.png){kind=small}
The Media
"Whoever controls the media controls the mind"
-Jim Morrison
The interests of the rich are over-represented in mainstream media in the UK. This is, in large part, due to the number of billionaires who own UK media outlets. They have great control over what is published, therefore will ensure the outlets they own stick to an agenda which preserves their interests. Another factor is that journalism is overrun with privileged nepo-babies who are in an elite network and who have a relationship with politics and big business interests.
Mega-wealthy influence on the media
Many billionaires own media outlets and much of the UK media is controlled by billionaires. We see every day how the news is manipulated to represent their interests.
The power of the media to control what we think, believe and manipulate lawmaking cannot be underestimated.
Newspapers
Billionaire media dominance in the UK is most obvious in our print media. This could be on reason the print media in the UK is consistently found to be the least trusted in Europe.
A summary of their ownership is included in the table below. These people either live in tax havens, have made use of tax havens in managing their immense wealth, or managing ownership of their newspapers.
Many former editors of newspapers run by Rupert Murdoch have been vocal about his influence. Not only did he hire people that subscribed to his worldview and would stand up for the billionaire interests, all employees would know they had to please him.
Newspapers are in decline. Their readership numbers are tumbling.
The Sun, which is still one of UK’s biggest newspapers, as of 2021 was valued at zero, i.e., worth absolutely nothing. Newspapers typically run at a loss, but clearly billionaires still consider them a worthy investment.
Television
Recently, the super-wealthy are trying to gain more influence into television, with the launch of GB News (owned by a range of billionaires who don’t live in the UK) and TalkTV (owned by Rupert Murdoch, also a billionaire who doesn't live in the UK).
Both of these news outlets thrive on creating fictional enemies to distract from the problems that the billionaires, such as those that own these outlets, are causing society. Personalities on these channels (some of which are former/current members of the UK Government) including Esther McVey, Lee Anderson, Jacob Res-Mogg, Nadine Dorries and former Prime Minister Boris Johnson. They are often reactionaries who benefit from sowing division and hatred because it gets them attention, and consequently, consistent work from outlets such as these.
In their desire to court the most reactionary viewership possible, their presenters thrive on controversial and offensive views. Some presenters have been accused of sharing dangerous conspiracies, such as GB News presenter Neil Oliver who has been accused of discussing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.
Publicly Owned Media
The BBC
The most popular broadcast news outlet in the UK is the BBC. It is also one of the most trusted news outlets.
The BBC is publicly funded via the TV Licence which is paid by everyone in the UK who owns a TV. The UK Government can scrap the Licence at any time, or give it to organisations other than the BBC. Therefore there is a potential for a conflict of interest where BBC could feel like they must censor their political content, and are less critical in their reporting of the Government, out of fear of pissing them off and losing their funding.
They are supposed to be impartial. However, journalists have been found to have broken their own impartiality guidelines, on more than on occasion.
In 2024, the Government announced reforms to "boost confidence in BBC impartiality" in response to public perception the BBC has a left-wing bias. There is debate as to whether this perception is reality as the Government cannot give any actual examples of bias.
Research has found a bias at the BBC, but against their claims, it is a pro-Tory bias. Analysis of guests on BBC's Question Time found an overuse of right-wing voices. There is major influence from the Spectator magazine, which is a pro-Conservative publication which once had Boris Johnson as editor. Source: The Conversation
BBC Leadership
The personnel at the top of the BBC does seem to have a Conservative slant. A number of appointments to the BBC Board have close ties to Conservative party.
-
The former Chair, Richard Sharp has many connections to senior Tory party members and has donated over £400,000 to them. Sharp's appointment has been shrouded in controversy given his close links to Boris Johnson who appointed him.
-
Director General of the BBC, Tim Davie, was a Conservative Party member and once stood as an election candidate.
-
BBC Board Member (and former Head of Communications for the Conservative party) Robbie Gibb, was accused by former BBC Newsnight presenter Emily Maitliss of being an “active agent” of the Conservative Party. Another former BBC political employee, Lewis Goodall, described Gibb "always watching him" because he worried Goodall was aligned to Labour.
Channel 4
Channel 4 is publicly owned but funded through advertising.
Many Conservative politicians have been vocal about their dislike of Channel 4’s news output because of their willingness to question government decisions and scrutinise Tory politicians.
​
Such as Lee Anderson, who called their coverage of Boris Johnson's behaviour during covid lockdowns as a "witch hunt."
Who are our journalists?
Journalists in the UK are typically not representative of the general public.
-
Just over 10% from a working class family
-
44% of newspaper columnists are privately educated, compared to just 7% of the population.
-
89% of newspaper columnists have a degree, compared to 19% of the general population.
Unpaid internships are common in journalism, which can exclude those not from existing wealthy backgrounds into the profession
​
Even if those not from a privileged background may feel pressure to report in a way pleasing to those in charge of a billionaire controlled news outlet.
​
Another factor which may bias reporting in the UK is the close knit relationships between politicians and the media. While networks are important in journalism, within the British establishment there is revolving door of journalists becoming high-profile political advisers and vice versa.
Out of touch?
An anecdote that featured in Private Eye about Allegra Stratton, former Newsnight presenter, and subsequently worked for Boris Johnson’s government, showing how out of touch journalists can be.
Is it any surprise that almost 70% of people feel like they are being lied to by journalists?
An example of an out of touch journalist is Jeremy Kyle. Kyle is from an extremely privileged background yet made a career of berating and humiliating people who were poorer than him and judging their life decisions. One secret recording heard him refer to guests on The Jeremy Kyle Show as “thick as shit”.
The Jeremy Kyle Show ended in controversy after the death of a guest. Here Terry Christian criticised the show, and also the media’s general appetite for producing content which demonises the poor.
The show’s cancellation did not stop Kyle from staying in the media spotlight. He now has a show on Murdoch owned TalkRadio. He uses his platform to be a defender putting profit over people while pretending to stand up the common man.
The above video also contains a series of bad faith arguments from Jeremy Kyle, which distract from the substance of the argument being had to help make his point.
Media regulators
In the UK, we have regulators who monitor the output of media to ensure they meet editorial standards.
The biggest newspaper regulators, IPSO, is criticised for its effectiveness and its impartiality.
In 2022, the Chair of IPSO, Edward Faulks, was forced to cancel dinner plans with billionaire media tycoon Rupert Murdoch after The Guardian found out about it. It was never made clear why such a dinner was taking place. However in the same week, IPSO received 12,000 public complaints over a misogynist article written in The Sun, which Murdoch owns.
Here is an analysis on why IPSO is an ineffective body at deterring hateful content. Essentially, IPSO was formed by the owners of newspapers and punishments for breaching codes are too small to be effective. Successive governments have been too weak to force media owners into taking more accountability for their output.
