The test writers can draw a very fine line with pronoun antecedents. This question isn't from OG and I'd be very careful about SC questions that aren't from the OG - most from good sources are fine, but when they cover an issue that the OG itself can be a little fuzzy on, then you can get into trouble.
The pronoun says "they will or could be made sufficiently safe in the future." This sentence has already referred to the stations as unsafe, so we infer that the later reference to "safe" also refers to the stations.
HOWEVER, I really don't think the official writers would present this particular question.
Technically, we do have two plural nouns in the sentence, journalists and power stations. This doesn't automatically mean they are both possible antecedents. The official test seems to follow a rule that says if both the nouns are in a similar class (eg, if we had had, say, journalists and politicians), then we have to clarify the pronoun, even if the context of the sentence gives us an idea of which group the pronoun is supposed to be referringto, but if they are in an obviously different class and if it doesn't make much sense for the pronoun to refer to one of the classes, then we're okay even if we do have two plural nouns.
In this case, the two nouns are definitely in different classes, but it is also conceivable that someone might want to make journalists safer in the future. (That would, of course, probably be a totally different sentence, but it is conceivable.) The official test doesn't generally tolerate this kind of (very nitpicky) ambiguity.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!
Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT
Contributor to Beat The GMAT!
Learn more about me
