This study builds on the hierarchy of influences model and the concept of the chilling effect to investigate how strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) affect journalism, directly and indirectly. Based on the semi-structured interviews with Slovenian journalists and editors targeted by SLAPPs, and with their newsroom colleagues, it reveals inconsistencies between the respondents’ expressed awareness of the impact of SLAPPs on their work and their perception of the broader impacts. By examining how SLAPPs interact with the various professional and personal circumstances of journalists and editors, and with the political, economic and regulatory context, toward a potentially deterring outcome, the article contributes evidence on factors that strengthen or mitigate the possible chilling effect of SLAPPs, for both targeted and non-targeted journalists and editors. The research findings add to the empirical knowledge of the emerging body of research on SLAPPs in anticipation of European and national anti-SLAPP regulation.