The Latvian news outlet Delfi has declared its intention to boycott coverage of the Winter Paralympic Games in Milan-Cortina if athletes from Russia and Belarus participate under their flags. This decision is rooted in concerns over the normalization of aggressor states in the sporting world, as these nations are seen as undermining the spirit of fair competition and representing a threat in a broader geopolitical context. While the motive is understandable, it raises questions about the role of media in informing the public versus taking a stance against perceived injustices.

Critics argue that by refusing to cover the Paralympics in response to Russian and Belarusian participation, media outlets such as Delfi are effectively silencing important stories and narratives. The assertion that ''not covering'' equates to being less informed is a key point of contention, as many believe that the media's duty is to shed light on all events, regardless of the participants. This silence could ultimately penalize athletes and the public, who deserve awareness and insights into global sporting events.

While Delfi’s editorial stance aims to deny a platform for aggressor states, it inadvertently highlights a significant dilemma within journalism: the balancing act between advocating for ethical standards in public discourse and fulfilling the essential function of informing society. For many, the challenge lies in finding ways to address the actions of these nations without negating the rights of individuals to compete and the public's right to be informed about these competitions, thereby suggesting that alternatives to complete boycott might be necessary for achieving both accountability and awareness.