The working conditions of journalists in the UK have changed since 2015, but some characteristics and inequalities endure. The survey data reveal increases in temporary contracts and freelance and remote working, and the persistence of gender disparities in pay and promotion and the centralisation of media organisations in London. This chapter examines these trends in detail, drawing on the 2023 survey and its 2015 predecessor (Thurman et al. 2016).

2.1 Work contracts: a more precarious landscape

The employment conditions of UK journalists have grown increasingly unstable in recent years. The survey data disclose a decline in permanent contracts, dropping from 74% in 2015 to 65% in 2023 (see Figure 2.1). This reflects a broader shift in the media industry towards more flexible, yet often precarious, employment arrangements. One of the most striking changes we found has been the rise in the proportion of freelance journalists, which grew from 17% to 28% over the same period, as media organisations have adjusted to economic pressures and evolving market demands (see, e.g., Standing 2016; Nel and Milburn-Curtis 2020).

Figure 2.1

Freelancers in 2023 made up a significant portion of the journalism workforce. This model allows media organisations to scale their operations quickly and cost-effectively, but it places significant burdens on journalists. Freelance work typically lacks the job security and benefits, such as pensions, associated with full-time roles, leaving many journalists in vulnerable positions (Nel and Milburn-Curtis 2020).

Fixed-term contracts, while relatively stable, reflect the increasingly fragmented nature of employment in journalism. Many journalists pursue what are known as ‘portfolio careers’, where they juggle multiple roles across various organisations – including outside journalism – blending freelance, part-time, and short-term contracts. On average, the journalists in the survey earned 94% of their work-related income from journalism.

Economic pressures and organisational dynamics have undoubtedly contributed towards this shift, but other influences, such as personal choices or broader societal changes, may also be contributing to this trend.

It is important to note that the sample may underrepresent journalists working part-time, and, therefore, those working freelance and on temporary contracts. Journalists who worked fewer than 18.2 hours per week as a journalist – half the average working week in the UK – were ineligible to take the survey if they did not earn at least 50% of their income from journalism. If they did earn at least 50% of their income from journalism but worked fewer than 18.2 hours per week they were included. This approach was dictated by the global Worlds of Journalism Study, of which the survey is part.

The survey shows that male journalists were more likely to hold permanent contracts. This imbalance likely contributes to the gender inequalities we see in job security (see Chapter 6) and in career progression and access to higher-paying roles (see below).

2.2 Salary distribution: persistent inequalities

The data show that the median annual income for UK journalists in 2023 was between £37,501 and £45,000 after tax deductions. While the equivalent median income for male journalists was £37,501–45,000, the median income for women was in the next band down at £30,000–37,500, underscoring the persistent gender pay gap in the journalism profession (see Table 2.1). These findings highlight how women’s salaries are concentrated at the lower end of the pay scale, whereas men’s earnings are more skewed towards the higher salaries.

Table 2.1

The reasons for this gender pay gap are complex, involving structural biases, the lack of transparency in salary negotiations, and cultural expectations that often place women in lower-paying roles (Ross and Carter 2011).

In Chapter 1 we described how older UK journalists in the sample were more likely to be men. Unsurprisingly, older journalists also tended to occupy more senior positions with higher pay. The median income for UK journalists aged 40 and over was between £45,000 and £60,000, dropping to £30,000–37,500 among the under 40s (see Table 2.1).

Of course, demographic differences are not the only cause of disparities in pay. They are, to some extent, also influenced by the characteristics of the employer. We find that journalists who worked for publicly owned media and/or broadcast media were, on average, in a higher pay bracket than their counterparts who worked for commercial media, print media, or internet-native outlets (see Table 2.2.). Shifts in the advertising market have impacted broadcast media less than the print sector, meaning that salaries may not have been as affected. Similarly, although there have been serious funding cuts for UK publicly owned media in recent years, they have a relatively secure financial outlook compared with some parts of the commercial sector.

Table 2.2

2.3 Working hours and the rise of remote work

The median number of hours worked in journalism each week in the sample was 40, but this is heavily shaped by the exclusions mentioned earlier in this chapter. Around one third (30%) of the sample reported doing extra work outside of journalism, with 10 hours being the median amount of extra work done.

The working patterns of UK journalists have seen notable changes with the rise of remote work following the restrictions on social contact that were introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (Cherubini and Sharma 2023). The data show that the median number of hours worked from home each week was 24, which is equivalent to three days. There were only small differences in the average number of hours worked from home between men and women, and journalists under 40 and those 40 and over. However, journalists working for commercial media spent more time working from home than those working for publicly owned media, and journalists working for print and internet-native media typically spent more time working from home than those working for broadcast media (see Figure 2.2.).

Figure 2.2

The shift towards remote work has provided journalists with greater flexibility in managing their professional and personal lives. While this can offer benefits, such as reduced commuting times, it also raises concerns about the potential for burnout and the difficulties of disconnecting from work. Journalists must often be ‘on call’ for real-time updates, particularly in the digital media space, where the demand for continuous news coverage has become the norm (Bakker 2014). This may have contributed to a culture of overwork, with journalists working beyond their contracted hours, particularly during evenings and weekends.

2.4 Job titles and seniority

The survey asked journalists to select their job title from a long list of options. Although around a quarter (26%) of respondents held jobs that did not fit into these categories, the data still give a sense of how work is distributed across the profession. The four most populated categories were ‘Editor-in-chief/Editor/Online Editor/Magazine Editor’ (16%), ‘Reporter/Staff Writer’ (12%), ‘Features Writer’ (7%), and ‘Chief/Senior Reporter’ (7%) – together accounting for about 40% of the UK journalism workforce (see Table 2.3).

Table 2.3

When we assign¹ these job titles to different levels of management responsibility we see that around two thirds (63%) of UK journalists did not have a management role, around a quarter (24%) had a top management role, with the remaining 13% having a middle management role (see Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3

Gender disparities extend beyond salary and contracts and permeate other aspects of employment in journalism. The survey highlights that men were more likely to occupy top management roles, with 63% of top management roles held by male journalists, compared with just 37% by women. Conversely, women were slightly overrepresented in middle management and non-management roles, accounting for 55% of middle management positions and 54% of non-management roles. These findings suggest that female journalists face more significant challenges in advancing to leadership positions, a trend observed across many industries (Franks 2013).

2.5 Beats and specialisation

In 2015, 53% of UK journalists said that they worked on or supervised a specific beat or subject area. In 2023, the equivalent figure was 57%, suggesting there has been little if any change in the extent of specialisation in the sector. That most UK journalists focus on a particular beat may enhance the quality of reporting but could also limit their opportunities in a rapidly changing media environment.

As in 2015, business (focused on by 22% of journalists with a specific beat in 2023), lifestyle (13%), culture (9%), and sport (7%) were among the most commonly worked beats (see Table 2.4). Politics, although sometimes thought of as the archetypal and most important journalistic beat, was only worked on by 6% of those with a specific beat (or around 3% of UK journalists as
a whole).

Table 2.4

2.6 Funding models and regional disparities

Most of the journalists’ main employer was a commercial media organisation (71%), as opposed to being publicly funded (14%) or a non-profit (2%) – though it is important to note that 11% said that they had no main employer. The concentration of media organisations in London is another long-standing feature of the UK journalism landscape. The survey data show that 66% of journalists were employed by media outlets based in the capital, with 19% based in another city, and 4% outside of a city (see Figure 2.4). This centralisation of the media industry has significant implications for regional representation in news coverage, with voices and perspectives from outside London long underrepresented (Franklin 2006).

Figure 2.4

2.7 Union membership

Union membership remains a notable feature of journalism, with 52% of journalists reporting that they belonged to a union. The comparable figure from 2015 was 44%, suggesting there has been an increase in recent years. Union representation is critical in advocating for better working conditions and negotiating wages, particularly for freelance journalists who may lack formal employment protections, so the increase could be linked to the rise in freelance working that was described at the beginning of this chapter.

2.8 Conclusion

The survey shows that a rise in freelance and remote working and persistent gender disparities in salary and employment roles characterise the working conditions of UK journalists. While remote work and flexible contracts provide new opportunities, they also introduce challenges, including job insecurity and the potential for burnout. The centralisation of media organisations in London continues to pose challenges to regional diversity in news coverage. Despite these challenges, union membership remains strong, as does specialisation. However, addressing persistent gender inequalities and supporting local and regional media will be crucial for ensuring a more equitable and sustainable future for journalism in the UK.

Footnote