Britain's Press Freedom 2010 -2024

The UK’s ranking in the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) was 19th in 2010 and to date in 2024 the ranking was 23rd. So, not really a disaster in terms of press freedom but it is what happened in the intervening years and the overall stasis in the ranking that causes concern.

Within the British Constitution there is supposed to be a balance of power between the executive (basically the Prime Minister and the Cabinet), the legislative (the House of Commons and the House of Lords) and the judiciary (the legal system starting at local magistrates courts and reaching up to the Supreme Court). There is also the media otherwise known as ‘the fourth estate’.

Although not recognised formally as part of the constitution it still has a vital role to play and its freedom to question and hold to account those who have power over the wider population is paramount.

Without the media, especially Private Eye, the ongoing Horizon scandal involving the Post Office and the post masters and mistresses may well still be being buried away somewhere in the corridors of power and not subject to the ongoing public enquiry or reversals of criminal convictions. Without the media the electorate may never have known about any betting scandal whirling around the 2024 general election date. Without the media the MP’s expenses scandal would not have been exposed back in 2010.

And if anyone can cast their minds back over fifty years there was a famous case based in Northern Ireland between the Government of the day, the judiciary and a journalist. The journalist was Bernard Falk (1943-1990). He interviewed some IRA members which was aired on the BBC. Their identity was not revealed during the interview. Bernard Falk was asked to appear in court and further asked to identify the IRA man in the dock. He refused and was found guilty of ‘contempt of court’. He served four days in the Crumlin Road prison. Ironically he was amongst several IRA prisoners.

The establishment was furious about him not revealing his sources. The establishment being Margaret Thatcher, members of her Cabinet and other politicians. Collectively they threatened the BBC with reducing the licence fee. The BBC successfully, and thankfully, resisted this pressure.

Even as recently as 2009 there have been calls for the freedom of the press in this country to be enshrined in law. Bernard Falk’s legacy to press freedom in this country is that he is still being cited in those calls. To date no such act has been passed.

Yes, when the media get it wrong or when they behave incorrectly then they should be subject to the law. A prime example of the media doing it wrong is the phone hacking scandal which was a means to an end; that end being ‘in the public interest’. Really? No one individual or corporation should be above the reach of the law.

As well as providing one hard number the RSF backs this up with some narrative.

In the case of the UK, it mentions the following constants which inhibit press freedom:

• Attacks on journalists

• Lawsuits taken out against journalists – gagging orders

• Low public trust in the media

• Lack of pluralism amongst media owners

• Political pressures on the BBC

• Foreign ownership

These are all issues that as consumers of the media we should always be aware of. The media is an essential part of our political system and has to be supported in all of its efforts to get to the truth and hold accountable. Hopefully this country’s rankings will only get better rather than stay static or worsen over the coming years.

Please read the detailed report the RSF has prepared for this country via the following link.