Journalists working in the open information space are increasingly facing attacks that start with anonymous comments and end with account hacking or smear campaigns.
Technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) is the intersection of digital attacks and sexist biases. It increasingly affects their safety, reputation, and ability to work freely.
This text is about what these attacks look like today, why they are becoming more aggressive, and what can help journalists and editorial offices survive in this new online reality.
GenerativeAIacceleratesdigitalterror
International data confirms that online attacks against women journalists are becoming a global trend, and with the advent of generative AI, the scale of violence has increased dramatically. According to UNESCO research, nearly 75% of women journalists worldwide have experienced online violence, and one in four has received threats of physical violence or death. With the development of AI, these risks are becoming even more dangerous: deepfakes, doxing, and entire campaigns to humiliate or discredit are being created faster, more massively, and with almost no possibility of tracing the source.
UNESCO emphasizes that digital attacks rarely remain confined to the internet. According to the organization’s field research, 14% of women journalists in various countries have experienced real physical violence related to online threats. In Zimbabwe, 63% of women journalists surveyed reported TFGBV, including hate speech and image abuse, with doxing—the publication of private data—remaining one of the most common forms.
On a global scale, the problem goes far beyond the profession: 58% of young women and girls worldwide have experienced online harassment. And when a woman journalist is attacked, it is not only a blow to a specific person, but also an attempt to silence entire communities of women, to diminish their presence and voice in the media space.
UNESCO warns that a new wave of AI-facilitated violence poses a serious threat to freedom of speech. Today, the issue of women journalists’ safety is directly linked to the issue of the safety of a democratic society.
The reality of online violence against Ukrainian women journalists
Ukrainian statistics also show that online violence against Ukrainian women journalists is systematic and widespread. According to a study by the non-governmental organization Women in Media, 81% of women journalists surveyed had experienced digital attacks. For many, these attacks lasted more than a day—some waves stretched out over months or even years, affecting both the journalists themselves and the editorial offices where they work.
The consequences range from deterioration of mental health to self-censorship: women refuse to cover topics that could provoke new attacks. Only 64% of respondents immediately recognized that they had experienced violence, and 14% reported that online threats had spilled over into real life, ranging from harassment to leaks of personal data.
The most common forms of attacks were sexist insults and smear campaigns. Female journalists were called names, labeled as “pro-Russian,” and had fabricated stories spread about them. Trolling (32%), disinformation (27%), cyberstalking (22%), doxing (18%), threats of sexual violence (16%), impersonation (14%), attacks on family members (14%), image distortion (12%), and sexting (6%).
Despite the scale of the problem, only 19% of victims contacted the police—most did not expect an effective investigation. Instead, women rely on the support of colleagues, the help of human rights organizations, and internal solidarity within the professional community.
The survey was conducted in August 2024 among 180 women journalists, editors, and media managers—it was the first attempt to systematically record their experiences.
When working in the media becomes risky
Why does this digital storm hit female journalists so hard? Because the media is an arena where women not only work with news stories, but often become symbols of change that irritate patriarchal structures. Women journalists, presenters, and bloggers, especially those who cover topics related to feminism, politics, or human rights, are 27 times more likely to face online harassment than male media professionals. This is no coincidence: TFGBV is not just “trolling.” It exploits gender stereotypes to silence women. An estimated 73% of women journalists have experienced online violence, including death threats, and 50% of these cases are gender-based. In Latin America, this figure reaches 91%, and in the Middle East, it is as high as 98%. Here, TFGBV becomes a weapon that not only attacks professional reputation but also destroys personal lives, further emphasizing gender inequality in the digital space.
To understand why TFGBV has emerged, we need to look at the social and cultural causes. Sexualization makes women’s bodies objects of manipulation, and stigma makes women feel guilty. For example, most deepfake porn on the internet shows women without their consent, and the algorithms for this are often created by men. For women journalists, this is not an abstraction: in Pakistan, fake photos have led to “honor killings,” and in Ethiopia, to beatings after being outed on TikTok. Sexualization is reinforced by cultural stigma: victims of TFGBV are often accused of “provocation” — as if to say, “it’s your own fault for posting the photo.” According to a global survey, 57% of women have experienced image-based sexual abuse, and 58% have experienced coordinated smear campaigns and online misogyny.
These factors are intertwined with patriarchal norms: online violence legitimizes offline aggression, making women “easy targets.” For example, in Arab countries, 53% of women experience physical attacks caused by online harassment because stigma blocks support from family or society. For women in the media, this is a double blow, as their visibility is both a strength and a curse. They do not simply report, but occupy a certain space, which is perceived as a challenge. The result is not just insults, but the systematic displacement of women from the public sphere, where their voices could change the established patriarchal narrative.
It is noteworthy that legal and institutional protection mechanisms often lag behind. Many countries do not have specific laws or policies that adequately respond to digital gender-based violence, and platforms are quite slow to moderate complaints. As a result, women may feel that their protection is limited and that aggressors are almost immune from punishment. This is structural injustice: a systemic barrier that women face even after seeking help.
The psychological pressure caused by constant online attacks is serious. Female journalists may experience anxiety, fear, and exhaustion. Such stressful conditions affect their productivity, motivation, and overall well-being. In some cases, this leads to self-censorship—media professionals end up avoiding topics that could provoke new attacks, even if these topics are socially important.
The career consequences are also significant. Gender-motivated online attacks can discredit a journalist: aggressors spread misinformation and use deepfakes to undermine her reputation. This can affect the trust of the audience and colleagues and, in the worst case, opportunities for professional growth and participation in important projects.
Social isolation is another consequence. Women can be “driven out” of professional networks through aggressive pressure: through hate, trolls, or coordinated mass attacks. They lose their sense of a safe community, even among colleagues, and this hinders their ability to share experiences or even ask for support.
Beyond individual harm, TFGBV has systemic consequences. When female journalists are silenced or self-censor out of fear, it undermines media pluralism. Fewer female voices means less diversity of perspectives, especially on issues related to human rights, gender equality, and social issues.
Finally, it is a matter of freedom of speech. Gender-based cyber violence not only threatens individual women, but also becomes a tool to reduce their influence in the public sphere. As long as women in the media face such pressure, there can be no real freedom of speech or equality in journalism.
First steps for protection and personal safety
Online attacks always take you by surprise. In most cases, journalists have to respond on several levels at once—technically, emotionally, and professionally. That is why it is important to have a clear algorithm of actions that will help you stay calm and protect yourself in time. The Ukrainian Feminist Network for Freedom and Democracy researched materials from media organizations—Texty.org.ua, the ZMINA Human Rights Center, and the Institute of Mass Information—and compiled advice on how journalists can best respond to digital violence against them.
So, the first step is to record everything that is happening. Screenshots, links, dates, profile names, messages—any information may be needed as evidence. It is important not only to take a screenshot, but also to save the original link, as it confirms where and when the harmful content appeared. If possible, it is also worth downloading a copy of the page or correspondence – this helps to preserve technical metadata that may disappear after the post is deleted or the account is blocked.
In response to threats or harassment, do not engage in dialogue with the offenders. Instead, immediately notify the editorial office. The team needs to understand what is happening: this allows them to quickly involve lawyers, technical specialists, security consultants, or at least provide support within the team.
At the same time, technical security should be checked. This is the moment when passwords should be changed—everywhere and immediately. For work and personal accounts, it is worth using different email addresses, unique combinations, and password managers. Two-factor authentication is a must: it significantly complicates unauthorized access even when the password is already known. Backups of materials, source contacts, work chats—all of this should be stored in more than one place. Cyber violence often involves hacking accounts and deleting data.
Deepfakes are a separate type of threat. If a fake video or image appears, it is important to record the first minutes of its appearance: download it and save the link, take a screenshot of the page of the person who published it, and track how it spreads. Next, inform the editorial office and lawyers. Many platforms have separate procedures for reporting fake content, and the sooner the complaint is filed, the less likely it is to get widespread publicity. In complex cases, technical experts may be needed to confirm that the content is fake. This helps both in internal communication between the media and the audience and in legal proceedings.
During an attack, it is easy to forget about yourself and your condition, but the psychological dimension is no less important than technical security. Online violence is a truly traumatic event, and reactions to it can vary from anxiety and insomnia to apathy or a sharp decline in performance. Therefore, it is worth allowing yourself to seek help. Some newsrooms offer psychological support, while others have the option of bringing in outside specialists.
It is also important to talk honestly with your manager about a possible break or rotation. Temporarily stepping back from the “front line” is normal practice. Working in the media involves constant stress, but when a targeted attack is added to this, resources are depleted much faster. A short break or a change of topic can be a real tool for maintaining health and performance.
Finally, it is good to have a pre-prepared “support plan”: contacts of lawyers, technical specialists, colleagues who can back you up, safety instructions, and a clear understanding of who to turn to in the first few minutes. This reduces panic and helps you feel in control of the situation.
In general, responding to online violence is not a matter of willpower or “stress resistance.” It is a set of skills that can be learned and used whenever a threat arises. And most importantly, do not remain alone: editorial offices, professional organizations, and colleagues exist precisely to support people who find themselves under attack.
How can an editorial office protect a journalist during digital violence?
Meanwhile, the organization Women in Media has created a guide on how editorial offices should respond in the first 24 hours after an online attack on a journalist. This is the time when the situation can either be stabilized or, conversely, allowed to escalate, leaving the person alone with the threat. The document is based on recommendations from UNESCO (The Chilling Effect), the Coalition Against Online Violence, PEN America, the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, and the IWMF, adapting international practices to the Ukrainian context.
The guide begins with the basic but critically important step of acknowledging the attack and letting the journalist know that she is not alone. In the first few minutes, the victim needs a signal of support—a quick call or message confirming that the editorial office knows what happened and is ready to help. At this point, it is important to avoid phrases that could devalue the experience (such as “it’s okay”). Instead, clear and supportive words are needed: the editorial office is there for her, the journalist is not to blame, and the responsibility for responding does not lie with her alone.
The next step is to assess the level of threat. The guide offers specific criteria: does the attack involve elements of defamation, coordinated trolling, account hacking, doxing, threats of sexual or physical violence, gendered misinformation, or revenge porn, including fake intimate images created by artificial intelligence? If at least one of these signs is present, the risk is considered high, and the editorial office should immediately involve the cyber police, lawyers, and psychologists.
In the first few hours, basic cyber protection must also be ensured. This includes changing passwords, activating two-factor authentication, checking devices, and installing VPNs and antivirus software. If the editorial office does not have in-house specialists, the guide offers three reliable sources of assistance: the Nadiyno.org digital security hotline, Access Now consultations, and support from the Digital Security Lab. All of these services can assess the incident, check for signs of a breach, set up protection, and help minimize the risk of a repeat attack.
A separate section is devoted to psychological support. The guide emphasizes that a journalist may want to temporarily change their work format, take a break, or switch from a sensitive topic—and the editorial office must respect this decision.
The list of available resources includes consultations from the NGO Women in Media, the Support4Media program, up to ten free sessions from Reporters Without Borders, and the 24/7 People in Need hotline. The editorial office’s task is not to demand that the journalist “hang in there,” but to create conditions in which she can recover her resources.
An important step is documenting the attack. The editorial office should help collect screenshots and links, record the time and accounts involved in the harassment. These materials are needed for legal assessment, appeals to law enforcement, and competent communication with the public. The guide also recommends using an interactive map of online attacks—it helps to systematize cases and see the broader context of threats.
Legal support is another key element. A media lawyer can determine whether threats fall under criminal or administrative liability and advise whether to contact the police, media regulator, or respond publicly. The list of contacts includes the Human Rights Platform, IRRP, and the hotline of the Institute of Mass Information. Importantly, the guide encourages the editorial office to take some responsibility: if necessary, the statement should not be made by the journalist alone.
The question of a public response by the editorial office always requires careful consideration. On the one hand, a statement can stop the wave of hatred, show solidarity, and protect reputation. On the other hand, it can increase the visibility of the attack and cause additional pressure. Therefore, the editorial office should act only with the full consent of the victim and taking into account her emotional state.
In addition, the editorial office should inform the entire team about the response policy. A short internal letter explaining the situation and the algorithm of actions reduces tension, strengthens trust, and demonstrates that an attack on one journalist is an attack on the entire editorial office.
The guide also contains a section on what not to do. Do not downplay the threat, demand an immediate public comment, ask the journalist to “get over it and get back to work,” or keep the incident quiet within the team. All of this exacerbates the trauma and undermines team support.
Legal gaps
Digital violence against female journalists in Ukraine often encounters legal loopholes, as most forms of abuse, such as doxing, deepfakes, or cyberstalking, are not specifically criminalized in legislation.
Marta Pavlyshyn, a lawyer and program manager at the JurFem: Education Center, explains that only last year did Article 173.7 appear in the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, which provides for liability for sexual harassment through electronic communications. According to her, cyberstalking, doxing, or deepfakes are not specifically identified as grounds for liability.
She also notes that in most cases, it is only possible to hold the offender liable if their actions constitute another offense, such as invasion of privacy or fraud.
“If there is no other offense, victims can use civil litigation tools—go to court to protect their rights or resolve the issue through the platforms where the information was disseminated,” she says.
The lawyer advises recording as much evidence as possible: screenshots of posts and correspondence, eyewitness testimony, and psychological assessments that can confirm the negative impact of online attacks on the woman’s condition.
Cyberviolence simultaneously undermines the safety, reputation, and mental stability of women journalists and thus affects the quality of journalism as a whole. Countering it requires comprehensive solutions: technical, legal, ethical, and cultural. Without this, the media environment will remain vulnerable. That is why editorial offices should implement clear response protocols and security policies; professional organizations should expand training and support; and technology platforms should respond more quickly and effectively. And journalists should speak out about attacks, document them, and not remain alone. Joint action is the only way to reduce harm and restore a space where the media can work without fear.
Author: Yana Radchenko