Advocacy

Editor’s Note:
On May 3, World Press Freedom Day, we begin a series of reports examining the state of press freedom in the United States at a pivotal moment in the nation’s history. As the country approaches its 250th anniversary, our reporters have spent months asking a central question: Has the United States upheld its promise of a free press, or have we fallen short?

The series examines contemporary threats to journalism, and emerging challenges posed by artificial intelligence, social media, misinformation and changing public trust in the press.

At a time when the role of journalism in democracy is once again under scrutiny, this series invites readers to consider not only what freedom of the press has meant in American history, but what it must mean for the future.

When the Press Becomes the Target, Should Journalists Fight Back?
By Anna Claire Carter

Erosion of press freedom is no longer an abstract concern. This new era is marked with hostile rhetoric, restricted access, and growing threats to safety.

With these pressures in mind, once-uncomfortable questions are gaining urgency across the field: How can journalists advocate for themselves? Or should they?

“Every other industry advocates for its own existence, its own rights, the legal protections on which it depends,” said Seth Stern, Chief of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “There’s no reason the press should be any different.”

A measurable decline in press freedom

Data suggests that attacks on the ability of the press to do its job are real. According to the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, 103 incidents have already been reported in 2026, which include arrests of journalists, seizures of their equipment, assaults, and interrogations. Reported incidents increased by 124.63% from 2022 to 2025.

Global rankings of press freedom show a similar trend. The United States’ rank has continued to drop over the last decade, according to the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and its World Press Freedom Index, in 2016, the United States ranked 41st. By 2025, it had fallen to 57th. RSF attributes the decline to the second Trump Administration’s cut in support for independent media, weaponization of institutions, and a climate of hostility towards reporters.

For example, the Trump administration cut federal funding for the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which distributed media resources to international organizations and audiences. Access to information has also been threatened. As of February 2025, the Trump administration announced it would handpick which media outlets would participate in the White House press pool. This breaks decades of precedent where the independent White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) selected reporters.

Under this new arrangement, President Donald Trump restricted the access of Associated Press journalists after they refused to use “Gulf of America” in place of the “Gulf of Mexico” in their reports. In retaliation, AP reporters were denied access to the Oval Office and other press events.

A trickle-down effect

This attitude towards the press has trickled down to state and local officials.

In April 2025, Mississippi Today, the largest non-profit newsroom in Mississippi, reported that the sports gambling company DraftKings had partially funded a trip to the Super Bowl for Mississippi House Speaker Jason White and his entourage. Shortly after that, the news outlet reported it was removed from the Speaker’s press distribution list. Then, in January 2026, Mississippi Today reporter Michael Goldberg was excluded from a press conference, just as the new legislative session was about to begin.

Mississippi Today Editor-in-Chief Emily Wagster Pettus said in a statement, “We and other news organizations are the eyes and ears of the public at the state Capitol. It is petty and wrong for Speaker Jason White — or any other elected official — to cut off media access.”

Some advocacy experts see such limitations on access and press freedom as stemming from the President’s stance toward the press.

Director of the Joseph L. Brechner Freedom of Information Project, Dr. David Cuillier said, “It’s getting worse because state and local officials are taking their lead from the President. When the President tweets, [the press is] the ‘enemy of the people’, ‘fake news’ and repeatedly, calls reporters piggy, is literally very disparaging and verbally violent with the press, and gets away with it, then we are starting to see this all around the country with other officials.”

Tai Takahashi, news director at television station WJTV/WHLT in Jackson, Mississippi, is experiencing the current environment from the front lines. “As far as press freedoms go, we are under attack, and I think we have been for some time,” said Takahashi.

The impact of rhetoric

Journalism advocates say that denigrating the press poses a real threat to press freedom.

“Right now, there’s so much rhetoric that puts journalists in harm or questions the work they’re doing on a daily basis,” said Chris Vaccaro, president of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). “That’s why we’re standing up and fighting.”

Tara Puckey, president of the Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA), said the effects are tangible and immediate.

“Hostile rhetoric has a real impact. When journalists are publicly named as ‘enemies of the people’ by people with significant platforms and power, the effects show up in harassment, in threats, in sources who won’t talk, and in journalists who leave the profession or self-censor to manage their own safety. That’s not hypothetical.”

The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented similar trends, pointing to rising political polarization in the aftermath of the 2020 election, a rise in domestic extremism, and the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as factors contributing to a “riskier working environment for U.S.-based journalists”.

The question of objectivity

These challenges to press freedom have sparked conversations on how advocacy groups, media organizations, and journalists should respond, if at all.

Objectivity became enshrined as a doctrine in 20th-century American journalism, setting the foundation for “fact-driven” journalism. Some in the industry may argue that journalists should not advocate for themselves, as it infringes on their objectivity and role as “watchdogs.”

Jesse Holland, associate director at the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, said, “Nowadays, it’s whoever is shouting the loudest is believed by the most people. And that will never be us. Because we’re trained not to be the story.”

Stern attested to this: “Journalists are very reluctant to make themselves the story. They see it as undermining their objectivity.”

But he argues that this shouldn’t stop journalists from speaking up about press freedom.

“You might not want to be the story,” Stern said, “but you’re not the one making yourself the story. The government is making you the story by attacking press freedom, and you’re the press. How can you maintain objectivity about that?”

Over the years, scholars and institutions have called for a redefinition of objectivity, arguing that the doctrine’s foundation lies in methodology rather than in the results. A journalist is objective by committing to using objective methods to test interpretations for bias or inaccuracies.

Advocacy as survival

In an environment of hostile rhetoric, limited access, and safety concerns, journalism organizations are expanding their advocacy efforts in response.

SPJ has increased its focus on defending press rights, lobbying for transparency, and supporting reporters facing conflicts. Vaccaro said the organization also provides guidance for journalists navigating threats and encourages collaboration rather than isolation.

“It’s important that journalists know there are larger organizations that do have their back, that they could come to SPJ with ideas, with conflicts, with struggles, looking for guidance and advice. Don’t do it alone when you’re advocating,” said Vaccaro. “Try to think of the bigger picture and that there’s probably somebody else out there in a similar situation that may have some institutional knowledge. And everyone’s here to help, especially in our large national organization with thousands upon thousands of members.”

RTDNA has taken a similar approach, combining public advocacy with practical resources.
Puckey said the group works across legal, educational, and public platforms to strengthen resources for journalists to do their jobs safely and to support them when they are facing challenges.

Puckey said, “Every journalist who gets stronger and more skilled is a journalist who can keep doing the work. You can’t separate the health of the profession from its freedom.”

For journalists facing immediate threats, Puckey offers an essential piece of advice: document everything and seek support.

“Many journalists don’t know what resources exist,” Puckey said. “Many more don’t reach out until they’re already in crisis.”

Puckey acknowledged that it isn’t easy to advocate alone. “That’s why organizations like RTDNA exist, not to replace individual advocacy, but to make it possible,” said Puckey.

Looking forward

Free press advocates say it’s not just journalists who will suffer in restrictive environments.

“Press freedom is an important story, not just to journalists, but to everyone else,” said Stern. “The news consumers are the ones who suffer when journalists don’t inform them about the attacks on press freedom that we’re experiencing, the significance of those attacks, and how they fit in historically, how they might shape our future.”

Puckey echoed that sentiment. “Press freedom requires a public that values it, economic models that sustain journalism, and political leaders who understand what a free press does for democracy. Right now, all three of those are under different kinds of pressure.”

Jesse Holland calls for more institutional support. “Our journalism leaders should be the first ones to say; you shouldn’t attack journalists. You shouldn’t say this about journalists. Journalists are Americans too. We’re not the enemy.”

Puckey says advocacy should be a group effort.

“The most important advocacy journalists can do is to keep doing excellent, accountable journalism”, said Puckey. “That sounds simple, but it’s not. It requires institutional support, resources, and a professional community that has your back.”

Takahashi offered advice to fellow journalists, saying, “I advise people to remember why they believe in what they are doing. Remember what an awesome responsibility it is. Report with passion. Keep people in power accountable. When you do that, good things are going to happen.”

He said now is the time to double down on the work:

“We are more important and relevant than ever. We just need to convince people that we are, and that comes from doing your job.”