What Tommy Robinson’s conviction tells us about the cost to journalists reporting in the public interest

During the unrest that followed the 2024 Southport murders, British tabloid the Daily Mail reported on the activities of far-right activist Tommy Robinson. The story was covered by freelance reporter Andrew Young, and edited by the Mail’s own Jacob Dirnhuber.

On October 28, Robinson was convicted for threatening and harassing Young and Dirnhuber. A jury at Southwark Crown Court in London found Robinson guilty of two counts of harassment causing fear of violence, an offence with a maximum sentence of ten years. The judge will sentence him on December 16.

Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, hired private investigators to find the journalists’ home addresses. He messaged Dirnhuber saying “I’ll be knocking at your door”, and told Young by phone “I’m coming to get you”. He also posted images of Dirnhuber outside his home, and of Young’s family.

Before Robinson’s conviction, Young was given a close protection officer, while Dirnhuber was forced to move house.

Anyone is entitled to criticise the Daily Mail or challenge its reporting. In a democratic society, any member of the public must be free to challenge what journalists publish. But journalists must also be free to report without fearing threats of violence, whether online or in their homes.

In reality, threats to reporters’ homes and families, along with online abuse and physical intimidation, have become so pervasive that they are treated as part of the job in Britain and well beyond it.

Few of these cases end up in front of a jury, yet Robinson’s conviction shows that the law can respond. Prosecutors told an earlier hearing that none of the alleged harassment contained a direct threat of violence, and the jury still convicted.

Robinson’s victims had a national newspaper behind them, but many journalists have no such support. When threats make journalists or their editors think twice about a story, the public loses out, usually without ever knowing.

Read more: The enduring power of journalism in a world of more media and less freedom

A growing threat

The Robinson case is one among many, and around the world journalists are increasingly under threat for doing their jobs. The Committee to Protect Journalists found a record 129 journalists and media workers were killed in 2025, more than three-quarters of them in conflict settings.

Europe is not immune: hired killers murdered Daphne Caruana Galizia in Malta in 2017, and Ján Kuciak in Slovakia in 2018, both investigative journalists.

Most threats never come near that point, but they are very common. In a 2020 global survey by UNESCO and the International Center for Journalists, 73% of the women journalists who responded had experienced online attacks, and one in five reported being attacked or abused offline in connection with it.

In research commissioned by the UK government and published in July this year, 72% of the 531 journalists surveyed had experienced harassment, abuse, threats or legal intimidation. Among those affected, almost half said safety concerns had made them hesitate before reporting certain stories.

These figures should concern anyone who relies on journalists to uncover what those in power would prefer to keep quiet.

Read more: Four major threats to press freedom in the UK

The toll of online abuse

Online abuse is far more pervasive than physical violence, and it takes a heavy toll. Among those affected in the aforementioned UK government survey, 78% had faced online abuse, compared with 11% who had been physically attacked. Just over half said safety concerns had damaged their wellbeing, and almost one in four had considered leaving journalism.

Female journalists are at an increased risk of being targeted. In a 2026 UN Women study, nearly a quarter of female journalists and media workers surveyed had been diagnosed with or treated for anxiety or depression linked to online violence. Some 45% said they self-censored on social media to avoid abuse – a 50% increase on 2020 – and more than one in five self-censored in their day-to-day work.

My own research on abuse of women in Irish politics raises a related question about who can afford to stay visible in public life when doing so exposes them to threats.

Reporting the abuse often brings little relief. Only 17% of affected journalists in the UK government survey had gone to the police, and a little over one in four of those found it effective. Of those who reported to online platforms, just 5% found that route effective.

The Daily Mail deserves credit for standing by its journalists, but not every news organisation can afford to do the same, and many freelancers have no one to call. If reporters fear for their safety because of online or offline threats, stories will go untold, and those in power will face fewer questions. Democracy will suffer as a result, and we all lose out.

Tom Felle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.