The silence itself has become part of the story
In Lisbon, thirteen journalists at RTP — Portugal's public broadcaster — have signed an open letter naming their executive editor as the source of sustained intimidation and psychological harm. The letter arrived not from nowhere, but from a meeting in which management told them their suffering did not qualify as suffering. What is at stake is not merely a workplace dispute, but a question as old as institutions themselves: who decides when harm is real, and what happens when those with power choose not to hear it.
- Thirteen RTP journalists reached a breaking point and put their names to a formal letter accusing executive editor Ana Sofia Freitas of intimidation, humiliation, and deliberate psychological harm.
- Management's refusal to recognize the conduct as bullying didn't end the crisis — it ignited it, transforming private grievance into a public document.
- The letter reveals a newsroom already stretched thin, where the editor's prolonged absences and refusal to coordinate daily work push the burden onto junior staff.
- Coordinators report being singled out for belittlement, morale has eroded, and the journalists say their capacity to produce journalism is being actively degraded.
- Neither Ana Sofia Freitas nor news director Vítor Gonçalves had responded to the accusations at time of publication — a silence that has itself become a statement.
Inside RTP's multimedia newsroom, thirteen journalists have signed a letter that reads like a breaking point. Addressed to news director Vítor Gonçalves, it describes a workplace where intimidation has become routine — where executive editor Ana Sofia Freitas has, they say, built an environment of humiliation and psychological wear.
The letter was triggered by a meeting that offered no relief. When the journalists brought their concerns to Gonçalves and deputy director Maria de São José, they were told what they were describing did not constitute bullying. That dismissal became the catalyst for putting everything in writing.
What the letter documents goes beyond a difficult personality. The signatories describe repeated intimidation, deliberate humiliation, and what they call an unnecessary display of power — conduct that has damaged morale, harmed their mental health, and weakened the newsroom's ability to function. Coordinators, they note, have been especially targeted.
They also describe a pattern of absence: Freitas leaving the newsroom for extended periods, and when present, delegating daily coordination to junior staff. In a newsroom already under strain, the journalists argue that management's suggestion that the executive editor need not be involved in daily operations only deepens the burden on everyone else.
The letter closes with a clear declaration: the multimedia journalists have lost confidence in Ana Sofia Freitas. As of publication, neither she nor Gonçalves had responded. The silence has become part of the story — and a signal of how the institution is meeting this rupture.
Inside the multimedia newsroom of RTP, Portugal's public broadcaster, thirteen journalists have put their names to a letter that reads like a breaking point. The document, addressed to Vítor Gonçalves, the director of news, describes a workplace where tension has become the baseline—where they say the executive editor, Ana Sofia Freitas, has created an environment built on intimidation, humiliation, and psychological wear.
The letter came after a meeting that the journalists experienced as a dismissal. When they brought their concerns to Gonçalves and Maria de São José, the deputy director, they were told that what they were describing did not qualify as bullying. That response—that framing—became the catalyst for putting everything in writing. The journalists felt they had been heard and rejected in the same moment.
What the letter details goes beyond personality clash or communication breakdown. The signatories describe repeated attempts at intimidation, deliberate humiliation, and what they call an unnecessary display of power. They say this has damaged morale, harmed their psychological health, and degraded the newsroom's ability to function. Coordinators, they note, have been singled out for provocation and belittlement. The relationship with Freitas, they write, is marked by persistent tension.
They also document a pattern of absence. Freitas, they say, leaves the newsroom for extended periods, particularly after management has intervened in some way. When she is present, she sometimes refuses to coordinate the day-to-day work, instead delegating that responsibility to junior staff members. This matters because the newsroom is already stretched thin. The journalists argue that Gonçalves's suggestion—that the executive editor need not be involved in daily operations—only worsens the load on everyone else.
The letter ends with a clear statement: the multimedia journalists have lost confidence in Ana Sofia Freitas. Thirteen names are attached. As of the time this account was written, neither Freitas nor Gonçalves had responded to the accusations. The silence itself has become part of the story—a signal, perhaps, of how the institution is handling the rupture.
What emerges from the letter is a picture of a newsroom under strain, where the people doing the work feel unsupported by those managing it. The dispute is not abstract. It touches on how power is exercised, how complaints are heard or dismissed, and whether a public broadcaster's leadership takes seriously the wellbeing of the journalists who produce its journalism. For now, the letter sits as evidence of a crisis that management has not yet addressed.
Citas Notables
The journalists declared their lack of confidence in executive editor Ana Sofia Freitas— The open letter signed by thirteen RTP multimedia journalists
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did it take a formal letter? Why not just leave?
Because they work in journalism. They believe in the institution, or they did. A letter is a last attempt to be heard before you decide whether to stay.
The management said it wasn't bullying. What's the difference between what the journalists described and what management saw?
Power and perspective. The journalists experienced repeated humiliation and intimidation. The managers looked at the same events and saw something less serious. That gap is the real problem—it means the people in charge don't see the harm being done.
What does it mean that Freitas disappears from the newsroom?
It means the work still has to happen, but without the person who's supposed to be directing it. The junior staff fill the gap. The burden shifts down, not up.
Could this be about resources? Maybe everyone's just stressed?
Stress is real, yes. But stress and intimidation are different things. You can be under-resourced and still treat people with respect. The letter says both things are happening at once.
What happens next?
That depends on whether Gonçalves and Freitas respond, and how. Right now, silence is the answer. The journalists have made their position clear. The institution has to decide if it takes that seriously.