The hostility toward journalists on battlefields worldwide has roots in the chaotic and high-stakes nature of conflict zones, where combatants often view media as a threat to their objectives. Fighters, whether state-backed forces or non-state actors like insurgents, may perceive journalists as spies, propagandists, or tools of opposing powers, especially when their reporting exposes war crimes, human rights abuses, or tactical movements. In conflicts from Syria to Ukraine, journalists have been deliberately targeted—snipers in Aleppo have aimed at press vests, and drone strikes in Gaza have hit media convoys. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) documented 78 journalist deaths in 2024 alone, with over half classified as deliberate killings, often by combatants seeking to suppress narratives that undermine their cause or reveal their vulnerabilities. This hostility is fueled by a belief that controlling information is as critical as controlling territory.

The motivations behind targeting journalists vary by context but often stem from a mix of strategic calculation and ideological fervor. In authoritarian regimes or militia-controlled areas, fighters may kill journalists to silence dissent or prevent documentation of atrocities, as seen in cases like the 2018 execution of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, though not on a battlefield. Non-state groups like ISIS or Boko Haram have explicitly declared journalists as enemies, equating their reporting to warfare against their ideology. Even in democratic nations’ conflicts, such as U.S. operations in Iraq, “accidental” strikes on journalists—later revealed as targeted in some instances—suggest a desire to eliminate witnesses. X posts from conflict zones often amplify this sentiment, with fighters or their supporters openly calling for attacks on media to “cleanse” narratives, reflecting a broader cultural shift where truth-tellers are seen as combatants in an information war.

The consequences of this trend are profound, eroding the ability to report ground truths from war zones and endangering the public’s right to know. Journalists, often unarmed and marked by “PRESS” identifiers, face not just physical risks but psychological warfare, with threats extending to their families or colleagues. Legal protections, like the Geneva Conventions’ recognition of journalists as civilians, are routinely ignored, with only 7% of journalist killings since 1992 leading to convictions, according to CPJ. As battlefields become more fragmented and information warfare intensifies, the desire to kill journalists reflects a grim reality: controlling the story is worth more to some fighters than human lives. This chilling dynamic threatens to plunge conflicts into even greater opacity, leaving atrocities unexposed and perpetrators emboldened.