During a 2024 edition of the BBC podcast When it Hits the Fan, the journalist and presenter Amol Rajan painted a gloomy picture of his profession. Journalists, Rajan stated, had ‘lost their role as gatekeepers’ and their ‘monopoly on public information’. He concluded that journalism was ‘in a bad way’, and that the glass is ‘not just […] half empty but it is smashed into a billion pieces and we’re all bleeding of the shards’ (BBC 2024a).

Rajan described the confusion that many journalists feel about their changed role in society (Gottfried et al. 2022; Henkel 2025). Even their most fundamental roles are increasingly under threat, be it to inform and to hold the powerful to account (Esser and Neuberger 2019), be it as gatekeepers (Bell and Owen 2017), or as those who select what is newsworthy for their audiences (Thurman et al. 2019). Moreover, political, societal, and cultural events in the UK have put the profession under increased pressure. In the aftermath of Brexit, journalists have been accused of failing the country (Lewis 2019), so-called ‘mainstream media’ have come under increased attack by alternative media (Cushion 2022), and news media have been accused of amplifying disinformation spread on social media (Wring and Ward 2019). In addition, journalists’ traditional values, such as objectivity, have been questioned in the face of the war in Ukraine (Onishenko 2022), social movements such as Black Lives Matter (Lowery 2020; Schmidt 2024), and global threats such as climate change (Robbins and Wheatley 2021).

This chapter explores how UK journalists think about their present role in society. The survey asked journalists to assess the importance of 24 journalistic roles, rating each from ‘not at all important’ to ‘extremely important’.

Most of the role questions were included in the 2015 survey (Thurman et al. 2016), which allowed us to analyse whether and how journalists’ role perceptions changed over the subsequent eight years.¹

We divided the 24 roles into five groups, according to underlying commonalities between the roles that emerged from factor analysis of the survey data:

1. Informer and watchdog roles, which are: ‘be a detached observer’, ‘provide analysis of current affairs’, ‘provide information people need to form political opinion’, ‘discuss future implications of current events’, ‘monitor and scrutinise those in power’, ‘shine a light on society’s problems’, ‘counteract disinformation’, and ‘let people express their views’.
2. Advocating and interventionist roles, which are: ‘set the political agenda’, ‘influence public opinion’, ‘advocate for social change’, ‘motivate people to participate in politics’, ‘promote peace and tolerance’, ‘point towards possible solutions to society’s problems’, ‘speak on behalf of the marginalised’, and ‘support efforts to promote public health’.
3. Audience-oriented roles, which are: ‘provide entertainment and relaxation’, ‘provide the kind of news that attracts the largest audience’, ‘provide advice, orientation, and direction for daily life’, and ‘tell stories that emotionally move the audience’.
4. Loyal facilitator roles, which are: ‘support national development’, ‘support government policy’, and ‘convey a positive image of political leaders’.
5. Educator role to ‘educate the audience’.²

Figure 9.1

9.1 Informer and watchdog roles

To inform their audiences, to provide context for the information they deliver, and to scrutinise those in power are still what UK journalists believe to be among their most important roles. Scholars and professionals alike have long considered these roles to be central to the purpose of journalism (Kovach and Rosenstiel 2014, 50). As in 2015, we find that UK journalists in 2023 continued to emphasise these traditional reporting roles, as do many journalists around the globe (Hanitzsch et al. 2019).

However, the survey also reveals that journalists’ attitudes towards these classic roles have changed since 2015.

In 2023, as in 2015, the survey asked journalists about the importance of being a ‘detached observer’, a role that has been linked to the journalistic value of objectivity (Firmstone 2024, 99). Over two thirds (69%) considered it as very or extremely important (see Figure 9.1). Although still prominent, being a detached observer was significantly less important to journalists than it was eight years previously (77%) (Thurman et al. 2016, 31).

Moreover, the data suggest a generational shift. The 2023 survey shows that older journalists ascribed greater weight to the classic role of being a detached observer. Three quarters (74%) of those 40 years and older held it to be very or extremely important, compared with under two thirds (60%) of those under 40.

Three questions in the survey related to roles that provide context: ‘provide analysis of current affairs’, ‘provide information people need to form political opinion’, and ‘discuss future implications of current events’.

Just over half of the journalists in the sample (56%) found it very or extremely important to ‘provide analysis of current affairs’, down from 67% in 2015 (Thurman et al. 2016, 31). Again, compared with 2015, this role has lost importance. In the 2023
survey, only journalists working for news outlets with the legacy media backgrounds of newspaper, TV, or radio (see Chapter 3) held this analytical role to be almost as important as all journalists did in 2015.³

Journalists’ role to ‘provide information people need to form political opinion’ was considered by 42% as very or extremely important – not significantly different from 2015. However, there is a striking difference between the high level of importance journalists working for local or regional news outlets gave to this role (60% considered it as very or extremely important) and the lesser level given by their colleagues at outlets with national or transnational reach (just 39%). This considerable gap confirms the vital role local and regional media have for a functioning democracy and the dangers inherent in the dramatic decline of local and regional media (Ponsford 2024c), as the Cairncross Review highlighted (Cairncross et al. 2019, 17).

To ‘discuss future implications of current events’, a role that was not included in the 2015 survey, was considered as very or extremely important by 60% of the respondents, making it one of the most important roles for journalists in the 2023 sample.

The classic watchdog role to ‘monitor and scrutinise those in power’ was considered by two thirds of the respondents (65%) as very or extremely important. The 2015 survey asked this question in two parts: ‘monitor and scrutinise political leaders’ (48% found this very or extremely important) and ‘monitor and scrutinise business’ (59%). Therefore, journalists’ emphasis on this role seems to have grown. The broader scope of the new question, though, may have contributed to the increased perceived importance of this role. As with ‘providing analysis’, the traditional watchdog role of monitoring and scrutinising was more likely to be considered important among journalists working at outlets with a specific media culture. Four out of five (79%) journalists working for outlets with a legacy background found this role very or extremely important, as compared with 62% of journalists working for internet-native media. Geographical reach also matters. Four out of five (82%) journalists working for local and regional media found ‘monitoring and scrutinising those in power’ very or extremely important, against only 64% who mainly worked for media outlets with a national or transnational reach.

The emphasis journalists put on their role as watchdogs is further confirmed by the weight respondents gave to two new roles that were introduced for this survey. Two thirds of UK journalists in the sample (65%) deemed the role to ‘shine a light on society’s problems’ very or extremely important. Even more (71%) considered the role to ‘counteract disinformation’ very or extremely important. ‘Shining a light on society’s problems’ was seen as more important by those working for legacy media, those working for local media, and journalists under 40. To ‘counteract disinformation’ was significantly more important for those working for outlets with a legacy media culture than for their colleagues working for news media with an internet-native
media culture.

To ‘let people express their views’ was deemed very or extremely important by 60% of the respondents as compared with 54% in 2015.⁴ Journalists working for local or regional outlets found this role significantly more important (71%) than their colleagues working for national or transnational media (58%). Journalists who were 40 years and older also found ‘letting people express their views’ slightly more important than their younger colleagues (61% vs 58%).

9.2 Advocating and interventionist roles

While journalists’ informer and watchdog roles can be seen as ‘neutral’ in some sense (Hanitzsch 2011, 485), this cannot be said of the advocating and interventionist roles. Research on journalists’ role perceptions has for some time distinguished between the ‘advocacy–neutral’ and the ‘participant–observational’, where ‘advocacy’ refers to journalists ‘expressing subjective values and beliefs’ and ‘participant’ describes journalists ‘actively seeking to influence the political process’ (Donsbach 2015, 317). Another often-used term that we will adopt here is ‘interventionist’ roles, which means that ‘journalists pursue a particular mission and promote certain values’ (Hanitzsch 2007, 372).

Eight items in the questionnaire reflect these roles. Neither ‘setting the political agenda’ nor ‘influencing public opinion’ were very important for UK journalists (see Figure 9.2). Only 16% found it very or extremely important to ‘set the political agenda’, with journalists working for newsrooms with a legacy media culture background being more inclined to this role than their colleagues at internet-native outlets. To ‘influence public opinion’ was considered by 28% as very or extremely important – with no major change since 2015.

To ‘advocate for social change’ was considered by 30% of the journalists in the sample as very or extremely important. Only 15%, though, found to ‘motivate people to participate in politics’ very or extremely important. UK journalists ascribed more importance to the role of ‘promote peace and tolerance’, although just a third (32%) found this role very or extremely important. The importance of this role has decreased by 14pp compared with the 2015 survey.⁵

Figure 9.2

Figure 9.3

In response to recent developments, three roles were included for the first time in the 2023 survey. To ‘point towards possible solutions to society’s problems’ speaks to the rise of solution or constructive journalism (Lough and McIntyre 2023). Just under half (45%) believed this role to be very or extremely important. To ‘support efforts to promote public health’, a role that was particularly pertinent during the COVID-19 pandemic, was considered very or extremely important by 31% of the respondents to the survey. The third role that was asked about for the first time in the 2023 survey was ‘speak on behalf of the marginalised’; it was very or extremely important for 45% of respondents.

Younger journalists considered ‘advocating for social change’ (38% for journalists under 40 vs 25% for journalists 40 years and older) and to ‘speak on behalf of the marginalised’ (54% vs 39%) more important than their older colleagues, which indicates cultural-political differences between the generations (see Chapter 1). Female journalists put more emphasis on ‘advocating for social change’, ‘promoting peace and tolerance’, ‘pointing towards possible solutions to society’s problems’, and ‘speaking
on behalf of the marginalised’ than their male colleagues. Journalists working for newsrooms with a legacy media culture background (newspapers, TV, and radio) put a slightly higher emphasis on these roles than their colleagues working for internet-native media.

9.3 Audience-oriented roles

In 2015, UK journalists considered reaching large audiences and fulfilling commercial interests (Hanitzsch 2007, 375) as their most important aims when it came to how they thought about their audiences. Eight years later, these goals have lost some of their prominence for UK journalists. Specifically, since 2015, to ‘provide entertainment and relaxation’ and to ‘provide the kind of news that attracts the largest audience’ have become less important to UK journalists. The proportions considering these roles to be very or extremely important have declined from 50% to 41% and from 45% to 34%, respectively.

As in 2015, in 2023 journalists ascribed less importance to the audience-oriented role ‘provide advice, orientation, and direction for daily life’. It was deemed very or extremely important by around one fifth (22%) of the respondents – little changed
from 2015.

To ‘tell stories that emotionally move the audience’, which was included for the first time in 2023, has become the most important audience-oriented role for UK journalists, with 48% of respondents considering it as very or extremely important (see Figure 9.3). It was more popular among local and regional journalists: nearly two thirds (66%) of them found this role very or extremely important, whereas considerably less than half (45%) of national and transnational journalists did. This role was also considerably more favoured by journalists working for newsrooms with a legacy background (60%) than by journalists working for a newsroom with an internet-native media culture background (35%).

9.4 Loyal facilitator roles

The three roles that centre around promoting the state and political leadership, which are usually categorised as the ‘loyal facilitator role’ (Mellado 2015, 605), are prominent in some parts of the world but, unsurprisingly, were roundly dismissed by journalists in the UK (see Figure 9.4). To ‘support national development’ was considered very or extremely important by 20% of the journalists in the sample, but just 3% of respondents found to ‘support government policy’ very or extremely important and under 1% of respondents found to ‘convey a positive image of political leaders’ very or extremely important.

Figure 9.4

9.5 Educator role

The role to ‘educate the audience’ is an outlier in terms of the strength of support it attracted. Among all 24 roles that were included in the survey, the educator role had a 17pp lead over the rest, making it by far the most important role for UK journalists. Nine out of ten (88%) of the journalists in the sample found this role very or extremely important (see Figure 9.5). In 2015, journalists also considered this role their most important one (Thurman et al. 2016, 33–34). Then, 79% believed it to be very or extremely important.

Figure 9.5

The importance of this role among journalists is aligned with audience preferences. In their 2022 survey among 3,044 respondents across the UK, Gibson et al. (2022) found that 83% thought that ‘to educate’ was one of journalists’ top roles (Gibson et al. 2022, 10). Similarly, the 2024 Digital News Report established that, across 47 different news markets, audiences saw ‘educate me’ (67%) as their second most important need behind ‘update me’ (72%); with UK audiences being among those who considered ‘understanding’, a category that includes the ‘educate me’ need, their top priority (Newman et al. 2024, 44–45).

It may be, then, that the emphasis UK journalists gave to the educator role is a reaction to what they felt their audiences wanted. However, even if this was the case, it would only partly explain why the educator role was considered the most important by UK journalists, as audiences’ clear interest in journalists’ informer and watchdog roles (Newman et al. 2024) was not met by an equally strong emphasis from journalists.

Again, age matters. UK journalists under 40 were slightly more interested in the ‘to educate’ role (93% of those under 40 found this role very or extremely important) than journalists who were 40 years old or older (86%). However, any expectation that journalists working for publicly owned media are more invested in the educator role because it was included in Lord Reith’s famous founding mission for the BBC ‘to inform, to educate, to entertain’ is not borne out by the data. There is no statistically significant difference in how much journalists valued the educator role between those who worked for publicly owned media and those who did not.

There is, though, a significant correlation between the importance journalists put on the educator role and the platform for which they produced. Journalists who produced either for radio or for podcasts gave it significantly more emphasis than journalists on average did.

9.6 Have journalists shifted towards activist roles?

Although UK journalists still considered their traditional roles as informers and watchdogs to be the most important, the emphasis they gave to these roles has shifted. Overall, the informer roles have decreased in importance, while watchdog roles have increased. In addition, some roles that were newly introduced to the 2023 survey and that also speak to journalists’ watchdog function have attracted strong support: 71% of respondents found it very or extremely important to ‘counteract disinformation’ and 65% to ‘shine a light on society’s problems’. Furthermore, the educator role not only remained the most important for UK journalists but, since 2015, the proportion of journalists who thought it was very or extremely important has risen by 9pp to 88%.

Ranking those roles that more than 60% of respondents considered very or extremely important, we find the following six roles to be the most important for UK journalists in 2023:

• Educate the audience: 88% – up 9pp since 2015.
• Counteract disinformation: 71% – not asked in 2015.
• Be a detached observer: 69% – down 8pp since 2015.
• Shine a light on society’s problems: 65% – not asked in 2015.
• Monitor and scrutinise those in power: 65% – up; but asked differently in 2015.⁶
• Discuss future implications of current events: 60% – not asked in 2015.

Five of these six most important roles are linked to an activist conception of journalists’ societal role. In particular the increased importance of the activist ‘monitor and scrutinise’ role and the decreased importance of the neutral ‘detached observer’ role suggest that UK journalists’ attitudes towards their roles in society have turned more activist since 2015. That journalists emphasised their role as educators even more than they already did in 2015 seems to confirm this trend.

These findings call for more research. A number of questions could be explored using the data from the survey. Four suggestions: Firstly, what has caused the upheaval that we observe in journalists’ traditional role orientations? Secondly, what lies behind the significantly greater emphasis, shown in the data, that journalists working for local and regional outlets put on democratically relevant roles? Thirdly, is journalists’ turn towards activist roles accompanied by a move away from institutional politics as they appear to favour socially engaged roles over those with a traditional political focus? Finally, why – as suggested by the data – are journalists working for outlets with a legacy media culture more attracted to activist journalism roles than their colleagues working for newsrooms with an internet-native media culture?⁷

9.7 Conclusion

This chapter presented new data that suggest that UK journalists are turning towards roles that attempt to tackle societal problems. This stands in contrast to 2015, when commercially driven roles such as ‘providing the kind of news that attracts the largest audience’ were central to journalists’ conception of their role in society in addition to their traditional role as detached and neutral reporters (Thurman et al. 2016, 34). The move away from commercial roles that treat audiences as consumers and from the detached observer role towards watchdog and activist roles that involve audiences as citizens may be a reaction to the painful experience of journalists that Amol Rajan colourfully described of losing their essential importance as gatekeepers to a fractured and multifaceted information universe while living through a time of profound political, economic, and socio-cultural upheaval.

Footnotes