Paris — Syria marked World Press Freedom Day on May 3 with what many observers describe as a historic, if fragile, shift: the country has climbed 36 places in the global press freedom index published by Reporters Without Borders, now ranking 141st out of 180, up from 177.
For a country long synonymous with repression under Hafez al-Assad and his son Bashar al-Assad, the change is striking. Syria was widely known as the “Kingdom of Silence”, where dissent was stifled and journalism tightly controlled.
“Back then, we knew exactly where we stood and when to stay silent. Personal safety came before everything — even the work itself,” said independent journalist Simaf Hassan. “After the regime fell in December 2024, it felt as though the door opened slightly. I can test the margins now, as a journalist and activist.”
Yet that opening, she added, remains tentative. “Voices are louder, and debates are happening that were once impossible. But deep down, we haven’t fully left the Kingdom of Silence. Its form has changed — sometimes into cautious or selective silence.”
A legacy of violence
Since the outbreak of the Syrian uprising in March 2011, hundreds of journalists have been killed while covering events across the country. According to the Syrian Journalists Association’s Press Freedoms Centre, 1,546 violations were recorded between 2011 and the end of 2024, including 478 killings. The Assad government was responsible for 327 of those deaths, while 62 were attributed to the so-called Islamic State.
Officials in the new administration have welcomed the improvement in rankings. Omar Haj Ahmad, director of press affairs and licensing at the Ministry of Information, described it as “a qualitative leap made possible by the combined efforts of independent journalists, media institutions and professional bodies, working alongside the ministry.”
But rights groups and reporters caution that the gains are fragile.
The “comparison trap”
There is broad agreement that media freedoms have expanded compared with the Assad years. Yet many warn against using that period as a benchmark.
“We must not fall into the trap of comparison,” said Bassam al-Ahmad, director of Syrians for Truth and Justice. “The former regime is not the standard by which freedoms should be measured.”
Instead, he argued, Syria should be judged against international minimum standards of freedom of expression — standards that are only partially met today, and not universally applied.
A report by the Syrian Journalists Association documented 11 violations against media workers in the first quarter of 2026 alone, involving multiple actors including government forces and Kurdish-led groups.
These incidents highlight what analysts describe as a structural gap between an expanded margin of freedom and the absence of robust legal and institutional protections.
A new media identity
The transformation is perhaps most visible in the relaunch of the state newspaper Al-Thawra in December 2025. Its new editorial line has broken with decades of rigid state messaging, publishing investigative and critical pieces — including articles addressing corruption and nepotism within government.
“We set out from the beginning to build a national media that bridges the gap between citizens and the state,” said editor-in-chief Nour al-Din al-Ismail. “It must reflect people’s concerns while also presenting government achievements — without ignoring its shortcomings.”
Such changes would have been unthinkable under the previous system, where, as investigative journalist Mohammed Basiki put it, “there was no media — only propaganda.”
Today, he said, “the fall of the regime created a major opportunity. International outlets have entered the country, shedding light on current conditions and ongoing violations.”
According to the Ministry of Information, more than 3,000 foreign journalists have entered Syria since 2024, with over 23,000 press permits issued. More than 30 international outlets have opened offices, while around 470 domestic media organisations have been licensed — more than were approved during the previous four decades combined.
Persistent red lines
Despite the changes, concerns remain about the emergence of new “red lines”.
Major events over the past year — including sectarian violence on the coast in March 2025 and deadly clashes in southern Syria later that summer — have tested the limits of permissible coverage.
“Can you criticise the findings of investigations into these घटनات as freely as you can complain about electricity shortages?” asked Mr al-Ahmad. “That is the real question.”
Journalists report that sensitive topics — particularly those involving security forces or ongoing abuses — remain difficult to cover fully. Some cite lingering fear, while others point to pressure and intimidation in the absence of strong legal protections.
“There is still discomfort, even fear, around personal freedoms,” said Malak al-Shanwani, editor of an independent media platform in Damascus. “It would be tragic if we gain one freedom only to lose another.”
The information barrier
Another key challenge is access to information. While the new government has expanded its media engagement through press offices and official channels, journalists say the flow of information remains limited and largely one-directional.
“There is still a barrier between journalists and state institutions,” said Mr Basiki. “Information is not flowing freely or reciprocally.”
He and others are calling for a law guaranteeing the right to access information — similar to legislation adopted in Jordan in 2007 — which they argue would represent a turning point for Syria’s emerging media landscape.
A fragile transition
For now, Syria’s media sector remains in what many describe as a testing phase — for journalists, society and the authorities alike.
“If freedoms remain just an unprotected margin, they can easily be rolled back,” said Ms Hassan. “What we need is for rights to be guaranteed, not granted.”
There is cautious optimism that Syria is not merely dismantling an old system, but beginning to construct a new culture — one in which the press can operate independently and reflect the diversity of society.
Whether that promise can be sustained, however, will depend less on comparisons with the past than on the country’s willingness to institutionalise the freedoms it has only just begun to reclaim.
