AIB publishes FIFA World Cup 2026 safety briefing for media organisations

11 May 2026

AIB publishes FIFA World Cup 2026 safety briefing for media organisations

The Association for International Broadcasting (AIB) has published a new safety briefing for member organisations ahead of the FIFA World Cup 2026, which will take place across the USA, Mexico and Canada.

The briefing has been developed to support broadcasters, production companies and media organisations deploying staff to the tournament, with a particular focus on operational, legal and digital security risks that may affect media personnel working in and around the event.

While the World Cup is one of the world’s largest sporting occasions, the AIB notes that the operating environment for media organisations has become significantly more complex in recent years. The guidance highlights issues including enhanced border scrutiny in the USA, device inspection and digital security concerns, civil unrest and crowd safety considerations, as well as location-specific security risks in parts of Mexico.

Importantly, the briefing is not aimed solely at reporters and correspondents. The AIB stresses that production staff, engineering teams, technical crews, producers, digital teams and operational personnel may face the same risk profile as journalists, particularly when entering the USA or operating in fast-moving public situations.

The publication forms part of the AIB’s wider work supporting member organisations with strategic intelligence, operational awareness and risk mitigation across the international media sector.

The AIB is also working closely with the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) on safety issues surrounding the World Cup. Together, the organisations are developing a series of webinars and practical briefings for media organisations and their staff in the run-up to the tournament.

The first webinar is scheduled to take place on 25 May, with registration details to be circulated to AIB members shortly.

Simon Spanswick, chief executive of the AIB, said:

“Risk for media organisations is no longer confined to traditional hostile environments. Increasingly, operational risk begins at the border and extends through digital exposure, legal considerations and rapidly changing public situations.

We felt it was important to provide practical guidance that can support not only journalists, but everyone involved in the deployment of media operations around the World Cup.”

The FIFA World Cup 2026 safety briefing is available exclusively to AIB members.

Media organisations that are not currently members of the AIB and would like to discuss access to the briefing, AIB membership and the range of intelligence reports, strategic briefings, working groups and industry support provided by the Association are invited to contact the AIB Secretariat.

Further information about the AIB is available at: AIB official website

AMC to take control of BBC America

24 October 2014

BBC America, the BBC’s commercial arm, will now be operated by American entertainment company AMC Networks, following a $200m (£125m) deal.

AMC, a company boosted by the tremendous success of its AMC Channel dramas Mad Men, Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead, will manage BBC America as a standalone alongside other channels in the AMC Networks portfolio, including IFC, SundanceTV and WE tv. AMC bought a 49.9% stake in the Corporation, while BBC Worldwide will retain 50.1% stake.

The two networks already have drama co-producing experience, with such series as The Honorable Woman.

BBC Worldwide chief executive Tim Davie said AMC “are committed to the kind of high-quality, unmissable content that has already gained BBC America one of the most educated, affluent and tech savvy audiences in all of US television.”

Tony Hall, BBC director general, said the deal would “help us reach new audiences in the US, strengthen BBC America’s position for the long term and create opportunities for the UK creative community”.

Entries pouring in for the 2010 AIBs

9 July 2010

As you will have seen, we have extended the deadline for entries to be submitted to the 2010 AIBs, the international media excellence awards, until 1600GMT on 16th July due to numerous requests. Broadcasters, content producers, providers of technology and others are responding to the extra time granted with large numbers of entries arriving at AIB headquarters every day.

So far companies in 21 countries have entered – from Argentina to China and from Australia to the USA. From phonecalls made to the AIB, we also know that many more entries are on their way.

It is particularly pleasing to see new companies entering for the first time – companies like KI.KA (Der Kinderkanal von ARD und ZDF) in Germany, TV Antena 1 in Romania, Russian Travel Guide Co Ltd Russia, Conker Media Ltd UK, Press TV Iran and eTV South Africa.

It is still not too late to enter if you are a producer or broadcaster of international TV or radio programmes (whether using terrestrial broadcasting, satellite, online or mobile) or if you produce the technology to power broadcasts, or if you run marketing programs for broadcasts (see the categories page on the website for the full list of different awards).

But with only one more week to the deadline, you will have to hurry so if you still want to enter go to the entries page for full details

40% of the world have not heard of climate change

8 June 2010

The YouTube video which is embedded below is a presentation by Dr Anthony Leiserowitz of Yale University of the results of the lastest Gallup survey of attitudes of people throughout the world to climate change. The survey has been carried out annually since 2006 and has a huge scope with nearly half a million people having been polled up to now. Although Dr Leiserowitz obviously believes in manmade climate change and the need to act to combat it, the figures provide interesting reading whatever your views.

The headline states that 40% of the world have not heard of climate change, but in fact the 40% figure includes those who answered “Do Not Know” and those who refused to answer the question, as well as those who actually said they had not heard of climate change. It also, as Dr Leiserowitz carefully points out, does not mean that 40% have not experienced changes in climate themselves. However, this headline figure is a good indication of how many people, usually the most disadvantaged by poverty and lack of education, are not aware of the debate and so have very little voice in deciding how the issue should be tackled.

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/B3R6VE4EvnU&hl=en_GB&fs=1&rel=0

The analysis by country is fascinating and makes the video well worth watching. The results of the first question, on awareness, are not that surprising, with the developed world most aware of the debate and Africa & South Asia the areas least aware. Some countries have over 70% of their population unaware and because of their large populations India & China have by far the largest number of inhabitants who are unaware. The example of Bangladesh is used to analyse the huge gap in awareness between those who are highly educated (98% aware) and those who are mainly or totally uneducated (under 30%).

But the question of belief in the causes of climate change presents a different geographical picture, with the USA joining India and a number of African countries as those with the highest belief that climate change is due to natural causes. Also, it is the countries of South America, particularly Brazil, who feel the risk to them from climate change is the highest.

Finally, despite the differing views, it is interesting to note that in nearly all the countries which are major carbon emitters, there is a majority of those who are aware who state that their governments should be doing more.

For more details of this report and similar work, visit the Yale Project Climate Change Communication website

Climate change cop-out or pragmatic approach?

15 May 2010

The Hartwell paper was published this week by a group of 14 academics from USA, Canada, UK, Germany, Finland and Japan. It proposes that the failure of the UN Copenhagen summit (COP15) to enforce meaningful targets and the lack of noticeable progress from the global agreements and targets on reducing carbon emissions actually provide an opportunity to address concerns on climate change in different ways.

The authors argue for the expansion of measures that are popular and pragmatic, offering energy security and also aiding human dignity by providing the poorest with safe, available energy. They point out that a majority of human activity that forces climate change is not due to carbon emissions but other causes, such as the loss of tropical forests, black carbon and the emission of other greenhouse gases. These causes can be addressed in ways that do not generate the controversy of capping carbon emissions.

The proposed approach suggests incentives for investing in alternative energy sources, which speaks to the desires of many nations to increase their energy security, and for helping underdeveloped countries to use more effective energy – for example by providing more efficient stoves for the poorest to dramatically reduce the 1.5 million annual premature deaths due to soot which is addition would cut the effect of “black carbon” on warming and on the melting of glaciers. The BBC’s “Costing the Earth” programme this week looks at this in some detail and examines the practicalities of such approaches.

The report switches the focus from CO2 emission targets and this has been criticised by other leading figures in the field such as Bill Hare, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, as reported in Nature’s Climate Feedback blog.

In discussing how to put their proposals into practice, the authors suggest funding via an hypothecated carbon tax, which they claim will be low. But it is not clear how low this would be and any tax would seem to counter their argument that their approach would be more popular than the current emission caps and carbon trading.

Whether practical or not, the paper opens up other strategies for changing the damaging by-products of humanity’s energy usage. The question is whether these are useful additions or alternatives to current approaches or whether they would mainly damage the efforts to focus on carbon reduction. The proposals are likely to prove additional distractions to such efforts as the American Power Act, as noted in Discovery’s article on this bill by US Senators Kerry and Liebermann