Sign up for The Media Today, CJR’s daily newsletter.

During his first term, Donald Trump cast journalists as unreliable (“fake news”) and treacherous (“the enemy of the people”). In his second, he has equated members of the media with terrorists. After Charlie Kirk, the right-wing activist and media star, was shot and killed, Trump condemned the rhetoric of the “radical left” and vowed to go after “those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it.” He didn’t mention the press explicitly—and yet it’s clear the administration views some news organizations as part of that complex. This new rhetorical framing, which is spreading online, poses a heightened challenge for journalists and media outlets.

The rhetorical escalation is happening amid a growing risk of targeted violence. In the days after Kirk’s death, there were two attacks on newsrooms: On September 12, an incendiary device was found under a news truck belonging to the local Fox affiliate in Salt Lake City. Two suspects are under arrest. On September 19, a day after a public rally in support of Jimmy Kimmel, at least three shots were fired into the offices of the ABC affiliate in Sacramento. A single suspect was arrested. The motives in these cases are not yet known. But security experts at several news organizations told me they are increasingly concerned about the risk of physical harm. Last week, at an event in New York, A.G. Sulzberger, the publisher of the Times, declared, “We spend nearly ten times more today than we did a decade ago to protect the safety, security, and legal rights of our journalists.”

Protests pose a particular area of concern, as they have become more difficult and dangerous to cover. The most recent example is from Los Angeles, where over the summer dozens of journalists were arrested, detained, or struck by law enforcement while covering demonstrations against Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Because the Trump administration has now normalized the deployment of the National Guard, it’s likely that if large-scale demonstrations break out, military personnel, who are largely untrained for policing and crowd control, will be in the mix.

It appears the media onslaught is upon us, especially when one takes into account the mounting legal and regulatory attacks. Individual reporters and news organizations in the United States need to take that seriously and to engage in the same kind of risk assessment that those in other backsliding democracies have managed to use effectively. Here are five suggestions for how to confront the likeliest, most imminent challenges based on conversations with media leaders and safety experts, and informed by my own experience.

Carry out your own organization-wide risk assessment: There has been a clear shift in the general political environment, but any given outlet’s actual level of risk will depend in good measure on its specific identity and profile. The risk to a Fox News reporter covering an alt-right rally will be different from that of a Times reporter. The risk to a Latino journalist covering ICE will be different from that of someone who presents as white. A risk assessment should not be a box-ticking bureaucratic exercise. In its simplest form, a risk assessment can be a structured conversation between editors and reporters about how to adapt to changing circumstances.

**Create a basic safety infrastructure:**The budget increase to which Sulzberger referred has gone toward doubling the number of staff dedicated to physical and digital security and establishing a team in the legal department on call to support journalists. Other funds have been set aside for training, mental health support, and, as a Times spokesperson told me, “We’ve hardened our physical offices to add layers of protection and strengthen our digital security.” Of course, most news organizations, in particular local and nonprofit outlets, don’t have those kinds of resources. There are, however, many safety strategies that can be employed at little or no cost. Start by appointing a safety lead within your organization. This could be an editor or a senior reporter who serves as a resource, helps less experienced reporters craft a safety plan, and stays on top of the shifting risk environment. This person can help smaller news organizations strengthen their networks and contacts in the media safety community. This is also a good moment to make sure your offices are appropriately secure. Often the most important safety measure to consider is to simply remove public signage or take down the street address from your website.

Be prepared to cover dangerous protests: This is especially important for local and nonprofit news organizations with fewer resources. Protests can erupt suddenly. If the National Guard is deployed, they can escalate in dangerous ways. Now is a good time to develop check-in procedures, implement protocols (for example, work in pairs), and invest in personal protective equipment, such as helmets and respirators (they are not expensive). If you have the resources, consider a daylong training for your staff. Make sure your reporters know what to do if arrested and that your organization has access to lawyers.

**Prepare for online harassment:**Online harassment cannot be prevented and has, unfortunately, become a normal part of life for many journalists. But the consequences can be reduced. Journalists and news organizations should consider carefully how they present themselves in the digital world, and remove or make private any information they don’t want their adversaries to have. Removing personal details from the internet can make life more difficult for anyone trying to dox a journalist. It’s important to keep in mind that online attacks are primarily intended to get inside a journalist’s head and cause them to self-censor. In the US, these threats rarely transfer into the real world. Even so, in case they do, it’s important that any journalist who is under attack enlist a manager or colleague to help monitor their social media feeds for serious threats. This strategy allows a journalist who does not want to see the stream of vitriol to log out while staying safe. The harassment usually dies down after a few days.

Consider mental health: It’s hard to overstate just how stressful it is for journalists to work in an environment of heightened risk, especially one in which the people they interact with on a regular basis are antagonistic or even hostile. There is no magic formula for managing stress in the newsroom, and every news organization will have to find its way. But that starts with a recognition that we are living in an extremely challenging moment—for America, for its civic institutions, and for journalists and news organizations across the country. Now is the time to double down on safety.

Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.

Joel Simon is the founding director of the Journalism Protection Initiative at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism.