How to keep the free media alive

As the world fixates on polarisation in major Western democracies, it’s easy to overlook that some of the most important battles for press freedom are being fought not in Washington, Brussels, or London — but in countries like Armenia, Georgia, Tunisia, and Moldova. Places where independent journalism is both more vital and more vulnerable.

The threats they face are quieter than jail cells or outright censorship. Instead, they come cloaked in bureaucracy: a vanished grant, a regulatory fine, a revoked license, or the sudden disappearance of advertising revenue.

During the 2024 Concordia Annual Summit, a panel titled “Media’s Critical Role in Preserving Democracy” brought this into focus. The discussion moved beyond traditional threats like authoritarian crackdowns and focused on the practical challenge of sustaining independent media in fragile states, where political and commercial pressures — and financial precarity — undermine even the bravest journalism.

Erosion of media freedom is often incremental. As one panelist put it, in Hungary, “it’s not the journalists who die, it’s journalism itself.” If newsrooms can’t pay reporters, keep the lights on, or resist political capture, their democratic function fades silently, without headlines.

This story is sadly familiar. The media is being targeted at an unprecedented rate in modern history, across all regions. Not just dictatorships but elected authoritarians are abusing power and deploying money to limit the ability of independent media to report instead of outright censoring them which would attract negative public attention. State advertising favors pro-government outlets, starving the rest. Government allies are acquiring once-independent newsrooms. Regulatory bodies restrict operations and the opposition voices are pushed to the margins. Other tactics include jailing journalists under vague terrorism charges or exiling them. Where some independent outlets remain, they operate under constant threat, with limited resources and subject to regular raids. Public access to objective reporting has eroded, damaging electoral fairness and trust.

In this global landscape, the stakes in smaller democracies like Armenia matter more than ever. Armenia, still reeling from conflict with Azerbaijan and facing geopolitical pressures, is considering an amendment to its media law. Depending on its final form, it could support pluralism — or open the door to repression under the guise of regulation. In such contexts, a single law can tip the balance between resilience and regression.

That’s why the conversations at Concordia matter. They remind us that press freedom isn’t just about avoiding censorship. It’s about building environments where journalism can survive. In young democracies, this means protecting newsrooms from insolvency as much as from jail.

There’s a clear pattern: countries with free media are more democratic, while those with captured or collapsing media fall into authoritarianism. The public cannot hold power to account if denied the truth. Yet independent journalism remains an afterthought for many governments and donors.

We need a new playbook.

• First, treat media as infrastructure worth investing in. That means sustainable funding — from philanthropic consortia and public subsidies with clear firewalls to hybrid models combining memberships and advertising. Reliance on fragile donor cycles keeps outlets on edge and weakens their independence.
• Second, international players — governments, NGOs, and media companies — must engage more strategically in smaller markets. Too often, they retreat under pressure or stay distant, ceding space to propaganda. When Western media pull out of countries like Iran, Venezuela, or Russia, the damage isn’t limited to their foreign correspondents. It leaves local journalists isolated — and autocrats emboldened.
• Third, civil society must build long-term trust with vulnerable communities. At Concordia, Estonia was cited as a success story: it created a Russian-language public news service to counter Kremlin disinformation. In Taiwan, independent fact-checkers earned credibility over years of community work, enabling them to push back effectively against Chinese interference during elections. These strategies succeed because they’re proactive, not reactive.

The problem isn’t just legal or political—it’s structural. Without reliable funding, journalism becomes a passion project rather than a profession. Even the most courageous reporters can’t do their jobs without resources. The result is a slow decay—first of the media, then of democracy itself.

The real question is not just how we report, but how we keep reporting — through political storms, economic crashes, and shifting regimes. Can fragile democracies create systems that protect the truth? Can donors treat journalism not as charity, but as an essential pillar of democracy?

We are past the point of rhetorical commitments. We need action and imagination. If we want to avoid a world where truth is a luxury and propaganda the norm, we must build systems that allow journalism not just to exist, but to endure.

Tatiana Der Avedissian is a communications and sustainability expert and advisor. She serves on the board of several non-profit organisations including The Armenia Project which she co-founded.