With increasing frequency, we hear that journalism is dying, that traditional media will disappear, that artificial intelligence and social networks are the present and future of information.
With increasing frequency, we hear that journalism is dying, that traditional media will disappear, that artificial intelligence and social networks are the present and future of information.
We also increasingly hear political leaders attacking and persecuting journalists and the media. This happens in dictatorships like Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, but also in flawed democracies such as El Salvador, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Argentina.
During our missions this year, we witnessed the climate of tension created by state institutions. We observed this in Peru, a country experiencing obvious institutional deterioration. We also noted it in Costa Rica, a nation once considered a beacon of democracy in the region.
And what about the United States, where Donald Trump's return to power already shows clear signs of an intent to intensify his confrontation with the press? This is already having a harmful, contagious effect on autocratic leaders across the continent, who feel emboldened to withhold information, denounce their critics, criminalize them, and attempt to impose a single narrative.
So, we ask ourselves: if journalism is doomed to extinction, why these attacks, this bitterness, this violent rhetoric? The answer is simple: because professional journalism troubles power—political power, economic power, and also organized crime and mafias that corrode institutions.
Social media communicate and facilitate interaction. But journalism investigates, verifies, questions, exposes irregularities, and gives voice to alternative perspectives.
It is true that technological advances have fostered new information platforms. And social media are a powerful tool for disseminating messages and generating interaction. But often, they are echo chambers that exacerbate beliefs and reinforce ideological biases.
They are also vehicles for spreading misinformation and viralizing manipulated content intended to confuse, harm, or interfere in electoral processes.
With artificial intelligence, Andrea Colamedici even created a fake Hong Kong philosopher earlier this year—Jianwei Xun—to whom she attributed a book called Hypnocracy. The text initially dazzled the world and then sparked immense intellectual and moral controversy. Ironically, it suggests that in the era of post-truth and artificial intelligence, power no longer operates through repression but by manipulating the perception of reality.
Giuliano da Empoli, in his book The Engineers of Chaos, aptly states that political gurus “reinvented propaganda tailored to social networks, thereby transforming the very nature of democratic play.”
He also notes that new populisms—on both the left and right—subject journalists who question them to a “storm of insults,” as their mission is to inflame extreme passions.
Da Empoli cites an MIT study showing that false information is, on average, 70% more likely to be shared because it is generally more peculiar and intriguing than the truth—compounded by the fact that social networks lack responsible editors to verify facts and take accountability for errors.
Do we need to remember that, earlier this year, following the change of government in the United States, Meta deactivated its content verification program? Just when does the misuse of artificial intelligence make us doubt everything?
Do we need to remember that Trump’s main ally controls X? That a presidential executive order set a deadline for TikTok’s Chinese parent company to sell its operations in the United States?
In this environment, professional journalism is more necessary than ever—even on social networks. Not by rejecting technological advances, but by integrating them into editorial processes to report and investigate more effectively.
Today, more than ever, we must defend freedom of expression and the press, and the existence of reliable, sustainable journalistic media that fulfill their civic mission to inform and hold power accountable. Because without free journalism, democracy will continue to weaken, and authoritarianism will rise across the continent.
This conviction drives us to send missions to at-risk countries; to speak out when we detect threats or attacks; to develop our Chapultepec Index, which measures press freedom in the region; and to present—as we will today—our semiannual assessments of the state of the right to inform and be informed in the region.
This will be my final report as President of the Freedom of the Press and Information Committee. Last October, I was honored to be appointed second vice-president of the IAPA. With the collaboration of our Executive Director, Carlos Lauría, we have worked on finding a successor.
After discussions with President Dutriz, we decided that in early May, I will hand over the position to an enthusiastic and dedicated colleague who I am confident will continue the work we began in 2020.
I refer to Martha Ramos, Editorial Director of Organización Editorial Mexicana, who will soon conclude her term as president of the WAN-IFRA World Editors Forum. She has gladly accepted this new challenge, which I am sure she will honor.
Rest assured, Martha, that you will have my full support, as well as that of the entire IAPA staff, who greatly facilitate the intense work this Committee requires. Of course, I will continue to advocate for press freedom in my new role.
Let us now turn to a summary of the current scenario, which we will later examine in detail. This semester has seen a troubling atmosphere of hostility toward the press, resulting in increasing violence. In some cases, this violence originates from political power; in others, from criminal groups; and increasingly, from street protests.
This last phenomenon reflects a complex social climate, but such attacks during citizen protests are often encouraged by stigmatizing rhetoric from political leaders.
It is not surprising, therefore, that most threats and attacks occur in countries where complaints about online harassment and stigmatization by politicians are multiplying.
The most alarming events include the 10 journalist murders recorded this semester. Mexico remains the country with the highest number of reporters killed in the line of duty, with four deaths since last October. Haiti follows, plagued by unrelenting political and social violence.
There have also been murders in Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, and Peru. Journalists are missing in Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico, and Nicaragua.
Another symptom of political persecution is the increase in cases of exile: one in Ecuador, another in El Salvador, and an unquantifiable number in Nicaragua, Cuba, and Haiti. “Exile,” said a journalist from Port-au-Prince who emigrated for political reasons, “is one of the most violent experiences a person can endure.” The regimes in Havana, Managua, and Caracas also deport critical journalists or prevent dissidents and their families from leaving the country.
This is why the IAPA, as President Dutriz mentioned yesterday, launched the Latin American Network of Journalism in Exile (RELPEX) and collaborated with other organizations, led by DW Akademie, in launching a website—periodismolibre.org —aimed at providing information and resources to displaced journalists and media.
The closure of Voice of America and the cutting of aid funds to developing countries only worsen the situation for displaced journalists.
In some cases, entire newsrooms are forced to relocate abroad. But the resilience to overcome adversity is remarkable. “Our printing press is silent, but our journalism rings loud and clear!” proclaims La Prensa of Nicaragua, nearly four years after its closure due to Ortega’s persecution.
Numerous threats and assaults were recorded in Ecuador during a complex electoral process, as well as in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru. Journalists were injured in Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, the United States, Haiti, and Venezuela—whether by state forces or during protests.
Furthermore, journalists are imprisoned in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. A paradigmatic case is that of José Rubén Zamora, vice president for Guatemala on our Committee, detained for over 800 days between July 2022 and October 2024, later placed under house arrest, and then returned to prison four months later by an arbitrary judicial decision.
We reaffirm our solidarity with the beloved “Chepe,” whom we had hoped could join this meeting. Let us renew our hopes that he will be with us at the October Assembly—not only free, but free from persecution for exposing those in power.
A phrase from José Rubén sums up his resilience: “I prefer to live standing in jail than kneeling, accepting crimes I never committed.”
His case is an extreme example of judicial harassment, but such abuses are multiplying—particularly in Peru, where defamation has not been decriminalized, and recent legislation has increased penalties.
Panama sets records for multimillion-dollar claims against media outlets and journalists. But abusive lawsuits and police or judicial harassment also occur in Cuba, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Uruguay, and Venezuela. The goal is to financially strangle those who investigate and report.
In Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador, media outlets have closed due to political or economic pressures. Information deserts are also expanding in Canada.
The most widespread verbal violence against the press shows as stigmatization by political leaders in Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, the United States, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela.
Added to this is the denigration through social media in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, and Peru. In other words, stigmatizing journalism is common in more than half of the 14 countries we surveyed.
Discriminatory allocation of official advertising affects media outlets in Colombia, Costa Rica, and Argentina. And restrictions on information access and obstacles to journalistic work are common in Argentina, Canada, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, the United States, Guyana, Paraguay, and the Dominican Republic.
A concerning action from the Trump administration is the expulsion of the Associated Press from the White House press pool—a presidential measure upheld despite a favorable judicial ruling. Later, we will hear more from Julie Pace, Executive Editor and Senior Vice President of AP.
Digital attacks are intensifying, especially against women journalists. We are also seeing the blocking of news websites—such as the Nicaraguan dictatorship’s targeting of .ni domains—along with similar actions in Cuba, Ecuador, and Venezuela.
On a positive note, we highlight the decision of the Federal Supreme Court of Brazil, which established objective criteria regarding liability and content removal online; and the signing of the Chapultepec Declaration by Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo.
Also noteworthy is the endorsement of that declaration and of the Salta II Declaration by Rodrigo Arias, President of Costa Rica’s Legislative Assembly; former President Laura Chinchilla; and Panama’s three government branch leaders: President José Mulino (Executive), Dana Castañeda (Legislative), and Eugenia López Arias (Judiciary). In Peru, the President of the Judiciary, Janet Tello, has also joined.
I would also like to highlight the recent signing of a friendly settlement agreement with the State of Colombia to provide reparations to the families of journalist Julio Daniel Chaparro Hurtado and photographer Jorge Enrique Torres Navas, who were murdered in 1991.
Today, as 34 years ago, authoritarian onslaughts weaken institutions and blur the separation of powers. But they have not broken the will of journalists and media outlets, who continue to demonstrate admirable courage and resilience.
Many have paid for that strength with their lives. Others, with exile or banishment. Some, with arbitrary imprisonment. For all of them, we commit to never giving up. Because if we do not fight disinformation and intolerance, disinformation and intolerance will destroy journalism, democracy, and the well-being of our societies.
Let us continue working to ensure our media are spaces for civic dialogue and democratic construction—strongholds against authoritarianism and beacons of freedom and progress.