CPJ affirmed its definition of a journalist. Good. Now finish the job.

On 1 July, CPJ's board voted to affirm its definition of who is a journalist, anchored in international law, the first thing we asked for. It was the right call. It is not enough. Thank CPJ, and demand the rest: remove the chair who drove the change, appoint a Palestinian board member, and put the methodology under independent review. In one click.

Live tally

emails sent in this campaign · and counting

Support us. Each personalised letter to CPJ runs through our language model and our delivery provider, and both cost us money. Help us keep the pressure on until CPJ finishes the job.

Donate

Thank CPJ's board. Then demand it finishes the job.

Add your details below. We personalise and send, for you, a letter to CPJ's board, general and press inboxes: welcoming the affirmed definition, then pressing the three demands that remain. Read it first with View Email Template.

Your details

Review & send

Done

How this works

Enter your details below
Verify your email with a one-time code
We send the email on your behalf — done!

Have a NewsCord account? Sign in to autofill

First Name *

Last Name *

Email Address *

Address (optional — added to signature)

Recipients

⚖️

CPJ Board of Directors

[email protected]

📍

Committee to Protect Journalists (general inbox)

[email protected]

📰

CPJ Press desk (signals media scrutiny)

[email protected]

Email me if they respond, and about future NewsCord campaigns

Skip the review and send my complaint straight awayThis is ticked, so we file your complaint as soon as you verify your email. Untick it if you would rather read the finished wording and change anything first, before it goes out in your name.

We'll send a 6-digit code to verify your email before proceeding.

About this campaign

On 1 July 2026, the board of the Committee to Protect Journalists voted to affirm its existing definition of who is a journalist, anchored in international humanitarian law, a definition that includes journalists who work with media affiliated with an armed group. That was the right call, taken under real pressure. It is worth acknowledging.

It is not quite enough. Affirming the definition on paper does not undo the damage of reopening the question, and it does not prove the definition will be applied fairly from here. Three things still need to happen for CPJ to confirm its commitment to fairness and restore the trust this episode has cost.

We are asking CPJ’s board to remove Jacob Weisberg as chair, the chair who drove the move to reopen who counts as a journalist; appoint a Palestinian representative to the board; and have an independent international human rights lawyer, working alongside Palestinian representation, review the methodology and every contested removal against the definition CPJ has just affirmed, publish the basis for each, and reinstate any name not supported by clear evidence of direct participation in hostilities.