During the 1994 Rwandan genocide, some of the media betrayed its people. Radio-Television Libre des Mille Collines and the Kangura magazine both sponsored or run by hard-line Hutu party officials were at the forefront of hate media. Later, Rwanda’s media took to peace reporting in order to help the people unite and heal from the 1994 genocide effects. However, this seems to have had negative consequences for press freedom and freedom of expression as well as holding public officials accountable.

Germany has registered an increase in the inclusiveness of minority groups such as People with Disabilities (PWDs) and the Moslem community. This growth is as a result of a 2016 survey carried out by Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) that found that almost 88% of minority groups were not guaranteed access to airtime and there was no policy safeguard for such communities, except indigenous inhabitant minorities like the Sorbs, Danes and Romani people.

Journalists in Germany are under threat by the Network and Enforcement Act that limits free social media expression.

In Germany, Freedom of the press and expression is guaranteed and protected by the constitution. Article 5 of the Basic Law, states that “Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. There shall be no censorship.”

The digital surveillance in Germany has had a conceivably long-term impact on the media industry.

Journalists in Burundi are still faced with violence meted upon them by the state despite the change of government in 2020. Over the years, freedom of expression and the media has been restricted even to those who ought to practice it for the benefit of the people of Burundi. Burundi has faced a number of political challenges since it attained its independence in 1962.

Like in many African societies, Burundian women face numerous obstacles to development and active participation in public life.

Government’s hostility towards the media has forced many independent media houses in South Sudan to embrace self- censorship as a tool for safety. The government in South Sudan controls the media and this threatens the independence of journalists and media houses. The iron hand from the security poisoned the working environment for journalists in the country, feeding the public on unbalanced news including stories on government policies, as William Dhieu, head of the Communication Studies department at the University of Juba explains.

A South Sudan media expert has blamed the increasing number of journalists leaving the profession to the heightened threats and attacks that media personnel face at work.William Dhiue, a Journalism Lecturer at the University of Juba, said that several journalists now prefer to join other sectors rather than continue to work as journalists.“The journalists have migrated to either government offices as public relations officers or they have taken up humanitarian jobs as communication officers.

A South Sudan media expert has warned that the media ownership structure in South Sudan poses a major threat to press freedom in the country. William Dhieu, a Journalism Lecturer at the University of Juba, said that media ownership in South Sudan is dominated by former or active ruling party, Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM) members, who only toe party line views."The party or government member’s ownership of media makes them partisan and exclude other voices or opinions they do not agree with or support," D