Other media monitors reported a range of detained journalists in February 2025, ranging from 40 to 60.9 However, each monitor’s list was different and all missed or excluded individuals that others included.10 Differences were due to challenges in establishing identities, credentials, and situations, caused by information blackouts and security concerns. There were also methodological differences. For example, some monitors excluded journalists regarded as “pro-military”. ICNL used international standards definitions and focused on crosscorroboration for verification. For example, the following table shows that for currently detained journalists, most cases were corroborated by three or more sources (94%), with slight differences depending on the stage of each individual’s case.11 Those cases with fewer sources were relatively new cases. Journalist Detentions Corroborated by 3+ Sources Corroborated by 3+ sources Not corroborated by 3+ sources Of 7 detained on unknown charges 86% 14% Of 3 detained on known charges 66% 33% Of 41 detained and serving sentences 98% Of 51 detained in total 94% 6% ‘‘ Most other media monitors reported fewer detained journalists in February 2025, ranging from 40 to 60. However, ICNL identified 51 detained journalists using international standards definitions and focused on crosscorroboration for verification. 9 The case database aggregated lists from eight NGOs and CSOs, five INGOs, and one intergovernmental organization. 10 Monitors used different in-house criteria and methodologies, and some used imprecise definitions. Reliance on professional judgment and personal networks were common. Some monitors relied heavily on other monitors without cross-corroboration. Security concerns and information blackouts meant research was very difficult. The inherent risk in these approaches was that individuals would be excluded or overlooked. 11 Journalists unassociated with specific media outlets, such as freelancers, stringers, or “citizen journalists” were harder to cross-corroborate, presumably because without an employer or colleagues they had fewer support networks. The label “citizen journalist” is used by some to describe journalists working inside Myanmar who were not journalists before the coup began, or who have not received significant formal journalism training, or who are not working under a formal contract to one media outlet. Assessing Detentions of Journalists in Myanmar, Feb. 2021 to Feb. 2025 6