is a form of protection

Laurent Richard, a journalist and executive director and founder of Forbidden Stories, had this to say about the survey and collaborative efforts: “When investigations become collective, intimidation loses part of its power. If we want to protect journalists, we must stop thinking only in terms of defense after the fact. We must build systems that make attacks less effective in the first place.”

“That means investing in collaborative networks. Supporting cross-border investigations. And recognizing that, in today’s environment, sharing information is not a weakness — it is a form of protection,” Richard added.

The full report is available to download here. – Rappler.com