{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012276785714285714, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006696428571428571, 'mean_word_length': 5.7443609022556394, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Journalism under attack: The Charlie Hebdo covers and reconsiderations of journalistic norms

In January 2015, masked gunmen attacked the satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The events presented an ethical dilemma for news organizations around the world, which had to determine whether to republish controversial images from Charlie Hebdo’s history. Many US news organizations explained their ethical decision-making in their own publications or provided interviews to other news agencies reporting about the disagreement. This study is based on a qualitative textual analysis of 35 articles from news outlets in the United States published within a month after the attacks. The analysis considers the journalistic norms and boundaries underlying the news organizations’ decisions to republish or withhold the images and how these norms shape assumptions about journalistic professionalism.