JX Fund – European Fund for Journalism in Exile

The rollback of press freedom programs, as well as the loss of some funding from European nations refocused on security closer to home, has left exiled media outlets from Myanmar, Belarus, Afghanistan, South Sudan, and other countries that lack a free press facing the same question: When decades-long donors pull out, what comes next?

On the occasion of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) is releasing a new report “Ending the Silence on Online Harassment of Journalists”. Authored by journalist and tech policy advisor Elodie Vialle, the report provides an overview of the widespread phenomenon that is online harassment targeting journalists, whose normalisation makes it harder to address.

The situation for independent media is not getting any easier, and the grant crisis of 2025 has shown just how vulnerable journalists are, especially those working in exile. But many newsrooms are developing innovative ideas to replace some of this lost funding and even developing news products aimed at different audiences in the diaspora or elsewhere.

In an increasingly hostile global environment for independent journalism, journalists under severe political pressure (JUSPP) represent the most vulnerable segment of the media landscape in the OSCE region. In the context of this report, JUSPP are defined as journalists and other media professionals who face systematic threats and persecution from state or non-state actors due to their reporting and dissemination of information.

This Monitoring Report takes stock of the press freedom situation in 36 EU Member States and candidate countries during the first six months of 2025. Between January and June, the Mapping Media Freedom database documented 709 press freedom violations, affecting 1249 media workers or entities.

In contexts of exile and censorship, several independent media outlets have turned to creating original products — leveraging their brand identity, analytical expertise, or connection to specific audiences.

The report examines how China is exporting its model of internet control via Geedge Networks, a company tied to the Mesalab lab. Geedge supplies surveillance and censorship tools to countries like Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Myanmar, enabling real-time monitoring and traffic control. Leaked documents reveal how these systems mirror China’s Great Firewall and are used both domestically (e.g., Xinjiang) and abroad.

The Spanish-language report ‘Displaced Voices: An X-ray of Latin American Journalistic Exile 2018–2024’ shows that a total of 913 journalists were forced to leave their countries in Latin America between 2028 and 2024. Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba together account for more than 90% of all journalistic exile in the region.

The Human Rights Watch’ report, “Disrupted, Throttled, and Blocked: State Censorship, Control, and Increasing Isolation of Internet Users in Russia,” documents the impact of the government’s increasing technological capacities and control over the country’s internet infrastructure.

From empowering exiled journalists, to sustaining watchdog journalism in fragile democracies and conflict zones, donor aid often serves as the lifeline for public interest media across the Asia-Pacific region. However, recent research led by DW Akademie reveals that donor aid is sometimes fragmented, poorly coordinated, and even unintentionally harmful.

Authoritarianism is on the rise globally – with far-reaching consequences. More and more journalists are forced to leave their countries in order to continue their work. At the same time, states undergoing autocratisation – where once-democratic systems become increasingly authoritarian, or authoritarian regimes descend fully into autocracy – are extending their repressive tactics beyond their own borders.

The Global Forum for Media Development’s (GFMD) Mapping of media assistance and journalism support programmes in Asia, Pacific and Oceania region is a timely data-based analysis of media assistance in the Asia region between 2020-2024. It will be an important resource for stakeholders — donors, international NGOs, local civil society organisations, media, and journalists — to assess donor-based funding in the region.

In today’s independent media ecosystem, membership programs — distinct from traditional “subscriptions” — and grassroots fundraising campaigns are becoming increasingly relevant, particularly for nonprofit outlets. The logic behind these models is simple but powerful: if you cultivate a loyal, engaged, and appreciative community, you can invite them to support your work financially.

With the closure of USAID resulting in a 25 percent cut to the world’s media development budget, independent media outlets across the world have become more vulnerable to existential threats ranging from bombings to disinformation. It is vital that the rest of the world steps up to support journalists in these trying times.

Although physical attacks against journalists are the most visible violations of press freedom, economic pressure is also a major, more insidious problem. The economic indicator on the RSF World Press Freedom Index now stands at an unprecedented, critical low as its decline continued in 2025. As a result, the global state of press freedom is now classified as a “difficult situation” for the first time in the history of the Index.

This briefing paper “Navigating Instability” outlines an initial framework for responding to the challenges faced by exiled media, based on over 20 years of IMS support. With input from exiled media leaders, IMS’ Exiled Media Working Group has identified five key phases of transition and evolution that media in exile experience.

Report for the World and Columbia University (SIPA) have launched The Path to Impact: Insights from Global Majority Newsrooms, an impact report highlighting the global impact of local journalism in Asia, Africa, Europe, and South America.

This report “2024: Confronting Political Pressure, Disinformation, and the Erosion of Media Independence” identifies serious threats, including the digital surveillance of journalists and its risks to source confidentiality, the transnational repression of journalists—particularly from Russia and Belarus—and the trend of media capture by governments in some countries.