Whatever the obstacles faced by the press in Ireland, they pale when compared to those encountered elsewhere in the world. In sheer numerical terms, 1999 was one of the worst on record. At least 71, and perhaps as many as 87, journalists were killed either in the course of, or because of, their work. This is the highest figure since 1994, when 115 died.

Many reasons contribute to these figures. Inexperience and unnecessary risk-taking in an increasingly competitive field are undoubtedly factors, but they are not the most significant.

Rather than being killed by mistake, journalists are increasingly being specifically targeted. This happens for various reasons: in the international sphere, for example, war-crimes tribunals have placed journalists in the position of becoming witnesses. Although this is not a duty they shirk, it makes their job increasingly perilous as those who commit atrocities now realise they need to silence all witnesses.

In many conflicts, journalists are seen to have a propaganda value and thus become military targets themselves. Last year, some 25 journalists and media workers died in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia alone. Sixteen of these were victims of the NATO bombing of the Radio Television Serbia building in Belgrade in April.

Ourtright war is not the only hazard for journalists. In Colombia last year seven journalists were murdered for asking the wrong questions - or, in the case of one cartoonist, caricaturing the wrong person. Organised criminals have in recent years killed journalists in the former Soviet Union, and last year one was probably shot at the behest of a rival.

All these deaths are the tip of an iceberg of physical assaults, jailings and disappearances that affect journalists every year. For every death recorded, there are numerous instances of intimidation and violence that are not listed.

A glance at the website of the International Federation of Journalists (www.ifj.org/hrights/protests/protests.html) gives idea of obstacles faced by the media around the world.

In March, more than 30 local and foreign journalists were detained during opposition demonstrations in the Belorussian capital of Minsk. In Brazil, the prefect of a province threatened the editor of a paper with death and two other journalists were tortured. In Swaziland, the Swazi Observer group of newspapers was closed after it refused to reveal a sources.

But it is not just the obvious cases of murder and imprisonment. Most of the new democracies, and even some of the older ones, have constitutions that guarantee freedom of expression and a free press. However, the reality is somewhat different. Defamation laws, tax laws and special statutes that forbid insulting top officials are used to ensure the new independent media is kept under control. In Belarus, for instance, newspapers are forced to be printed outside the country.

In Ukraine, newspaper editors have been fined thousands of dollars. The situation is the same in most former eastern bloc countries. You may ask yourself why this matters. In the short term, it doesn't. This kind of thing is, perhaps, to be expected in "fledgling democracies". The other way to look at it is that such abuses and attempts to control the media are often the first steps towards dictatorship and worse. A radio station, Radio Mille Collines, was central to the genocide in Rwanda, and in Yugoslavia it was Slobodan Milosevic's control of the media that made the war and his continued rule possible.