World Press Freedom Day in an age of quiet retreat
THOMAS NKHOMA | Monday April 20, 2026 06:00
But beyond that headline figure lies a more troubling pattern: a 63 percent surge in self-censorship among journalists, 48 percent increase in efforts by governments and powerful actors to control media and a sustained decline in academic and artistic freedom. These are not isolated indicators. They are signals of a world in which the space for independent thought, inquiry and expression is steadily narrowing.
This is the climate in which Botswana will commemorate World Press Freedom Day. Traditionally, the day has been one of reflection and recommitment - a reaffirmation that journalism remains central to democracy. Yet the global data forces a more difficult question: what does it mean to celebrate press freedom at a time when it is, in many respects, retreating? More importantly, where does Botswana stand within this trajectory?
At first glance, Botswana may appear insulated from the more extreme manifestations of this global decline. There are no widespread reports of journalists being killed, imprisoned or forced into exile. The country retains a reputation for democratic stability and institutional order. However, to read the global report only through the lens of extremes is to miss its deeper warning. Decline does not always begin with crisis. It often begins with subtle shifts - cultural, institutional and rhetorical - that gradually redefine the boundaries of what is possible. This is where Botswana must pay close attention. The report’s finding of a 63 percent increase in self-censorship is particularly instructive. Self-censorship is not imposed. It is internalised. It emerges in environments where the risks of speaking begin to outweigh the rewards. In Botswana, this risk is becoming more perceptible, not necessarily through overt repression but through a combination of structural changes and public narratives that place journalism under suspicion.
Recent developments within the Department of Broadcasting Services offer a telling example. The transfer of key personnel, particularly those associated with editorial independence, has raised concerns about the direction of state media. In my earlier reflections, such as ‘The Quiet Return of Media Capture in Botswana’, I argued that media capture in contemporary settings is rarely dramatic. It is incremental. It unfolds through administrative decisions that, over time, reshape institutional culture. The newsroom does not disappear. It adapts. And in adapting, it may lose some of its critical edge.
This dynamic is further complicated by the broader trend identified in the global report: a 48 percent increase in efforts to control media across newspapers, television, radio, and digital platforms. In Botswana, control does not always manifest as direct censorship. It takes more nuanced forms - editorial influence, strategic appointments, or policy directions that subtly recalibrate the boundaries of acceptable discourse.
Yet perhaps the most consequential shift has been rhetorical. When national leadership, such as the president, publicly characterises 90 percent of media output as fake news, it does more than critique journalistic standards. It delegitimises the institution itself. When the president describes journalists as unprofessional or driven by ‘brown envelope’ incentives, it reinforces a narrative that undermines their credibility in the eyes of the public. In an era where information already competes with misinformation, such statements carry significant weight. They shape perception. They influence behaviour. And, as the global report suggests, they contribute to an environment where self-censorship becomes rational.
This is particularly dangerous when viewed alongside the report’s findings on journalist safety. Between January 2022 and September 2025, 310 journalists were killed worldwide, with 162 of those deaths occurring in conflict zones. The year 2025 alone recorded 91 killings - the highest since 2018. Beyond physical violence, journalists increasingly face digital harassment, legal intimidation and forced displacement.
Botswana is not experiencing this level of violence. But the lesson is not that such outcomes are inevitable. It is that the conditions that precede them often begin in less visible ways. Hostility towards the media, once normalised, can evolve. What begins as rhetorical attack can translate into public hostility particularly on social media platforms where journalists become easy targets of coordinated abuse.
This is already evident in the local context. As noted in ‘A Climate Turning Hostile for Media in Botswana?’ the tone of engagement with the media is shifting. Journalists increasingly find themselves defending not just their stories but their legitimacy. The space for critical inquiry is narrowing, not through formal restriction but through a climate that discourages it.
The weakening of institutional safeguards compounds this vulnerability. Organisations such as the Botswana Editors Forum and Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Botswana Chapter have long served as anchors of professional solidarity and advocacy. When these bodies face pressure or diminished influence, the ecosystem that supports media freedom begins to erode. The global report underscores the importance of strong institutional checks and balances - robust legislatures, independent judiciaries and active civil society - as essential to protecting freedom of expression. Without these, the media operates in a vacuum, exposed and fragmented.
The economic dimension cannot be ignored either. As global advertising revenue increasingly concentrates within digital platforms, traditional media faces financial strain. In Botswana, this translates into constrained resources, reduced investigative capacity and increased vulnerability to both political and commercial influence. Economic fragility does not directly suppress journalism but it limits its ability to resist pressure.
Taken together, these trends point to a critical juncture. Botswana is not yet in crisis but it is not immune to the currents shaping the global media landscape. The warning from the World Trends Report is not that every country will experience the same outcomes but that the underlying dynamics - control, self-censorship, weakened institutions and hostile rhetoric - are widely shared.
World Press Freedom Day, therefore, must be more than a ceremonial observance. It must be a moment of introspection. A moment to ask whether the country is strengthening or weakening the conditions that allow journalism to thrive. Because the most dangerous assumption is that decline happens elsewhere. In reality, it often begins quietly, through decisions that seem routine, statements that seem rhetorical and changes that seem administrative. Until, over time, they amount to something more profound. A shift not just in the media landscape but in the very nature of public discourse. By then, the retreat may already be well underway.
*Thomas Thos Nkhoma is MISA-Botswana chairperson
As Botswana prepares to mark World Press Freedom Day, the real question is not how it will celebrate but what exactly it is celebrating and under what conditions, writes THOMAS THOS NKHOMA*