Western media coverage of the Iran–Israel–US conflict often functions as a weapon of war, using selective language that frames US and Israeli strikes as “self-defence” while depicting Iranian actions as "provocation". This linguistic framing normalises civilian casualties and helps manufacture public consent for military aggression by dehumanising certain populations.

In the past, having a detailed editorial plan was something extra that only some newsrooms did, but today it is a necessary part of surviving the non-stop news cycle. As newsrooms move away from old paper deadlines and into a digital world run by social media and search engines, having a clear plan is what keeps a team organised instead of stressed.

There has been a widening crackdown on the media in Ethiopia since war erupted between the central government and Tigray’s regional authorities in 2020, and the pressure appears set to intensify as the country prepares for general elections in June.

As political speeches framed the 2026 U.S.–Israeli attack on Iran, segments of Western media echoed their language and narratives, illustrating how strategic rhetoric and news framing can shape public opinion and legitimise military action.

In the following account, Amira Nassar presents a narrative filled with intricate detail, intimate exchanges, and an unyielding struggle over the meaning of writing amid slaughter and starvation. Part of The Journalism Review’s documentary project recording the testimonies of journalists in Palestine and the Gaza Strip during the ongoing genocide, it stands as a testament against oblivion and the machinery of extermination.

Does a journalist have the right to critique their own employer? It is a striking irony that they report on global crises while remaining silent about their own industry's fragility: stagnant wages, eroding professional values, and profit-driven ownership. Journalists must realize that confronting this internal rot is not just a right, but a necessity to save the profession from extinction.