Close Menu
Market Data Newsletter
Monday, September 28
Global Free Speech

CPJ urges heightened awareness for journalists traveling to US for FIFA World Cup 

News RoomBy No Comments3 Mins Read9 Views
CPJ urges heightened awareness for journalists traveling to US for FIFA World Cup 

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

May 21, 2026, New York, NY — The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has advised journalists traveling throughout the United States for the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup may face questioning or hostility from immigration officials at the border or around venues. 

The World Cup spans games across cities in the U.S., Mexico, and Canada from June 11 to July 19, 2026. CPJ, a press freedom organization that works globally, has published resources for journalists reporting on the World Cup from this year’s host countries, including a travel advisory and legal rights guide. 

FIFA has accredited an estimated 50,000 journalists and media workers to cover the games. The majority of World Cup matches will be held in the U.S. where in recent months there have been cases of journalists being arrested, detained, and deported in relation to their work.

“Based on the experiences of recent months in the United States, journalists traveling to the United States need to know that their press credentials won’t necessarily protect them at the border or when out reporting,” said CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg. “We’ve seen immigration enforcement used as a tool to silence reporting, with authorities detaining, denying entry to, or deporting journalists not because of any crime, but because of their journalism.”

International journalists, commentators, and writers traveling to the U.S. have previously been denied entry at the border and had visas revoked under the current administration. CPJ urges reporters to complete a risk assessment, identify emergency contacts, develop a check-in procedure and keep those contacts on paper in case devices are confiscated. Reporters have also been assaulted by officials while covering protests in the United States.

Journalists should prepare for possible additional screening at the border. Failure to comply with a request from a border guard could result in devices being seized and, depending on the journalist’s immigration status, delays or denial of entry. 

In Mexico, journalists covering stories of corruption or human rights around the World Cup may face harassment, threats, or physical violence. Attacks on journalists covering the World Cup may be especially acute for those of marginalized genders. In Canada, there have been cases of journalists stopped at the border and, very rarely, arrests of reporters covering protests. 

To access safety information while reporting, journalists can text CPJ’s safety chatbot on WhatsApp by messaging “hello” to +1-206-590-6191 and selecting from a menu of safety topics. 

###

About the Committee to Protect Journalists

The Committee to Protect Journalists is an independent, nonprofit organization that promotes press freedom worldwide. We defend the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal.

Media contact: [email protected]

Note to journalists needing advice:
Journalists seeking emergency assistance or safety advice can email CPJ at [email protected]. They will be asked to provide information about their circumstances, needs, and work as a journalist. All information is confidential but may be shared with a small network of trusted partners for vetting purposes.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Share.

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Global Free Speech

The BBC clearly sees the value of television series That Mitchell and Webb Look. Marking the 20th anniversary of its original screening, the Beeb has re-released the series on iPlayer. But – and there is very often a “but” with these things – they’ve removed around 11 sketches from the BAFTA award-winning show. The official word is that these sketches don’t “work today”, which is polite speak for “they may cause offence”. The episodes singled out include scenes featuring a battle reenactment with characters in blackface, a contestant on a show wearing a burka and a lost tribe” in a garden centre. These sketches set out to challenge stereotypes, not to reinforce them; but 20 years on, this distinction seems to have been lost along the way. I’m a bit uncomfortable about this. I find it infantilising, to say the least. Can’t we trust audiences to make up their own minds, to switch off if they find the sketches in question unpalatable? Does the BBC think that we are just passive consumers, unable to disaggregate the mocking of racism from racism itself? These sketches set out to challenge stereotypes, not to reinforce them This act of censorship is distorting – of the shows, whose narratives and rhythms were built to include these sketches, and more broadly too. Conversations we were having 20 years ago have been erased, as if to suggest that they never happened. But they did! And with this erasure, the opportunity for thoughtful engagement and learning from our past is gone. “Let’s just pretend we were all lovely 20 years ago. It’s better that way” seems to be the message. Speaking as a minority myself, I find that knowing the nasty stuff that people said before – and indeed, still say today – is much more useful than pretending it never happened. This approach, I think, is also inconsistent. What it reveals is a cherry-picking (intended or not) of the groups that we can mock, and those that we can’t. Let’s face it, gender stereotypes are rarely deemed to have aged beyond the pale – if that were the case, we would have to wave goodbye to half the television made before the mid-2010s. Suppression like this sends a bad message to artists, namely that what they’re creating today may hold less value tomorrow. Or, even worse, that future audiences may deem them bigots – that Sword of Damocles hovering over the heads of any creative paying attention to the discourse of the moment. Suppression like this sends a bad message to artists The BBC’s decision reaffirms a broader trend. In 2020, Little Britain was removed from the iPlayer platform for similar reasons. It has since been reinstated – minus some sketches. Meanwhile, the UK’s arts space more broadly is seeing a retreat to the land of “safe”, as Index recently revealed in a year-long investigation into self-censorship in UK theatre. The BBC, it must be said, does remarkable stuff. The ongoing podcast investigation into the disappearance of US journalist Austin Tice is just one example. But this does not mean, however, that they don’t sometimes get it wrong. Chopping at That Mitchell and Webb Look is one example. Sure, the removal of the material isn’t the life-or-death story that Index often works on. Sure, Mitchell and Webb aren’t the faces of persecuted artists – they have huge platforms and agreed to the changes themselves. Still, one can’t help but think that the decision came from a place of conservatism, perhaps even fear. This is weak and dispiriting, indeed the very opposite of what enables creativity in the arts. We shouldn’t be encouraging this cultural timidity. Rather, we should harness culture and creativity as the starting points of a conversation about our here and now. That’s what the arts are for, after all. READ MORE

Add A Comment

Comments are closed.