Close Menu
Market Data Newsletter
Friday, February 20
Global Free Speech

CPJ to release 2025 report on killings of journalists worldwide

News RoomBy No Comments1 Min Read1,070 Views
CPJ to release 2025 report on killings of journalists worldwide

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

New York, February 20, 2026—On February 25, 2026, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) will release its annual report on journalists and media workers killed worldwide in 2025.

CPJ’s 2025 Killed Report will include global data and in-depth analysis revealing which countries are the deadliest for journalists amid escalating conflicts that have caused a surge in press killings worldwide. 

In early December 2025, CPJ announced press killings in 2025 had equaled its record high in 2024. 

WHAT: CPJ’s 2025 Killed Report 

WHEN: February 25, 2026, at 3:00 a.m. ET/9 a.m. CET

WHERE: www.cpj.org

WHO: CPJ experts are available to speak in multiple languages about the key findings

###

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.

To request an embargoed copy or interview, please reach out to [email protected].

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

16th Feb, 2026. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban (R) and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio attend a joint press conference in Budapest, Hungary on Feb. 16, 2026. Photo: David Balogh/Xinhua/Alamy Live News When I left Hungary on Sunday, the US secretary of state Marco Rubio had just arrived in Budapest for talks with the prime minister Viktor Orbán to give him the USA’s full-throttled support. Hungary has been somewhat of a touchstone for the MAGA movement and Rubio told Orbán that US Hungarian relations were entering “a golden age” and that if Orbán needed anything, the US would consider providing it. There are elections in Hungary just after Easter and it looks likely, if the polls are to be believed, that the more pro-EU opposition leader Péter Magyar will win. There is restrained optimism among many liberals in Budapest although nothing in this part of the world is a done deal. The week I was there, Magyar was going big on the theme that he had been lured into a honey trap and some Kompromat video Russian-style was going to be released. Only a grainy black and white still of a double-bed captured by a ceiling camera ever emerged. Even with a Magyar win, it will be difficult to unravel the total capture of institutions (universities, the media and the cultural centres) by billionaires and those loyal to Orbán’s Fidesz. I heard some 30-something American men in black bomber jackets in Budapest’s Jewish quarter loudly complaining in English that the “young people” in Hungary wanted to tax those billionaires, but they simply didn’t understand how the country relied on them. We are examining the implications on freedom of expression of all these Hungarian developments in the next magazine. This part of Europe, which was once the Habsburg Empire, feels in flux. People, and particularly young people, are fighting back to claim their rights to be heard. Liberal forces in Slovakia are mobilising, even while the far-right leader Robert Fico is attempting to “normalise” the cultural sector, taking money away from any arts institution considered to be too “activist”. Meanwhile in Vienna, the situation to the east is waved away in the coffee houses as being unimportant, or at least an issue which will resolve itself. A famous saying about the city is: “When the world comes to an end, move to Vienna because everything happens there 20 years later.” There are fears here about an over-dependence on an increasingly unfriendly USA, particularly when it comes to digital platforms and servers – the USA could turn them all off with a flick of a switch if Europe doesn’t toe the line – and a frustration that France and Germany are not working as one to build European solidarity against hostile forces in China and Russia. And then there is a question of the rise of the far-right parties in Europe, including in Austria itself. From the end of World War Two, it was the USA which acted as a liberal guarantor for free expression in western and then eastern Europe. The old order is breaking up, the EU is weakened and ordinary people are having to decide whether those rights are still worth fighting for. READ MORE

Global Free Speech

Creators have only three seconds to hook users before they scroll away. Photo: Ben Iwara/Unsplash Short-form video is the medium of our time. The average teenager will spend hours a day on TikTok and Instagram reels, which are the main sources of news and entertainment for the 18-24 demographic. Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, administers the most important algorithm in the English-speaking world. He is undoubtedly as consequential as David Zaslav or Rupert Murdoch – the CEO of Warner Bros and the owner of News Corp – but his name rarely makes headlines. On Mosseri’s Instagram, videos proven to hold users’ attention will be shown to more people. “Watch-time” is the basic currency of his algorithm. This has forced creators, many of whom earn a living on the platform, to abide by a golden formula: hook, secondary hook, payoff. The algorithm has spawned an entire coaching industry in which aspiring influencers pay veteran creators for crash courses in perfecting the formula. Each course teaches more or less the same thing: promise the viewer an answer to a question, keep promising, then answer at the end. Better yet, don’t answer it – promise to answer it in the next video. Where watch-time is the quantitative component of these algorithms, “trends” are the qualitative. If a particular word, image or sound appears to be trending among a certain data demographic, unrelated content will be algorithmically choked out of that demographic’s feed. This forces creators to cluster their content around proven trends. A trend is never a story. It is always a concept or feeling that can be immediately communicated within three seconds, because it is generally understood that creators have only three seconds to hook users before they scroll away. As influential creator coach Dominik Rieger will often remark: “The viewer must immediately know ‘This is for me’.” When Sean “Diddy” Combs trends, as he often does, it is never regarding a piece of evidence or a development in one of his trials. What is, on paper, a story about sexual coercion and exploitation of power is translated by the algorithm into a static portrait: a shame-faced Puff Daddy slick with baby oil. Searching “Diddy” will take you to a trove of baby oil related brainrot, and barely a single piece of factual reporting. Diddy’s actions did not create a story to be followed but a crude vignette to be gawked at. When US president Donald Trump’s shocking birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein was published by The Wall Street Journal, it did not become a major trend on TikTok or Instagram because the only way to parse the story was by reading the letter itself, which takes more than three seconds. As far as the algorithm is concerned, if an event’s essence cannot be compressed into a three-second span, it may as well have never happened. The proliferation of short-form video has created a media environment structurally hostile to sequential reasoning. Young people’s attention is guided by an ever-narrowing algorithmic spotlight. Stories that are too big to be rendered by the spotlight are able to bask in pitch darkness and the people we allow to control the algorithms are not interested in changing that. In fact, Mosseri has been open about his efforts to speed up trends: “I want us to be better at trends. It takes still too long for things to pop on Instagram.” The political implications of this media environment are clear. If short-form video platforms continue to transmute real-world events into less-than-superficial spectacles, the rich and powerful need not manually censor anything. If all chains of cause and effect have found their terminus in the platform algorithms, and if public consciousness is held inert by the same three-second hooks, what will be worth censoring? READ MORE

Add A Comment
Leave A Reply