Powerful figures are increasingly suing media outlets before a story is even published, the editor of the Wall Street Journal said.
Emma Tucker, whose outlet is being sued by Donald Trump over its coverage of his ties to the late child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, said the act of reporting itself is now under threat from the use of lawfare.
She explained that suing newspapers prior to publication has become an established PR tactic for the powerful amid growing distrust of mainstream media.
“One of the biggest challenges we face now isn’t so much what happens after a story runs,” Tucker told the Truth Tellers journalism summit. “It’s what happens before you even publish. That is a massive challenge for us.
“Increasingly, before you even reach publication, lawsuits come raining down – a torrent of legal letters lands in your inbox. Deep‑pocketed individuals are doing this as a PR strategy, because then other journalists write pieces like ‘look, so‑and‑so is suing the Wall Street Journal for some reporting they’re doing’.”
She added: “The Trump story about his alleged letter to Epstein epitomised how difficult and expensive these investigations can be. At least the defamation claim came after we’d published. These days, we’re increasingly getting legally challenged before we even get to publication.”
Tucker spoke on a panel about the rising pressure on investigative journalism that spans both authoritarian and democratic states.
The World Press Freedom Index, compiled by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), placed more than half of all countries in the “difficult” or “very serious” press‑freedom categories for the first time.
It found that while in 2002 a fifth of the global population lived in a country where press freedom was rated “good”, that figure has now fallen to less than 1% of the world’s population.
Patrick Radden Keefe, the investigative journalist who exposed the Sackler family’s role in the US opioid crisis, told the summit that there is now tension over reporting on Trump’s White House.
Radden Keefe said the administration is challenging objective truth but is also “good for business” for media organisations.
He pointed to the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, which he described as having become a “kind of a parody” – journalists denounce it while insisting they must attend.
“Part of what we should acknowledge is that Trump has, in some respects, been very good for business. Enterprises that rely on clicks and subscriptions have found that the Trump administration makes great copy,” he said.
media
