The recent international indicators have once again brought the question of media freedoms in Jordan to the global discussion table. Jordan ranked 132nd out of 180 countries in the 2024 Reporters Without Borders report, while the 2025 Freedom House report gave the Kingdom a score of 34 out of 100 on its general freedom index. On the surface, these figures seem part of a broader regional trend; however, in the Jordanian context, they carry a specific significance related to the nature of the state and its political identity.

Throughout its contemporary history, Jordan has distinguished itself as a distinct model in the region. It has never been a confrontational or bloody state in its dealings with opposing voices or journalists. Jordan was a relative exception in a turbulent neighborhood—a state that balanced the necessities of stability with the requirements of openness, treating the media as a space for discussion rather than an arena for confrontation.

However, recent years have revealed a widening gap between this political legacy and the emerging legislative environment. The laws regulating media work—most notably the 2023 Cybercrime Law—have introduced stringent punitive measures and fines reaching up to 20,000 JOD. This is coupled with broad legal terms such as "fake news" and "inciting strife," which are subject to wide interpretation.

The dilemma here is not only related to the possibility of judicial prosecution but also to the structural impact this legal environment leaves on the professional culture itself. Self-censorship moves a step forward, the margin for public criticism recedes, and public debate becomes more cautious and less bold. Amnesty International has noted that this climate pushes journalists to avoid tackling sensitive issues for fear of legal repercussions, which in turn affects the flow of information and the quality of dialogue regarding public policies.

In my view, Jordan does not lack the political capital required to correct this course. Its historical experience proves that security and the protection of freedom of expression are not contradictions, but rather two elements of the same equation. A balanced legislative review, consistent with international standards, can restore trust between the state and the media, transforming the regulation of the digital space into a tool for professional advancement rather than a means of restriction.

In a region that is still redefining the relationship between authority and society, Jordan has an opportunity to prove that true stability is not achieved by narrowing the public sphere, but by expanding it on responsible foundations. Press freedom is not a burden on the state; rather, it is a guarantee for it and a bridge of trust between the state, its citizens, and the world.