This report is based on a survey conducted between September and November 2023 with a representative sample of 1,130 UK journalists, a follow-up to a similar survey in 2015 (Thurman et al. 2016). The survey was carried out as part of the third wave of the Worlds of Journalism Study project.¹ Our analysis of the survey data and of over 200 other relevant sources of information has produced numerous findings.

This report documents increased precarity in the profession with a shift away from permanent contracts and growth in the number of freelancers, lingering inequalities between specific groups in terms of pay and seniority, the continued adoption of new technologies that bring benefits but also exacerbate risks, and changing conceptions of roles, ethics, and journalism’s relationship with society.

On UK journalists’ personal characteristics and diversity, in the survey:

• UK journalists were overwhelmingly White (90%), university educated (91%), non-religious (71%), and from a privileged background (as defined by their parents’ occupation) (71%).
• Nearly two thirds (63%) were 40 years of age or older, with a median age of 45. That is three years above the median age of the working-age population but in line with other academic professions.
• Female and ethnic minority journalists differed significantly from their male and White colleagues in terms of age and years of work experience. In both groups, journalists over 50 were less numerous, suggesting that female and ethnic minority journalists may experience less job satisfaction than their White and male colleagues.
• UK journalists were left-leaning and, as a group, have moved further to the left since 2015. In 2015, around half (54%) identified with the political left, but this rose to three quarters (77%) by 2023.
• A higher percentage of UK journalists were privately educated (13% at primary, 22% at secondary schools) than is the case for the general population (6%).
• Only 12% of UK journalists grew up in a working-class household. Those journalists who had a parent who worked in one of the three most privileged categories of occupation (71%) were more likely to be employed by the national media.

On UK journalists’ employment conditions:

• The proportion of UK journalists with permanent contracts dropped from 74% in 2015 to 65% in 2023. Over the same period, the proportion of freelancers grew from 17% to 28%.
• In 2023, the median annual income for UK journalists was between £37,501 and £45,000 after tax. Men, those aged 40 or over, those whose main employer was a broadcaster, and those who worked for publicly owned media all had higher salaries on average.
• Gender inequalities in the profession persisted, with men earning higher average salaries and being more likely to have a permanent contract and hold a top management role.
• Most UK journalists worked from home at least three days per week, with some variation by gender, age, and main employer.

On the media platforms, formats, and cultures UK journalists work with:

• The distribution platform – from print to podcasts – UK journalists were most likely to produce journalism for was websites (97% at least ‘rarely’), followed by social media (80%), print (74%), email newsletters (62%), podcasts (56%), news apps (53%), radio (39%), television (36%), and messaging apps (32%).
• On average, UK journalists produced journalism for just over five distribution platforms at least ‘rarely’, with that figure close to three if only platforms that they ‘always’ or ‘often’ produced for were included.
• The single media format – from audio to animation – UK journalists were most likely to produce journalism in was text (95% at least ‘rarely’); followed by photographs (77%); video (69%); audio (67%); and graphics, cartoons, illustrations, or animation (50%). 79% produced multimedia stories using a combination of these formats.
• 84% of UK journalists had a main employer from a legacy media background.

On news automation in UK newsrooms:

• 7% of UK journalists worked in newsrooms that used automated news text production, and 10% in newsrooms that used personalised news distribution.
• Privately owned media organisations (and especially news agencies) were more likely to use automated text production, while publicly owned media organisations were more likely to use personalised news distribution.
• Journalists who were aware of the use of automation for text production or personalised news distribution in newsrooms where they worked felt less secure in their jobs and less free to select news stories they worked on.

On UK journalists’ use of social media and audience analytics:

• Social media was widely used by UK journalists professionally, with 70% saying they regularly (‘always’ or ‘often’) used it to discover news stories and 57% saying they regularly used it to promote their journalism. Almost all UK journalists used social media for their work at least some of the time.
• Social media was widely used professionally by journalists working for commercially and publicly owned media, but those working for internet-native media were more likely to regularly use it for discovering news and promoting their journalism than those working for media with a print background.
• Journalists who regularly used social media to promote their journalism were more likely to have experienced some safety threats, including demeaning and hateful speech and attempts to publicly discredit their work.
• Newsroom analytics were used on a regular basis by 35% of UK journalists, with those working for internet-native media more likely to use them than their counterparts working for media with a broadcast or print background.

On UK journalists’ safety and well-being:

• Only 18% of UK journalists² reported they had ‘never’ experienced safety threats related to their work over the previous five years. The most frequent forms of safety threats experienced by journalists were ‘demeaning or hateful speech’ (45% had experienced at least ‘sometimes’), followed by ‘public discrediting’ (39%) and ‘other forms of threats and intimidation’ (16%).
• Gender was significant in journalists’ experience of safety threats and work-related stress. In the survey, 22% of women journalists had experienced sexual violence in the previous five years compared with only 4% of men; and 60% had felt stressed out at work at least ‘often’ in the previous six months compared with 49% of men. Men reported experiencing ‘arrests, detentions or imprisonment’ and ‘legal actions taken against them because of their reporting’ more frequently.
• Journalists working for outlets with a TV or newspaper background reported experiencing hate speech (57% had at least ‘sometimes’) and other threats or intimidation (21% for TV and 23% for newspaper) more frequently compared with journalists who worked for news organisations with other backgrounds.
• On average, UK journalists felt moderate to high levels of stress at work, with one third of women (33%) and about one quarter of men (23%) reporting they experienced work-related stress very often.
• Lower-ranked journalists (with ‘no or very limited operational and strategic authority’) experienced hate speech and public discrediting of their journalistic work significantly more frequently than higher-ranked respondents (with ‘strategic authority’) and were also more likely to worry about losing their jobs (34% agreed compared with 25% of the higher ranked). Higher-ranked respondents, however, reported experiencing legal threats related to their work more frequently (10% had at least ‘sometimes’) than the lower ranked or middle ranked (4%).
• Race and ethnicity, which often shape attacks against journalists, did not produce significant statistical differences in the data. However, as the survey sample was predominantly White (90% of participants), further research is needed to account for the correlation between race and journalists’ safety.

On the influences on UK journalists’ work and their perceptions of press freedom and editorial autonomy:

• While the majority of UK journalists believed the UK has a good level of media freedom and they had good levels of editorial autonomy personally, a considerable proportion disagreed.
• UK journalists perceived that their work was influenced – for better or for worse – by various factors, including editors, editorial policies, journalistic ethics, resources such as information access and time constraints, and other dynamics within the news production process.
• UK journalists also perceived some, albeit limited, commercial influences from audience research, audience feedback, profit expectations, business managers, and media owners.
• Government censorship, government officials, the police, and politicians were perceived as ‘not influential’ by many respondents.
• UK journalists did not view news actors, such as scientists or health experts, public relations, issue advocacy groups, businesspeople, and religious groups and institutions, as having a strong influence on their work; however, scientists or health experts were perceived as having a stronger influence than other news actors.

On UK journalists’ beliefs in truth, interpretation, and objectivity:

• A large majority (82%) of UK journalists agreed that interpretation is necessary to make sense of facts. There was stronger agreement among more experienced journalists.
• 69% of UK journalists believed it is possible to represent objective reality in reporting, with older and more experienced journalists expressing higher confidence in this belief.
• 50% of UK journalists believed they could withhold their personal beliefs from their reporting, indicating a split view on this matter.
• Journalists employed by media with a television background and that were publicly owned were more likely to believe in objective reporting and the withholding of personal beliefs.
• 48% of UK journalists believed that truth is inevitably shaped by those in power, with younger journalists and those leaning politically left more likely to agree with this statement.
• Only 17% of UK journalists believed that things are either true or false with no in-between, reflecting a rejection of dogmatic thinking.

On UK journalists’ role in society:

• Journalists continued to ascribe importance to their roles as informers and watchdogs. However, they gave increasing importance to activist roles compared with in 2015.
• Journalists saw their top three roles as to educate the audience (88% considered this role ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important), to counteract disinformation (71%), and to be a detached observer (69%).
• When it comes to audience-oriented roles, journalists have moved away from roles that are predominantly commercially driven. The most important audience role in 2023 was to ‘tell stories that emotionally move the audience’ (48%).
• Journalists working for newsrooms with a legacy media culture (specifically, newspaper, TV, or radio) were more open to activist and innovative roles, for example solutions journalism, than their colleagues who worked for newsrooms with an internet-native media culture.
• Journalists working for local and regional media gave more importance to roles related to the functioning of democracy, such as to ‘provide information people need to form political opinion’ and ‘monitor and scrutinise political leaders’, than their colleagues at national and transnational outlets.
• Although, since 2015, UK journalists have moved towards a more activist conception of their role in society, they were much less drawn towards roles that involve intervening on behalf of the established political order such as ‘setting the political agenda’ or ‘supporting government policy’.

On ethics and standards:

• In 2023, journalists expressed a weakened commitment to a universal professional ethos; fewer than 60% agreed that professional standards should always determine ethical behaviour, compared with the 94% who agreed in 2015 that ‘journalists should always adhere to codes of professional ethics, regardless of the situation’.
• UK practitioners in 2023 were most likely to agree that ‘what is ethical for journalists should be determined by professional standards unless extraordinary circumstances require disregarding them’. But there was a notable rise in opposition to the idea that journalism ethics are purely a matter of personal judgement.
• Accepting payments from sources was considered unacceptable by almost all UK journalists.
• Seven out of ten UK journalists (69%) thought publishing unverified information was unacceptable under any circumstances, but the rest thought it was justified on some occasions.
• Freelancers and staff journalists shared broadly similar views on ethics. However, we found gender disparities. For instance, 60% of female journalists disapproved of payment for confidential information, compared with 48% of male journalists.
• Most questionable ethical practices were less likely to be justified by journalists in management positions than by those in more junior roles.

Footnotes