By Olivia Mangold
Abstract: Journalists reporting on right-wing extremism are increasingly confronted with hostility, intimidation, and assault. This development endangers freedom of press and challenges fundamental democratic values. The qualitative study examines the evolution of right-wing extremist threats over the past five years and their implications for journalistic practice. It focuses on four journalists who reported in semi-structured interviews about repeated threats ranging from verbal abuse and legal intimidation to physical assaults. In response, the journalists developed various protective strategies, such as publishing anonymously, adapting their research methods, and exercising greater caution in topic selection. Despite their professional commitment to unbiased reporting, tendencies toward self-censorship and growing mistrust of state institutions became apparent. Thus, threats by right-wing extremists not only affect individuals but also structurally restrict press freedom. In order to counteract this, targeted protection measures, institutional support, and broader societal awareness are needed.
Reporting on right-wing extremist activities increasingly puts journalists at personal risks (cf. Reporters Without Borders 2024). While some previous studies have addressed the threat situation, little is known about the practical strategies journalists develop to cope with attacks and intimidation. This article investigates how threats from right-wing extremist actors in Germany have changed over the past five years and how they influence journalistic practice. The central question is which individual security strategies journalists employ to continue their work despite growing risks for their personal safety.
The analysis is based on qualitative interviews with journalists who regularly report on right-wing extremism. They provide insight into personal experiences with threats and describe the countermeasures taken in their daily work. The study thus offers an empirical contribution to the ongoing research on press freedom, showing how media professionals navigate the tension between threat and independent reporting.
Press freedom under pressure
Freedom of the press is a fundamental right in democratic countries. A free press guarantees media independence and is an essential prerequisite for democracy. The press promotes the process of opinion and will formation through the dissemination of information, the opportunity to share viewpoints and express opinions, and through participation in public debate (cf. Bundesverfassungsgericht 2000). However, the concept of a free press can only function if media professionals are able to report »freely, diversely, and independently« (Federal Government 2025).
Over the past five years, the number of attacks on media professionals in Germany has increased. According to Reporters Without Borders, there were 13 attacks on journalists and media outlets in 2019, compared to 103 in 2022 (cf. Reporters Without Borders 2020: 1, 2023: 3). In 2023, the number of attacks fell to 41, but »even if the numbers are declining, they remain comparatively high compared to the years before the pandemic« (Reporters Without Borders 2024: 4). Moreover, it is likely that significant number of cases go unreported due to missing complaints and witnesses, as well as a lack of investigations and court proceedings. In 2025, 89 attacks have been documented and verified so far, 21 of which stem from conspiracy theorist and right-wing extremist circles (cf. Reporters Without Borders 2025b: 4).
Rising violence against media professionals in Germany is closely linked to social developments in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and other crises have led to polarization and insecurity, which right-wing extremist groups have exploited (cf. deutschlandfunk.de 2023). According to the Verfassungsschutz [Office for the Protection of the Constitution], the number of right-wing extremists rose to 40,600 in 2023, 14,500 of whom are considered violent (cf. BMI 2024: 78). Studies indicate growing approval of right-wing extremist attitudes, especially among young people (cf. Zick et al. 2023: 71). Digital platforms such as Telegram have played a central role in this radicalization process, for example, in the case of the »Freie Sachsen« [Free Saxons], whose online community grew from 10,000 members to over 100,000 in 2021 (cf. deutschlandfunk.de 2021). Right-wing extremism is no longer confined to the fringes of society; it has become a challenge for society as a whole.
Method
The study is based on a qualitative interview design. Guided, synchronous interviews made it possible to gain insights into the work of journalists who report on right-wing extremism.
Four journalists were interviewed who work in different media contexts and regularly cover right-wing extremist actors. The small sample includes both freelance and staff journalists at the local and national level who have experienced direct threats as well as legal intimidation attempts. David Janzen is a freelance journalist focusing on right-wing extremism. For 30 years, he has reported on neo-Nazi structures and runs the platform dokurechts. His experience and the repeated threats against him make him an important interview partner for the study. Alexander Roth is a journalist and deputy head of the live desk at the Zeitungsverlag Waiblingen. He investigates right-wing extremism, Reichsbürger movements, and conspiracy ideologies and also reports on the threat assessment for local journalists. Through his own experiences with hostility and threats, he is particularly close to the issue. Anna Hunger is the editor-in-chief of the independent newspaper Kontext in Stuttgart. Her work focuses on right-wing populism and right-wing extremism, and for years she has faced legal attacks in the form of SLAPP lawsuits. Interview Partner 4 works as an editor in the central newsroom of the Rhein-Main publishing group, focusing on extremism, security, and justice. During his time as a local journalist, he reported critically on Querdenker protests and was subsequently personally threatened and stalked. To protect his anonymity, his name is not disclosed; instead, the designation Interview Partner 4 is used throughout.
The interviews were conducted between December 2024 and February 2025 using a thematically structured guide focusing on five thematic areas: (1) nature of the threats, (2) changes in the threat situation, (3) handling of threats, (4) role of institutions, and (5) effects on journalistic practice. The analysis followed the principles of qualitative content analysis according to Mayring (cf. Mayring 2022: 11).
Types of threats
The interviews explore what kinds of experiences journalists reporting on right-wing extremism have with violence or threats (physical or digital), the intensity of these threats, and their psychological impact.
All four respondents report incidents of physical violence and/or physical threats and intimidation attempts, particularly in the context of demonstrations or public events. It repeatedly emerges that the journalists or their colleagues have been deliberately harassed, filmed, or personally confronted during demonstrations. Janzen in particular emphasizes that this is a common practice among neo-Nazis and right-wing groups to hinder reporting. This form of intimidation at demonstrations can be inferred from almost all interviews.
David Janzen: »You really think three times about whether it’s too risky and whether you should go alone, which used to be possible. […] It’s become much more obvious. So of course, it’s a significant restriction on reporting on-site – it’s become more dangerous, and you can’t report as carefree as before.«
Direct physical attacks vary in severity. Janzen mentions scuffles at demonstrations, while Roth reports an incident where a colleague standing next to him was punched in the face. Interview Partner 4 describes an incident in which a conspiracy-minded offender aggressively attacked him during a court hearing in October 2023 and later stalked him in his private life. The defendant reportedly rushed toward him shouting that he should »get the hell out.« The perpetrator had allegedly harassed him for years, and this continued even after the court proceedings.
Subtle threats complete the pattern. Hunger notes that while she has not experienced direct physical attacks, she has regularly faced subtle forms of intimidation, such as being followed at public events or being targeted through legal intimidation tactics like SLAPP lawsuits. Such lawsuits are often successful due to a significant »power imbalance between plaintiff and defendant, high claims for damages, or large dispute sums« (Ver.di, n.d.).
In addition to physical violence and threats, the digital sphere plays a central role. Roth and Interview Partner 4 report facing hate and threats on social media. The most frequently used platform for exchange among right-wing actors is Telegram (cf. Heft 2024), followed by Twitter/X, YouTube, Facebook, Parler, and VKontakte (cf. Heft 2024). In right-wing Telegram groups, Roth and others are insulted regularly and even subjected to death threats.
Alexander Roth: »Then the threats started appearing in the comments, fantasising about killing people, or names being carved into bullets […].«
Misuse of personal data is another tactic to intimidate journalists. Interview Partner 4 and Roth report that their names circulate within the right-wing scene to publicly denounce them at demonstrations or online. Interview Partner 4 describes that one perpetrator found out his private address and threatened to »settle things« with him there. He also recounts repeated instances of late-night doorbell ringing at his home.
Interview Partner 4: »He confirmed it – he said he’d settle the score with me, and then he mentioned my private address – that’s where he said he’d do it.«
Janzen’s private address also became known among right-wing extremist actors, apparently leading to numerous attacks at his residence. Although he did not elaborate on this in the interview, other interviews with NDR, the Braunschweiger Zeitung, der rechte rand, and taz draw a clearer picture of the threats. Janzen has been subjected to massive threats from right-wing extremists for years, including death threats. In 2019, neo-Nazis left stickers at his front door with the words »We’ll kill you, Janzen!« (NDR 2023). After the murder of Hessian local politician Walter Lübcke in June 2019, a neo-Nazi publicly threatened on the internet: »Yesterday Walter, tomorrow Janzen« (Nick 2024). During a rally, Janzen was attacked, and the police classified him as a provocateur (Brandes 2019: 35). In 2020, his family received a rotting pig’s head by mail (cf. NDR 2023); three years later, his house was vandalized with the far-right code »1488,« a candle bearing his name was placed outside, and raw meat was left in his mailbox (NDR 2023; Speit 2023). The number 14 in the code refers to »the racist creed from the United States known as the ›Fourteen Words‹: ›We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children‹« (Konrad Adenauer Stiftung 2015). The number 88 stands for the eighth letter of the alphabet »H« as an abbreviation for the Nazi salute (cf. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung 2015). In 2020, Janzen was reportedly harassed by a neo-Nazi while pushing a stroller; the perpetrator threatened to stab him. After Janzen filed charges, he himself was accused of defamation, though the public prosecutor’s office dismissed the case (cf. Beifuss 2020).
All interviewees describe the severe psychological strain these threats put on them. Janzen, Roth, and Interview Partner 4 report that they constantly expect hostility in everyday life, while shopping, at events, or in private settings, leading to insecurity, anxiety, and reduced well-being. Janzen states that he no longer reports on certain topics because the threat level has become too high and the stress of attending right-wing demonstrations is unbearable. Such reactions are a major concern for Lutz Kinkel, director of the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (cf. deutschlandfunk.de 2023a): the threat situation is so severe that many journalists can no longer or no longer wish to report on-site. Security escorts are often too expensive for freelance journalists or even for media outlets (cf. deutschlandfunk.de 2023a).
Interview Partner 4 emphasizes the deep psychological consequences. For him, the most distressing aspect was not being taken seriously by all relevant authorities, a realization that had long-term psychological effects. He deliberately chose not to specify which institutions he meant.
The intensity of the threats varies among respondents. Janzen and Interview Partner 4 report years of hostility, at times extremely intense. Janzen describes a phase during which he was threatened almost daily for several months. Roth describes the threat situation as a gradual process, with hostilities building up over the years peaking in 2021. Interview Partner 4 recounts that he had been threatened for years before the courtroom escalation. Currently, he is no longer threatened by the offender, likely due to his relocation. Hunger has been dealing with a SLAPP lawsuit since 2018, which also financially endangered her newspaper. The legal battle was extremely time-consuming for her.
Changing of threat situation
The interviews reflect that the threat situation has significantly intensified for journalists reporting on right-wing extremism. Before 2019, direct threats did not occur often, and conflicts at demonstrations were rare.
David Janzen: »In the past, there was hardly any confrontation with the press during demonstrations. Neither I nor others were noticed; things remained relatively calm.«
In general, threats from the right-wing extremist scene were rarely incorporated into media coverage, and right-wing extremism was discussed less in society.
Anna Hunger: »When I started working as a journalist [2007, 2008], there was no thought of ›something might happen to you.‹ […]. Of course, right-wing extremists already existed, but it just wasn’t as widespread as it is today – it hadn’t yet reached the middle of society like it has now.«
From 2019 onward, the situation worsened, intensified by Pegida [explanation]and the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from Reporters Without Borders show an increasing number of attacks on journalists between 2019 and 2022 (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2024). Right-wing extremist actors became better organized, particularly through the rising use of platforms such as Telegram, where users became increasingly anonymous and radicalized.
Not only the quantity but also the intensity of attacks increased. Scuffles at demonstrations and threats extending into journalists’ private lives have become common, supplemented by legal intimidation increasingly used to prevent critical reporting. Although, according to respondents, the threat situation has recently eased slightly, right-wing extremism and hostility toward journalists persist. Janzen points to the ongoing defamation of the press as the »lying press«[Lügenpresse], »a common narrative, especially in right-wing populist and right-wing extremist circles,« as he says. State institutions often respond inadequately; many investigations are dropped, and protective measures are inconsistently implemented, according to interviewees. Hunger notes, however, that organizations such as the No-SLAPP Alliance have been established to support journalists facing legal attacks.
Overall, there has been a clear deterioration in working conditions for journalists covering right-wing extremism, driven by direct threats, legal intimidation, and the growing societal acceptance of right-wing attitudes (cf. Zick et al. 2023: 71).
Dealing with threats
The respondents distinguish between individual and collective strategies for coping with threats. All interviewees make threats public. Janzen documents attacks on social media to avoid being pushed into the role of a victim and to generate awareness. At the same time, he is considering relocating but emphasizes that everyone must handle such situations individually. After being threatened during the court hearing in October 2023, Interview Partner 4 decided to report the events in detail, even though he was aware that the perpetrator might subsequently obtain his private address. Roth gives talks about the attacks and no longer attends demonstrations alone. Hunger refuses interviews with right-wing extremists to avoid giving them a platform, a rule that applies to her entire editorial team.
Networking is seen as the central collective strategy, providing both security and psychological relief.
Alexander Roth: »In general, I think it’s psychologically important to know that you’re not alone – that there are others who experience similar things. You can talk about it, and sometimes it’s simply about being able to tell someone who understands […]. It’s a different kind of conversation […] when you’re talking to someone who’s been through it, too. And for that, it’s important […] to practice a bit of mental hygiene.«
Hunger emphasizes that in this particular field, strong professional networking transcends the usual competition between newsrooms. She considers cooperation with other journalists within an ›anti-threat network‹ to be helpful and positive. Within her own newsroom, mutual support is also common. At demonstrations, journalists deliberately seek contact with colleagues. Reader donations, legal aid funds, or offered security escorts offer additional support (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2023: 10).
Three respondents also stress the societal dimension. Janzen sees the media as the »fourth estate« and calls for closer cooperation between press associations, police, and the judiciary. He cites Correctiv as an example of public-interest journalism. Roth calls for greater political attention, and Interview Partner 4 wishes for increased awareness of the issue within newsrooms, associations, and authorities.
In summary, individual strategies focus primarily on self-protection, while collective strategies aim at solidarity, awareness-raising, and structural improvements.
The role of institutions
Institutions play a central role in protecting journalists. Almost all respondents report experiences with the police in connection with threats. A common criticism is the lack of police presence or intervention during demonstrations.
David Janzen: »I’ve repeatedly experienced verbal threats coming from within demonstrations, but the police didn’t notice. Even when you address them, they say, ›I didn’t hear that; come to the station tomorrow and file a complaint‹ – which is, of course, futile.«
Roth describes a situation where he was threatened for a prolonged period after a demonstration despite police presence.
Alexander Roth: »There are always a few situations that become tense […], where the police simply refuse to maintain a presence on the ground.«
At the same time, he stresses the importance of preventive contact and points to the value of having designated police contact persons. Interview Partner 4 reports positive experiences, saying that he felt taken seriously during the threats, though he adds that this only applied to his regional police force. While Janzen and Roth remain critical overall, Interview Partner 4 perceives an existing awareness within the police for the risks faced by journalists, though usually only as part of routine duties.
These assessments align with reports from Reporters Without Borders documenting insufficient protection at demonstrations (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2020: 5, 2021: 5, 2022: 5, 2023: , 2024b: 11, 2025: 10). In 2024, the police were reportedly absent in 25 out of 41 cases and failed to intervene in four additional cases despite being requested to do so (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2024: 11). In some instances, there were even assaults on media professionals by police officers themselves (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2024: 11). As early as 2021, German newspaper taz criticized inadequate knowledge of press freedom and an outdated code of conduct between police and media (Fromm/Ulrich 2021; Innenministerkonferenz 1993: 1). The German Press Council therefore published a draft for updated rules in 2020, but its implementation is still pending (Der Deutsche Presserat 2020: 1, 2021).
All respondents also report negative experiences with the judiciary. Janzen and Roth criticize lengthy processing times, frequent case dismissals, and a lack of consequences, even for known perpetrators. Roth attributes this to overburdened courts but nonetheless calls for stronger judicial prosecution, as attacks on journalists differ in motivation from those on private individuals – they represent a targeted attack on press freedom. Hunger, as mentioned, reports abusive SLAPP lawsuits. In contrast, Interview Partner 4 describes his case as being taken seriously: the perpetrator was sentenced to three months in prison without parole.
Organizations and associations are generally viewed positively. Janzen and Interview Partner 4 see the main problem not in state restrictions but in broader societal developments. Janzen refers to support from international organizations and press associations. Hunger cites the No-SLAPP Alliance (NOSLAPP.de 2024), which includes, among others, the transparency portal FragDenStaat; she also mentions the association Netzwerk Recherche. Reporters Without Borders mainly supports small media outlets and freelance journalists (cf. Reporter ohne Grenzen 2025a). A new EU directive is intended to better protect journalists from SLAPP lawsuits in the future (Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer 2024). Among other things, it provides for the early dismissal of unfounded claims, the obligation for plaintiffs to provide evidence, and compensation for affected parties. EU member states are required to transpose the directive into national law by May 2026 and to provide support services for affected individuals by then (Reporter ohne Grenzen 2025a: 4).
Overall, institutions emerge as a key issue for all respondents. While organizations are generally perceived as helpful supporters, experiences with the police and judiciary are mixed. The police are seen on the one hand as overburdened or insufficiently active, and on the other as valuable points of contact. The judiciary is perceived as too slow and ineffective by some, yet others commend it for consistent rulings.
Effects on journalistic practice
The following section outlines how journalistic practice has changed due to the increasing threats and attacks on journalists, and which strategies the interviewed journalists have developed in order to continue their reporting.
Security measures
For the respondents, the protection of personal data plays a central role. Janzen and Interview Partner 4 had their addresses blocked in the registration database to make their places of residence inaccessible. Interview Partner 4 has consistently maintained this security measure and immediately renewed it after relocating. Roth is very cautious with personal information on the internet and often has private deliveries sent to the editorial office. Janzen publishes sensitive investigations partially anonymously or refrains from publication entirely when the risk is too high. Hunger reports that her editorial team has all texts legally reviewed prior to publication in order to prevent attacks.
All interviewees have also adjusted their work methods during on-site reporting, particularly at demonstrations, emphasizing that they have become more cautious.
David Janzen: »Of course, one naturally becomes more cautious.«
Alexander Roth: »I’m definitely more cautious.«
Anna Hunger: »You look more closely, you research more carefully, I think.«
Interview Partner 4: »I’m generally more cautious.«
Janzen rarely attends rallies anymore, if he does go, he makes sure he is not alone, and leaves events early. Roth takes similar precautions and reports that some colleagues now hire security personnel. At the Kontext editorial office, there are clear guidelines stipulating that younger colleagues may only attend demonstrations when accompanied. The newsroom also deliberately refrains from interviewing AfD politicians. Several reports confirm that the AfD systematically excludes critical media and thereby restricts press freedom (cf. Media Freedom Rapid Response 2024: 30ff.).
An example of this occurred at the AfD Bavaria party conference in November 2024, where BR reporter Johannes Reichart was accompanied by security personnel at every step, even on his way to the restroom. He later described this as a »new dimension of the restriction of press freedom« (Joswig 2024), since he had also been forbidden from speaking with party members. According to article 6 §27(2) of the Assembly Act (Versammlungsgesetz), press representatives may not be excluded from public assemblies if they can identify themselves with a press card.
Self-censorship
Self-censorship is likely the most severe consequence of the threats journalists are facing. The respondents understand this as the avoidance of certain topics or the modification of their reporting out of fear of repercussions.
Janzen, Roth, Hunger, and Interview Partner 4 all emphasize that they have not fundamentally changed their choice of topics but have taken selective precautions: Janzen refrains from investigations related to biker or criminal structures and publishes some sensitive pieces anonymously; Hunger points to legal disputes that restrict her reporting; and Interview Partner 4 describes maintaining his approach to topics, though acknowledging it was an psychologically intensive process to do so.
Roth also reports that colleagues have reduced their work or stopped reporting altogether out of fear, actively limiting press freedom. In addition, economic factors – such as the threat of subscription cancellations – can influence editorial decisions.
Overall, all respondents reject self-censorship for themselves personally but are aware of the risks and try to complement their work with security measures.
Alexander Roth: »I continue as before. The criteria for why and how we report are not tied to threats, but to relevance. So conversely, I also don’t report on people threatening me every week, as a kind of retaliation […], but the question simply is: is this relevant to the public, and is what I am writing true?«
Their experiences show that threats can lead not only to individual constraints but also to structural consequences for press freedom. According to the agenda-setting approach, topics avoided out of fear may gradually disappear from public discourse (cf. Löffelholz/Rothenberger 2015: 419). This increases the risk that the propensity for violence among right-wing extremists will not be adequately reported (cf. Löffelholz/Rothenberger 2015: 428).
Conclusion
This study makes it clear that right-wing extremist threats in Germany not only affect journalists individually but also have structural implications for journalistic practice and freedom of the press. The qualitative analysis of the interviews reveals a wide range of threats, from subtle intimidation and digital hate campaigns to physical assaults. This leads to psychological strain, increased caution, and, in some cases, self-censorship among those affected.
The interviewed journalists have developed both individual and collective strategies to continue their work despite the threats. Personal protection measures, such as securing private data, adapting research methods, and exercising deliberate caution on site, ensure direct safety. Networking, solidarity within editorial teams, and support from organizations play a central role in coping with threats.
At the same time, experiences with police and judiciary demonstrate that protection provided by the institutions is often insufficient, while associations and civil society initiatives provide important support.
The effects on journalistic practice are profound. The constant threat leads to changes in topic selection, limitations in research, and increased use of digital security measures. Although direct self-censorship is largely rejected by the interviewees, it becomes evident that fear as well as risk assessment significantly influence journalistic work. In the medium and long term, this could result in the disappearence of socially relevant topics from public discourse, thereby endangering press freedom and democratic public life.
The findings underscore the need for targeted protection measures, institutional support, and heightened societal awareness. Only a combination of individual caution, collective networks, and proactive political and institutional action can sustainably secure the work of journalists reporting on right-wing extremism and strengthen press freedom.
This concerns both targeted protection measures for media professionals and the raising of public awareness of the issue. The present study contributes to the academic discussion of the threat situation faced by journalists in Germany and calls for the development of solutions to protect press freedom.
About the author
Olivia Mangold earned her Bachelor’s degree in Media Studies and Sociology at the University of Tübingen. The article is based on her bachelor’s thesis. She is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in Media Studies with a focus on Media Economics and Media Management at the University of Cologne.
References
Beifuss, Florian (2025): Es ist eine Zermürbungstaktik. In: taz.de, 15 May 2020. https://taz.de/Journalist-ueber-Drohungen-von-Rechten/!5683319/ (01 April 2025)
BMI (2024): Verfassungsschutzbericht 2023. In: verfassungsschutz.de, 18 June 2024. https://www.verfassungsschutz.de/SharedDocs/publikationen/DE/verfassungsschutzberichte/2024-06-18-verfassungsschutzbericht-2023.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=17 (30 October 2025)
Brandes, Toni (2019): »Wer gegen die Nazis kämpft, der kann sich auf den Staat überhaupt nicht verlassen.« Interview mit David Janzen. In: der rechte rand, (30)180, pp. 34f. https://www.der-rechte-rand.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/netz-180.pdf (10 March 2025)
Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer (2024): EU beschließt Anti-SLAPP-Richtlinie zum Schutz von Journalisten. In: brak.de, 01 April 2024. https://www.brak.de/newsroom/news/eu-beschliesst-anti-slapp-richtlinie-zum-schutz-von-journalisten/ (30 October 2025)
Bundesverfassungsgericht (2000): Bundesverfassungsgericht – Beschluss vom 22. August 2000. In: bundesverfassungsgericht.de, 22 September 2000. https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2000/08/rk20000822_1bvr007796.html (30 October 2025)
Der Deutsche Presserat (2020): Verhaltensgrundsätze für Medien und Polizei zur Vermeidung von Behinderungen bei der Durchführung polizeilicher Aufgaben und der freien Ausübung der Berichterstattung. In: presserat.de, 24 November 2020. https://www.presserat.de/files/presserat/dokumente/download/Verhaltensgrunds%C3%A4tze_MedienPolizei_Entwurf_24_11_2020.pdf (30 October 2025)
Der Deutsche Presserat (2021): Innnenminister müssen sich zu gemeinsamen Regeln für Polizei – und Medienarbeit bekennen. In: presserat.de, 14 March 2021. https://www.presserat.de/presse-nachrichten-details/innnenminister-m%C3%BCssen-sich-zu-gemeinsamen-regeln-f%C3%BCr-polizei-und-medienarbeit-bekennen.html (30 October 2025)
Deutschlandfunk (2021): Warum eskalieren die Corona-Proteste? In: deutschlandfunk.de, 29 December 2021. https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/corona-demonstrationen-und-gewalt-100.html (09 March 2025)
Deutschlandfunk (2023a): Lutz Kinkel. ECPMF: Pressefreiheit in Deutschland weiter unter Druck – größte Gefahr für Journalisten bei Demos. In: deutschlandfunk.de, 01 May 2023. https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/ecpmf-pressefreiheit-in-deutschland-weiter-unter-druck-groesste-gefahr-fuer-journalisten-bei-demos-100.html (11 March 2025)
Deutschlandfunk (2023b): Immer mehr Rechtsextreme in Deutschland. In: deutschlandfunk.de, 21 September 2023. https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/rechtsextremismus-mitte-studie-rechtsextrem-weltbild-100.html (09 March 2025)
Die Bundesregierung (2025): Demokratie braucht Meinungs – und Pressefreiheit. Die Bundesregierung informiert. https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/schwerpunkte-der-bundesregierung/75-jahre-grundgesetz/meinungs-und-pressefreiheit-2274858 (25 February 2025)
Fromm, Anne; Ulrich, Sarah: Pressefreiheit in Gefahr. Unter Druck. Gewalt gegen Journalist:innen hat massiv zugenommen. Vor allem auf Querdenker-Demos kommt es immer wieder zu Übergriffen. Woher rührt der Hass? In: taz. de, 27 March 2021. https://taz.de/Pressefreiheit-in-Gefahr/!5758599/ (12 March 2025)
Innenministerkonferenz (1993): Verhaltensgrundsätze für Presse/Rundfunk und Polizei zur Vermeidung von Behinderungen bei der Durchführung polizeilicher Aufgaben und der freien Ausübung der Berichterstattung. In: presserat.de, 26 November 1993.https://www.presserat.de/downloads.html?file=files/presserat/dokumente/download/Verhaltensgrundsaetze_Presse_Polizei.pdf (12 March 2025)
Joswig, Gareth (2024): AfD gegen freie Berichterstattung: Ihr Kampf. In: taz.de, 29 November 2024. https://taz.de/AfD-gegen-freie-Berichterstattung/!6049634/ (12 March 2025)
Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (2015): Rechtsextreme Codes. Extremismus. In: kas.de, 16 February 2025. https://www.kas.de/de/web/extremismus/rechtsextremismus/rechtsextreme-codes (10 March 2025)
Löffelholz, Martin; Rothenberger, Liane (2015): Handbuch Journalismustheorien. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. DOI 10.1007/978-3-531-18966-6_25
Mayring, Philipp (2022): Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse – Grundlagen und Techniken (13th ed.). Beltz Verlag: Weinheim Basel.
Media Freedom Rapid Response (2024): Mapping Media Freedom – Monitoring Report. https://www.mappingmediafreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/MR-2024-Final-Draft-Pages.pdf (12 March 2025)
NDR (2023): Haus eines Journalisten mit rechter Parole beschmiert. In: ndr.de, 29 March 2023. https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/braunschweig_harz_goettingen/Haus-eines-Journalisten-mit-rechter-Parole-beschmiert,braunschweig8150.html (10 March 2025)
Nick, Eva: So wehrt sich Braunschweiger Rechtsextremismus-Experte gegen Hass. In: Braunschweiger Zeitung, 11 June 2024. https://www.braunschweiger-zeitung.de/niedersachsen/braunschweig/article406201305/so-wehrt-sich-braunschweiger-rechtsextremismus-experte-gegen-hass.html (24 February 2025)
NOSLAPP.de (2024): Über das Projekt. NO SLAPP Anlaufstelle. In: noslapp.de. https://www.noslapp.de/ueber-das-projekt (12 March 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2020): Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2020 – Nahaufnahme Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/Ranglisten/Rangliste_2020/Nahaufnahme_Deutschland_2020_neu.pdf (03 February 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2021): Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2021 – Nahaufnahme Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/Ranglisten/Rangliste_2021/FINAL_Nahaufnahme_Deutschland_-_RSF.pdf (03 February 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2022): Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2022 – Nahaufnahme Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/Ranglisten/Rangliste_2022/RSF_Nahaufnahme_Deutschland_2022.pdf (03 February 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2023): Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2023 – Nahaufnahme Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/Ranglisten/Rangliste_2023/230510-Nahaufnahme_2023_korrigiert.pdf (03 February 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2024): Nahaufnahme 2024 – Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/RSF_Nahaufnahme_Deutschland_2024.pdf (03 April 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2025a): Nie mehr mundtot: Journalist*innen wirksam vor juristischer Einschüchterung schützen. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/meldung/2025/20250113_SLAPP-RL-Stellungnahme_Kurzfassung.pdf (12 March 2025)
Reporter ohne Grenzen (2025b): Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2025 – Nahaufnahme Deutschland. https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/fileadmin/Redaktion/Downloads/250331_Nahaufnahme_A5_Web_02.pdf (10 September 2025)
Speit, Andreas: Neonazis drohen Journalisten mit dem Tod: Und jetzt? In: taz.de, 06 April 2023. https://taz.de/Neonazis-drohen-Journalisten-mit-dem-Tod/!5923145/ (10 March 2025)
Thomas, Tanja; Heft, Annett (2024): Digitale Kommunikations – und Medienstrategien der Extremen Rechten im Vergleich. Ringvorlesung Rechtsextremismus – Erforschen und Entgegentreten. In: timms video, 04 December 2024. https://timms.uni-tuebingen.de:443/tp/UT_20241204_001_rvrechtsext_0001 (30 October 2025)
Ver.di. (o. J.): SLAPP – Einschüchterung durch Klagen | Medien, Journalismus und Film. In: verdi.de. https://medien.verdi.de/themen/slapp-einschuechterung-durch-klagen (24 February 2025)
Zick, Andreas; Küpper, Beate; Mokros, Nico; Achour, Sabine (2023) : Die distanzierte Mitte – Rechtsextreme und demokratiegefährdende Einstellungen in Deutschland 2022/23. Bonn: Verlag J.H.W. Dietz.
About this article
Copyright
This article is distributed under Creative Commons Atrribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). You are free to share and redistribute the material in any medium or format. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. You must however give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. More Information under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en.
Citation
Olivia Mangold: Attacks by the far right. The impact of right-wing extremist threats on journalistic practice in Germany. An interview study. In: Journalism Research, Vol. 8 (3-4), 2025, pp. 282-296. DOI: 10.1453/2569-152X-3-42025-15595-en
ISSN
2569-152X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1453/2569-152X-3-42025-15595-en
First published online
December 2025