In the summertime of 2007, I was preparing to go to Afghanistan. This was not my first journey to Hindukush, but this time I was to work exclusively with the Polish Army. I was driving as an embed – a reporter accredited to the quota. The accreditation conditions clearly state that the helmet and vest must be clearly marked with the sign ‘PRESS’. I ordered bright yellow stickers, glued them to equipment and so equipped I flew to war. And shortly I found that the "presso" did not offer any protection; yes, it acted like a bull pad...
The Taliban had no norm of global law and war customs – they saw full goals in journalists. They shot at us for 2 reasons – the first was due to the belief that reporters frequently work "on 2 fronts" that at least any of them treat journalism as a cover, in fact being intelligence officers.
The second reason was more cynical and was due to the cognition of the nature of modern media. The death of Western soldiers has already been common in public opinions, not peculiarly resonating. The conscious deficiency of interest in editorials did not pay much attention to specified dramas. There was another incidental with the tragic final – that's all. Meanwhile, the killings of journalists triggered an full media avalanche – they were rare, so they met the basic criterion of news, but above all, the editorial offices themselves cared for the appropriate publicity of specified stories, following the principles of professional solidarity. "One of our own died, this cannot be silenced" – that was more or little the case. And although this could be understood, at the same time specified actions benefited the Taliban, due to the fact that so they and their origin gained free publicity. Hence their determination to hunt journalists, which I have learned on my own.
Somewhere at the turn of 2007 and 2008, the ISAF Command concluded that "traditional" rules were incorrect to exist. That clear marking carries a hazard not only for the reporter himself, but besides for the soldiers accompanying him – and so the request of a "presso" fell off the agenda. During my next trips, my outfit was not very different from what the soldiers looked like; the only crucial difference was that they were wearing rifles, I was wearing a camera. Anyway, I felt safer.
Killer Gaza Strip
I mention this in the context of a fresh study by the Committee to defend Journalists (CPJ), an American non-governmental organization dealing with the protection of the freedom of the press and the rights of journalists, called the Red Cross of Journalism. According to this document, 129 journalists and media workers lost their lives in 2025 in connection with their profession. This is the highest number of fatalities in this group since CPJ began documenting specified cases in the 1990s, and at the same time the second consecutive year in which statistic are record-high.
The top number of tragedies occurred in the Gaza Strip, where according to CPJ 86 reporters were killed by the fire of Israeli soldiers. Israel was besides liable for a large part of the attacks qualified by CPJ as deliberate killings of journalists – the organization noted 47 specified cases, 38 of which were attributed to Israeli armed forces. Most killed are Palestinians, and Israel consistently refuses to admit that they worked as journalists.
But although the largest number of media representatives killed is due to the conflict in Gaza, reporters besides died in another parts of the world. CPJ noted that in 2025 9 journalists lost their lives in Sudan and 4 in Ukraine. Media workers besides died in Mexico and another Latin American countries, most frequently due to organised crime violence. Asia besides took a bloody toll – in the Philippines, India and Pakistan journalists were victims of attacks related to gang activity and government repression.
The CPJ study points out that in 2025 the usage of drones increased to kill media representatives. As many as 39 specified cases have been reported, the majority in the Gaza Strip and respective in Sudan.
Impunity and non-responsibility
One of the most serious problems the report's authors point to is the applicable impunity of the perpetrators of attacks on journalists. CPJ emphasises that very fewer fatalities have been subject to a reliable public investigation, and no 1 has been held liable for the circumstantial killings of reporters, even those considered intentional. This, according to experts, is not only a violation of global humanitarian law, which recognises journalists as civilians, but besides an open signal that attacks on the media can proceed without consequences.
And death statistic are just 1 side of the medal. In the same report, CPJ reports that at the end of 2025 around the planet there were about 330 journalists in prisons, which is not much smaller than in the evidence 2024. any have experienced torture, beating, or another forms of inhuman treatment. There is besides a problem of obstructing access to information and live coverage, for example through bans on entry into conflict zones, censorship or repression of independent media.
Data in 2025 show that despite technological advancement and the increasing function of mass media in global society, the profession of writer is inactive 1 of the most dangerous in the planet – especially erstwhile reporters effort to tell about the brutal reality of armed conflicts. The CPJ warns that this is not only a threat to media representatives and their families themselves, but besides to the freedom of information and the right of the public to have reliable information. The organisation calls for a crucial strengthening of the mechanisms for protecting journalists, a fair and full investigation into murders and the punishment of perpetrators, as well as global coordination of actions to prevent specified tragedies in the future. It is hard not to sign under these demands.
