In January 2024 the Press Gazette reported that the UK saw the biggest drop in trust in the media and was the least-trusted out of 28 countries surveyed for the latest Edelman Trust Barometer.
The UK fell to the bottom of the ranking, with 31% of people saying they trusted the media in a November survey – a drop of six percentage points since the 2023 Trust Barometer. Just above them were Japan and Argentina with 33%. Top of the list was China, though it’s one of the least free countries for the press in the world (179th according to Reporters Without Borders). Similarly United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are near the top of the table but are 145th and 170th in the World Press Freedom Index.
This is doubtless because countries where people claim to trust the press tend to be the same ones where the press is most controlled by the state and the people fearful to offer critical opinions – hence the contrast between a free press and (stated) public perceptions of it.
Nobody trusts the news anymore
No surprise then when in August a new report from the Universities of Leeds and Derby into public perceptions of journalism in the UK found that improving trust in the industry would require “greater visibility, transparency, and public engagement” to achieve a more effective level of press regulation, which in turn would lead to greater trust.
For the study, which was supported by the independent press regulator Impress, Professor Julie Firmstone and Professor John Steel carried out eight focus group sessions with a total of 44 participants. They uncovered a lack of trust in the news media and a need to boost knowledge levels regarding how regulatory processes work.
“Amidst declining levels of trust and confidence in news, coupled with an associated constant flow of mis/disinformation, our research highlights the importance of engaging with the public, gaining insights into their perceptions and experiences of how journalism performs its important civic role as well as how it is regulated”, Professor Firmstone and Professor Steel said of their latest work.
Addressing the issue of trust in reporting, they said: “Our study highlights the need for news organisations and regulators to have a more visible and meaningful engagement with the public and to take note of their suggestions for addressing the challenges of declining trust in news.”
The Labour conference fringe – voices for change
Such concerns were evident at a Labour Party Conference fringe meeting in Liverpool on 23 September. Organised by Byline Times, supported by the Media Reform Coalition, Hacked Off, Impress and the Public Interest News Foundation, the packed meeting, chaired by former TUC general secretary Baroness Frances O’Grady, heard from a wide range of speakers including two Labour MPs. The theme, ‘Can democracy survive the crisis in the media…and what to do about it’, was highly relevant given that the Labour party election manifesto, entitled ‘Our plan to change Britain’, makes no mention of the need to change the media!
Well maybe not quite, as The Bristol Cable points out: “… interestingly, the one mention for the media industry in Labour’s manifesto appears in the section ‘Build an NHS fit for the future’. This might at first seem like a mistake but, in my opinion, it’s well placed: within the ‘public health’ chapter.”
Given how little mention the media receives, it’s a relief to hear a political party considering it a public health issue. The manifesto states:
“Labour will build on the Online Safety Act, bringing forward provisions as quickly as possible, and explore further measures to keep everyone safe online, particularly when using social media.”
The Bristol Cable article points out that the Tories make no mention of journalism in their manifesto, but they do include a couple of light mentions for wider media issues. They mention the need to protect children on social media, and reform BBC processes.
The Cable highlights that the Lib Dems appear to have the most extensive nod to media policy in their manifesto, including the revival of Leveson part 2, the phone hacking inquiry; a comprehensive ‘anti-SLAPP law’ to provide robust protection for free speech, and support for the BBC both to provide impartial news and information, and to take a leading role in increasing media literacy and educating all generations in tackling the impact of fake news.
Turning to the Green Party, while references to media action are short in their manifesto, they do have a specific section for it and two fairly radical policies. The Greens say that they’ll push to implement the findings of the Leveson inquiry, which the government neglected to do before axing the second part in 2018 (which would have examined the relationship between journalists and the police).
Significantly, the Greens say the “dominance of billionaire and big-tech ownership” undermines democracy and promotes harmful online content, and that to remedy this, any elected MPs would fight for a change in the law so that no single individual or company can own more than 20% of any media market.
Regulating the hackers and the liars
So back to the fringe meeting. Speakers from the sponsoring organisations spoke of their campaigning priorities: Leveson 2 (Hacked Off); the importance of public interest and local news supported by ethical and impartial journalism that informs and empowers the public and democracy (Public Interest News Foundation); and bringing together activists, academics and media producers to challenge unaccountable media corporations and build an independent, democratic media system (Media Reform Coalition (MRC)).
Byline Times, the independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, highlighted the launch of its #MediaWatch, which exposes the worst of Britain’s broken media environment, and campaigns for government action, while Impress, the only Leveson-compliant and independent press regulator, emphasised the urgent need to counter press fake news and disinformation.
Following the presentations, many questions to the speakers raised serious concerns about the failure to regulate social media, to deal with fake news, mis- and disinformation and the need to kerb the powers of the tech giants. Although it had been hoped that the Online Safety Act would force service providers to clean up their acts, lessons from the summer riots, which were sparked by the deaths of three young girls in Stockport, showed how quickly fake news could be spread and how inadequate the new act had proved in dealing with it.
True, not all its provisions had been enacted but it had placed a range of duties on online service providers, making them responsible for the safety of users of their platforms. However, lessons so far showed that it would be unlikely to counter much of the kind of disinformation which has caused such consternation in the case of the riots. Whether the government will seek to toughen up the law remains to be seen, as does whether Ofcom will effectively regulate it.
The need to reform Labour’s 2000 Freedom of Information Act was also raised, to strengthen access to information in the UK, which has been weakened over time.
The meeting showed that there was an appetite for media reform among party activists, and even among some Labour back benchers, according to the two backbench speakers, Dawn Butler MP and Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP. Meanwhile, some urgent matters are looming that demanded immediate attention by Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary.
The Conservative plan to privatise the BBC
The BBC’s charter, which runs out in 2026, is up for review. The last government set up a number of ‘expert groups’ who are currently examining proposals which will have major implications for the future of the BBC and the needs of the audiences it serves.
As the MRC points out, this “DCMS review is taking place behind closed doors, without any public input or even basic parliamentary scrutiny. The review is not open to public submissions, instead inviting views only from ‘relevant stakeholders’ and other government departments”.
With regard to the licence fee and possible alternative funding models, the review’s guidelines reveal the last government’s preferred outcomes. The guidelines ask how the BBC can “generate more commercial revenue” and provide “more services to audiences on a fully commercial basis”. In asking “how the BBC could transition to a new funding model”, it seems that DCMS had already decided exactly the sort of commercialised, under-funded and unaccountable future for the BBC it has in mind. Are these views shared by the new Labour government?
Labour needs to urgently review the roles of these ‘expert groups’, open them up to the public and reverse the ‘decide first, ask the public later’ mentality of the last government. The very future of public service broadcasting hangs in the balance.
So the good news is that there is strong support for change and some committed organisations acting to bring that about, as represented at the meeting (and there are others elsewhere). Working together is essential.
However, one group missing from the meeting was the trades unions, who urgently need to put their weight behind campaigning for change in the media. This year’s TUC in Brighton passed a motion from the National Union of Journalists and seconded by the Writers Guild of Great Britain on restoring trust in the media. All the right noises were made; it just needs the Labour and trade union movement to put the fine words into action.
Time is short and the stakes are high.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
