Not Censored, But Silenced: Evidence from Local Journalists in German Far-Right Strongholds
For the first article we are covering from 2026 is this article by Patrick Peltz from European Centre for Press and Media Freedom and Yann P. M. Rees from Bielefield University, which looked at how local journalists from Eastern German regions experienced hostility and intimidation in the context of far-right mobilization in the area.
Recently, press freedom has declined in Germany, despite the country scoring high in international comparison. Particularly, despite legal and economic aspects scoring highly, the security dimension has seen a decline: the physical and psychological safety of journalists is increasingly challenged. This is typically, as shown in previous studies elsewhere (Krämer 2018) done by far-right elements portraying the media as partisan and deceitful, even “enemies of the people” (Garsztecki, Laux, and Nebelin 2024, 20–23).
This study contributed to that literature by proposing these questions: “How do far-right delegitimization efforts manifest in the everyday interactions and working environments of local journalists in regions where far-right influence is pronounced?” and “How do these experiences affect their perceived safety, coping strategies, and professional autonomy”? This was accomplished with fifteen semi-structured interviews in far-right strongholds in Saxony and Thuringia. They were conducted between November and December 2024.
In the German context, the far-right has been particularly effective in rural regions of Eastern Germany. It has been successful in building extra-parliamentary influence and later, via AfD, at the parliamentary level. This is particularly true of Saxony and Thuringia, and those who oppose this development have increasingly become targets of threats or even attacks (Beck, Jakob, and Kuhn 2023; Erhardt 2020; Imbusch and Steg 2025).
After the interviews, they were analysed with qualitative content analysis based on the outline by Mayring (2010). Many interviewees described a heterogeneous but increasingly hostile attitude toward journalism in their regions. Delegitimizing narratives were perceived as circulating, and they shaped how people talked. However, it was rarely personal, more directed at “the media”.
The hostility was amplified in contested topics such as migration, environmental and climate policy, and coverage of far-right parties or conspiracy driven groups. These provoked online and in-person hate for nearly all of the participants. According to a local journalist from Saxony, this massively increased with the refugee crisis in 2015.
These experiences reflected a broader pattern of hostility within their community. Also, often the encounters with AfD representatives carried an undercurrent of hostility. One reported an attempt of intimidation, and one reported a threat of purging the ministries and newsrooms when AfD comes into power. A journalist also accused AfD of being two-faced: some intimidate, while others present themselves as professional and peaceful.
Even physical confrontations were not unheard of. For example, one had a group marching outside the journalist’s home chanting “Lügenpresse” repeatedly on several occasions. Anonymous threats, such as the journalist’s surname paired with “scum” and “9mm”, referring to a pistol caliber.
These all made journalists somewhat more aware of security issues, even if they did consider the likelihood of an attack low. However, they were increasingly alert, planned in advance, and prepared exits in events. It should be emphasized that the journalists had an overall perception that the threats were very real and happening currently.
Most denied changes in their editorial behavior, but several described that they now approach certain topics more carefully that might trigger backlash – being aware of how people might respond. For some, the avoidance also affected working conditions in the newsrooms. Across interviews, they emphasized that certain topics politicized by the far-right generated reactions that were demanding or threatening.
The findings suggested that far-right delegitimization efforts involving hostile rhetoric weakened the journalists’ epistemic authority and eroded their professional autonomy. Thus, the study contributed to the effect of intimidation on journalistic autonomy in democratic settings. The coping strategies by journalists were both adaptive and maladaptive.
The article “Not Censored, But Silenced: Evidence from Local Journalists in German Far-Right Strongholds” by Patrick Peltz and Yann P. M. Rees is in Journalism Practice. (Free abstract).
Picture: Untitled by Russell Ferrer.
License Unsplash.
