Executive summary

The future of news matters. The media sector has defied the gloomiest predictions of the last 15 years and some audiences are better served than ever before. The UK’s press offers a healthy variety of viewpoints, broadcasters play an anchoring role, and online outfits are springing up offering unprecedented choice of formats and perspectives. However, many indicators about the future are not encouraging. Trust has fallen and news avoidance is rising. Key revenue streams are declining and will not return. Efforts to silence investigative reporting continue. AI is starting to reshape the nature of internet search and the concept of authoritative information.

The value of honest, accurate and informative news remains as significant as ever—perhaps increasingly so as domestic challenges multiply and the geopolitical context worsens. But importance does not guarantee survival. The outlook for some areas is particularly poor. Local journalism faces long term decline. Several mass market news outlets are following suit. News deserts have been growing. Some audiences are turning away from mainstream news; a growing number are embracing dubious online sources. Others switch off altogether.

Our inquiry left us with no illusions about the stakes: the period of having informed citizens with a shared understanding of facts is not inevitable and may not endure.

The risk of a ‘two tier’ media environment is a particular problem. Current trends suggest that a few large media brands and small niche outlets have a viable financial future: news afficionados will be well catered for (particularly those who are prepared to pay). But a growing proportion of the population risks becoming increasingly poorly served as the economics of mass market journalism worsen, unreliable online sources proliferate and ‘anchor’ institutions like the BBC struggle to ensure their reporting takes account of and reflects the underlying causes of socio-political realignments.

This is not a hypothetical worry: the contours of this scenario are already apparent. If current trends continue, the gap between those consuming professional journalism and those who do not will widen at pace. There is a realistic possibility of the UK’s news environment fracturing irreparably along social, regional and economic lines within the next 5–10 years. The implications for our society and democracy would be grim.

Further technological disruption is likely to have a significant influence on this trajectory. Not all change is bad and many of the impacts are overhyped: doom-laden prophecies of imminent sector-wide collapse are overblown.

Some trends are however worrying. The consolidation of power among the world’s pre-eminent tech firms is leading to unprecedented influence over the information we see. AI models can already produce passable news summaries and answer politically sensitive questions. These advances are starting to upend news media business models and change the way people find information. Some news organisations will receive prominence and money from these emerging AI-powered services; others will not. We have deepening concerns about the implications for media plurality, and the way these developments will compound the shift towards a two tier media environment.

The Government’s role in supporting the future of news is complex. It must avoid a policy of managed decline but this is easier said than done. The Government cannot compel people to engage with the news, and well-meaning financial support risks doing more harm than good by undermining media independence. Much of the work needs to be led by industry itself to ensure audience needs and expectations are well served.

The Government’s task is to establish the conditions that enable the sector to stand on its own feet and survive a protracted period of technological turbulence. Doing so will involve decisions which will not please everybody: the Government will need to confront tech firms and disappoint some parts of the media sector alike.

We recommend the following:

• Strike a balance: There is good scope for structural changes that benefit the media sector, such as tackling competition issues. At the same time we caution against schemes that risk overreach, such as Government-endorsed kitemarks for ‘quality’ news, or well-meaning interventions that end up picking winners in ailing markets.
• Support local media: tax breaks for hiring local journalists, training schemes and an expanded Local Democracy Reporting Service would all help local newsroom finances without creating undue distortions. Changes to the use of local authority advertising spend should also be explored, though with caution.
• Encourage innovation: the UK has good accelerator schemes to boost innovation elsewhere. The news sector needs one too. We’re calling for a Future News catalyst scheme to help media organisations experiment with technology to transition to more sustainable business models.
• Champion responsible AI: the unauthorised use of news content to train AI is deeply controversial. We firmly support AI development, but not at all costs. Previous efforts to mediate between tech firms and creative rightsholders have been tepid and inadequate. The Government must update legislation to align incentives between news providers and AI firms and help them strike mutually beneficial deals. Changes must include a transparency mechanism to let rightsholders check for infringements, much better technical and legal enforceability, and measures to support a new market in responsible AI training data.
• Take competition issues seriously: the Competition and Markets Authority should investigate allegations of anti-competitive practice by big tech firms acquiring AI training data. Updates to Ofcom’s rules on media plurality and investigation powers should account for tech firms’ growing influence in their ability to produce news content through generative AI summaries.
• Public service broadcasters: the Government should use the Charter renewal discussions to refresh the BBC’s role and mission—including explicit objectives relating to local news which crowd in the commercial sector, rather than crowding it out.
• Remain proportionate on mis/disinformation: measures to protect the health of the information environment are key but must not undermine confidence in free speech or fuel public distrust. We caution against overreliance on technical fixes (such as labelling and watermarks). More effort is needed on long-term resilience, muscular use of cyber power to deter adversaries and scaled up media literacy programmes.
• Tackle SLAPPs: investigative journalists continue to face legal intimidation and security risks. New legislation is needed, alongside stronger regulatory fining powers and better protections against transnational security threats.