Few institutions are singled out in the U.S. Constitution. The press is one of them.

Given that the founders enshrined our industry in the First Amendment, you’d expect journalists to stand tall not just for our corner of the document, but for the full scope of what it protects. Instead, fear of appearing biased, a rigid devotion to both-sidesism, or a frog-in-boiling-water tolerance for anti-democratic behavior have pushed too many newsrooms into retreat.

I’ve lived it. At one newsroom, we were told not to encourage readers to vote on Election Day because it might be seen as “liberal bias.” Today, Press Forward research warns that even the word “democracy” risks alienating donors. Both examples are points on a continuum where the press slowly accepts a muzzle — one designed for both journalists and the public they serve.

Here’s the turn: These constraints aren’t neutral. They’re the product of sustained bad-faith pressure. And the more we internalize them, the more we drift from the role the Constitution actually imagines for us.

My prediction for 2026 is that newsrooms will finally snap out of this crouch. More journalists, local outlets, and independent creators will reclaim the basics: free and fair elections, voting rights, effective government, and public institutions that function. These aren’t partisan positions. They’re the minimum operating standards of a healthy society — and the press is at its strongest when it defends them out loud.