Introduction

In the last decade, studies aiming to understand violence against journalists in Mexico have increased alongside the rise in the recurrence of attacks. While it is widely agreed that this is a multifactorial phenomenon (^{Brambila & Hughes, 2019}; ^{González & González, 2023}; ^{Márquez, 2023}), few academic studies simultaneously address and measure both the recurrence of attacks and the various types of aggression affecting journalists. Furthermore, there is a lack of studies that determine risk recurrence based on specific organizational characteristics of media outlets that may exacerbate the risk.

Violence against the press is often attributed to sociopolitical contexts, which tend to receive more attention. At the macro level, studies have shown that autocratic or hybrid regimes, particularly at the local level, create conditions that increase the risk for the exercise of free journalism (^{Asal et al., 2016}). Other factors include criminal rivalries (^{Holland & Rios, 2017}), weak States (^{Waisbord, 2007}), the prevalence of impunity (^{Ávila, 2017}), internal conflict, higher rates of human rights violations in subnational enclaves (^{Brambila, 2017}), populist leadership (^{Lugo Ocando & García, 2015}; ^{Mazzoleni, 2008}), and weak civil society organizations (^{González & Reyna, 2019}; ^{Salazar, 2022}). These factors have all been cited as causes of violence against journalists. At the micro level, it has been observed that journalists who are most at risk are those who work for multiple outlets, operate locally, and work under precarious conditions (^{Del Palacio, 2015}; ^{González & Cepeda, 2021}). A combination of sociopolitical factors and critical professional profiles are also predictors of recurring threats against the press (^{Hughes & Márquez, 2018}).

Thus, there seems to be consensus in the literature that regional journalists who work in precarious conditions, have unstable contracts, occupy lower positions in the organizational hierarchy, or cover sensitive topics are the most frequent victims of violence (^{Del Palacio, 2023}; ^{González, 2020}; ^{González de Bustamante & Relly, 2021}). However, while these journalists are often victims of the most extreme forms of violence, this profile has not been corroborated or comparatively analyzed across various forms of aggression. The incidence of attacks on journalists from local media outlets has not been systematically compared to the violence experienced by journalists from national outlets, especially in light of public stigmatization of national and international media during Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s administration (^{Signa_Lab, 2022}).

Although violence against journalists has become more complex, organizational factors -such as the reach of the media outlet, type of ownership, or the medium through which journalists report- require greater attention. Organizational conditions are crucial not only for enabling journalists to fulfill their roles more effectively but also for ensuring their safety and mitigating risks, especially in repressive environments where media support becomes essential for journalists’ well-being. However, the literature addressing media organizations’ characteristics often progresses independently from studies on violence against the press.

Mexico’s status as one of the most dangerous countries for practicing journalism, combined with a wide range of organizational conditions, justifies its selection as a case study. While murders are the most visible aspect of this risk environment (^{Slavtcheva-Petkova et al., 2023}), it is essential to consider the broad spectrum of attacks that threaten journalists’ safety. Some attacks are more closely related than others to specific organizational profiles. This research aims to identify the most frequent attacks journalists face in Mexico and analyze the impact of organizational conditions on exacerbating these risks.

Based on a representative survey of 443 Mexican journalists, we examine 18 types of attacks, including demeaning or hateful speech, public discrediting of work, questioning moral principles, threats, workplace harassment, surveillance or espionage, stalking, hacking, dissemination of personal information, identity theft, legal actions, office break-ins, sexual harassment or assault, coercion, physical attacks, arrests, family intimidation, and kidnapping. Statistical analyses were conducted to address the following research questions (RQs):

RQ1 What are the most frequent attacks on journalists in Mexico?

RQ2 Which organizational characteristics are statistically related to attacks on journalists in Mexico?

RQ3 Which organizational characteristics have the greatest impact on the different types of attacks considered?

Our findings indicate that organizational conditions -understood in this paper as the reach of the media outlet, the type of media platform for which the journalist works, the type of ownership of the media outlet, and the journalist’s position within the organizational hierarchy and decision-making processes- significantly impact journalists’ safety.

On the one hand, attacks aimed at journalists’ emotional well-being, such as hate speech or public stigmatization of their work, are the most recurrent nationwide. On the other hand, journalists facing the highest risks are those with significant decision-making power, predominantly in regional media outlets, and those who work across various media platforms. We also find that those working for community media are more exposed to specific attacks. Additionally, we demonstrate that some forms of violence are cross-cutting all organizational profiles, while other types are more targeted towards specific ones. This shows that violence manifests differently across organizational hierarchies, ownership types, and media reach.

This paper is structured as follows: first, we provide context on the approaches generated in the literature regarding violence against journalists, highlighting gaps and limitations. Next, we develop our research questions and present the survey methodology underpinning this article. In the subsequent section, we conduct statistical analyses to answer the research questions, and finally, we discuss the findings and present conclusions.

Attacks against journalists: a brief context

The majority of literature on risks and threats to the safety of journalists has focused on understanding the most extreme forms of violence, such as murders or physical attacks. However, this emphasis has overlooked the broad spectrum of everyday attacks that journalists face, which are less visible and often normalized as part of a profession inherently marked by risk (^{Mosdell, 2016}).

^{Slavtcheva-Petkova et al. (2023, p. 14)} present a classification of the different attacks affecting journalists’ safety, considering four dimensions of risk. The first is physical, encompassing elements that impact bodily integrity, such as beatings, arrests, kidnappings, and torture. The second is psychological, affecting mental and emotional well-being through intimidation, coercion, threats, dissemination of personal information, verbal abuse, and hate speech. The third dimension is digital, threatening digital self-determination and freedom in the online environment, including security breaches, hacking, and content blocking. Finally, the financial dimension refers to impacts on journalists’ professional livelihoods, including obstacles to job stability and conditionality of wages, among others.

Thus, the narrative that insecurity, impunity, and violence have made Mexico the most dangerous country for journalism helps to understand the most extreme form of violence -murders-, but does not necessarily address the other, more frequent, everyday attacks experienced differently by journalists depending on their organizational characteristics (^{Márquez, 2023}).

Research Questions

RQ1 What are the most frequent attacks on journalists in Mexico?

RQ2 Which organizational characteristics are statistically related to the various types of attacks against journalists in Mexico? Organizational characteristics include journalists’ rank, media reach, media platform, and media ownership.

RQ3 Which organizational characteristics have the greatest impact on the different types of attacks considered?

Methodology

The study was conducted collaboratively by a consortium of researchers who applied the international Worlds of Journalism survey in Mexico between November 2021 and November 2022. Adhering to the methodological guidelines established by the global consortium, the sample design and instrument were replicated in all participating countries.

Variables

Analysis strategy

To answer RQ1 regarding the frequency of attacks, a descriptive statistical analysis was conducted to identify the recurrence among respondents who reported experiencing frequent and very frequent attacks. Means and standard deviations were calculated for each of the 18 types of attacks considered.

To address RQ2, which examines the relationship between outlet’s organizational characteristics and attacks against journalists, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for each attack and independent variable, along with statistical significance testing.

Finally, to answer RQ3, concerning the magnitude of the impact of organizational characteristics, the effect sizes for each dependent variable were recorded and compared across independent variables to determine which variable contributed the most variance to each type of attack.

Findings

Associations between organizational characteristics and violence against journalists

Regarding RQ2, we found the following statistically significant associations between attacks and organizational characteristics.

Variations by journalist’s rank.

Decision-making power (rank) within an organization is one of the most influential variables differentiating violence against journalists. Results show that 12 attacks out of the 18 had statistically significant differences among journalists of different ranks. High-ranking journalists -those with strategic decision-making power- reported higher levels of recurrence for 12 types of attacks compared to mid-level journalists (operational decision-making power) and low-ranking journalists (no operational or strategic decision- making power).

The attack most strongly influenced by rank was hacking or blocking websites or social media, which exhibited the most statistically significant differences among all attacks and the highest effect size in the study (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.094). High-ranking journalists were disproportionately affected by this attack compared to their mid-and low-ranking counterparts.

Other attacks frequently affecting high-ranking journalists include stalking or persistent harassment (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.057), surveillance or espionage (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.045), legal actions stemming from journalistic work (p < 0.000, η^² = 0.036), direct threats or intimidation (p < 0.001, η² = 0.033), family intimidation (p < 0.000, η^² = 0.030), and name usurpation to manipulate news (p < 0.005, η^² = 0.027).

Less frequent but still statistically significant attacks against high-ranking journalists include insults or hate speech (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.022), public discrediting of their work (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.017), questioning of moral principles (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.016), dissemination of personal information (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.015), and coercion (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.014).

Although differences were not statistically significant across ranks, indications suggest that arrests and office break-ins may also affect high-ranking journalists more frequently. Conversely, workplace harassment and sexual harassment tend to affect mid-and low-ranking journalists predominantly.

Variations by outlet reach.

Journalists working for regional media reported the highest incidence of victimization compared to those working for local, national, or transnational media outlets.

The most significant attack affecting regional media journalists was name usurpation to manipulate news (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.060). Other statistically significant attacks, albeit with smaller effect sizes, included legal actions against journalists (p < 0.01, η^² = 0.038), surveillance or espionage (p < 0.01, η^² = 0.035), and direct threats or intimidation (p < 0.01, η^² = 0.035).

Additional attacks that disproportionately affected regional media journalists include hacking or blocking of websites (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.034), stalking or harassment (p < 0.05, η² = 0.031), coercion (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.031), other physical attacks (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.027), office break-ins or equipment confiscation (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.026), and dissemination of personal information (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.025).

These findings indicate that working for regional media amplifies nearly all types of risks, while journalists from national and transnational media are significantly less vulnerable. This corroborates existing literature on the heightened vulnerability of regional journalism in Mexico (^{Del Palacio, 2015}) and the lower prevalence of violence against the national press, even amidst rising hate speech and public stigmatization.

Variations by media platform.

The primary platform of transmission of the media outlet is less strongly associated with variations in attack recurrence, with significant relationships found for only four types of attacks: physical attacks (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.063), threats or intimidation (p < 0.001, η^² = 0.062), hacking (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.035), and arrests (p < 0.05, η^² = 0.037).

Source: The authors based on means, analysis of variance, and effect size (η^²) for the frequency of attacks (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Very Frequently) and the variable Journalist Rank: 1 = Low (no operational or strategic decision-making power), 2 = Medium (operational decision-making power), 3 = High (strategic decision-making power). Significance values: p ≤ 0.001, p ≤ 0.01, and p ≤ 0.05.

Figure 1 Significant associations between attacks and journalist rank 

Source: The authors based on means, analysis of variance, and effect size (η^²) for the frequency of attacks (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Very Frequently) and the variable Media reach of the primary outlet where the journalist works: 1 = Local, 2 = Regional, 3 = National, 4 = Transnational. Significance values: p ≤ 0.001, p ≤ 0.01, and p ≤ 0.05.

Figure 2 Significant associations between attacks and media reach 

Journalists working across multiple platforms were the most affected by physical attacks and threats. Arrests were more common among journalists working for social media outlets and news agencies than those from other outlets, while hacking disproportionately affects those working across multiple platforms. High standard deviations suggest that hacking cases are very particular but primarily impact journalists in multi-platform roles, followed by those working in social media. These findings highlight that precarious working conditions, such as employment across multiple platforms, may pose latent risks to journalists’ physical safety.

Variations in attacks by media ownership.

Findings indicate that the type of ownership of the primary media outlet where journalists work does not significantly influence the frequency of attacks. This suggests that attacks are cross-cutting and affect journalists in public, private, State-owned, and community media outlets alike. The only exception is hacking, which is significantly associated with community media (p ≤ 0.05, η^² = 0.024), highlighting the potential fragility of digital security in this type of media.

While no statistically significant differences were observed between private, public, and State-owned media outlets, indications suggest that community media are more vulnerable to stalking, threats and intimidation, sexual assault, and the dissemination of personal information.

Although not statistically different from their counterparts, journalists working for private outlets appear to be more prone to experiencing hate speech, public discrediting of their work, physical attacks, name usurpation, office break-ins or equipment confiscations, and coercion. Similarly, journalists in public outlets tend to face slightly higher levels of coercion and workplace harassment. Meanwhile, those who work for State-owned outlets are generally less likely to experience violence, except for surveillance or espionage, where they report slightly higher recurrence.

Combined effect sizes of organizational characteristics.

Regarding RQ3, which examines the effect size (η^²) of organizational characteristics on the likelihood of experiencing attacks, results show that the impact of organizational variables on violence against the press is not uniform. The higher the rank of the journalist, the greater the effect size on attacks such as website blocking and stalking, while outlet’s reach had the most decisive influence on the likelihood of regional journalists experiencing the use of bylines for fabricated or manipulated stories. Media platform (or multi-platform employment) had the largest effect size on threats and physical attacks, while community media ownership showed a strong effect on hacking and website blocking.

Source: The authors based on means, analysis of variance, and effect size (η^²) for attack frequency (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Very Frequently). This is linked to the survey question: “How would you describe the primary activity of your main employer or the media outlet where you work most extensively?” Categories include: 1 = Newspaper, 2 = Magazine, 3 = TV, 4 = Radio, 5 = News agency, 6 = Digital-native platform, 7 = Social media, 8 = Other (multimedia), 9 = Various media and platforms. Significance values: p ≤ 0.001, p ≤ 0.01, and p ≤ 0.05.

Figure 3 Significant associations between attacks and media platform 

Source: The authors based on means, analysis of variance, and effect size (η²) for attack frequency (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Very frequently). Ownership categories include: 1 = Private, 2 = Public, 3 = State-owned, 4 = Community, 5 = Other. Significance values: p ≤ 0.001, p ≤ 0.01, and p ≤ 0.05.

Figure 4 Significant associations between attacks and media ownership 

In terms of the comparative weight of organizational variables on specific attacks, hate speech and public discrediting were most influenced by regional media reach and high journalist rank. Surveillance, stalking, and hacking were determined by high rank, while coercion, legal actions, office break-ins, arrests, use of byline, and dissemination of personal data were more influenced by regional reach. Arrests, threats, kidnappings, and other physical attacks were more strongly affected by the media platform journalists worked for, which also had a greater influence than other variables on the likelihood of experiencing moral questioning, family intimidation, and sexual harassment. Workplace harassment was most strongly associated with specific media platforms and ownership types.

Discussion and research agenda

Amid the diversity of categorizations and conceptualizations of violence against the press in Mexico, this study has measured and compared the frequency with which journalists in various organizational contexts face a range of 18 types of attacks. One of the main findings is that the recurrence of violence against the press is neither generalized nor exempt from variations within specific organizational settings. Conceptual precision in distinguishing various types of attacks has allowed us to identify that assaults aimed at undermining journalists’ reputations -such as insults, public discrediting, and questioning- are the most frequent. These attacks are concentrated particularly among regional journalists and those in higher-ranking positions, who tend to have greater visibility or public recognition. On the other hand, attacks that threaten journalists’ physical integrity are less frequent but also tend to affect higher-ranking journalists.

This does not necessarily mean that violence primarily affects managerial levels in media organizations. Instead, the visibility of journalists who make strategic and operational decisions -even in small outlets without hierarchical editorial structures or those operating with very small teams- makes them targets for attacks. This finding nuances previous evidence suggesting that lower-ranking journalists are the most vulnerable. It highlights the importance of considering a journalist’s position within their organization and, more importantly, their level of decision-making power in determining their work agenda. It is also possible that journalists with greater decision-making power have normalized certain types of attacks as part of their profession.

Consistent with ^{Article 19 (2024)} reports, our study confirms that regional media journalists suffer the highest number of attacks. The national press remains a comparatively less risky environment for journalists, as it is the sector least affected by violence, even in cases of recurring attacks such as hate speech, questioning, or public stigmatization. Given that media reach is a decisive risk factor, studies on violence against journalists should incorporate analyses of local media systems, their normative principles, and working conditions to better explain the incidence of violence.

Regarding media type, we found that journalists working across multiple platforms are the most likely to be attacked, possibly due to precarious work arrangements. This aligns with findings from previous qualitative studies (^{Del Palacio, 2023}; ^{Rodelo, 2023}). Additionally, there are indications that television, digital media, news agencies, and social media may also be more exposed to targeted attacks. In contrast, newspapers and radio appear to be slightly less risky environments.

Finally, media ownership does not exert a decisive influence on violence against journalists, except for community media journalists, who are the most vulnerable to digital risks. Other types of attacks appear to be transversal to all organizational orientations, affecting journalists in private, public, and even, though to a lesser extent, State-owned media. Given the lack of statistical significance, future qualitative research should focus on studying specific forms of violence where journalists in public and State-owned media are slightly more affected to understand whether these types of organizations are genuinely less risky.

Space constraints have made it impossible to explore organizational factors simultaneously with individual or contextual factors. Future research agendas could work on better categorizing and defining different types of violence and modeling their predictive factors to achieve more precise diagnoses of the incidence and prevalence of risk.