The world is a pretty depressing place right now. Find out what news audiences truly value (and need) when it comes to court, climate and music reporting
So many interesting and valuable news reports, so little time in a busy newsroom. Journalism.co.uk summarises the major takeaways of new and ground-breaking research into the standards of news reporting and what truly resonates with audiences.
Court reporting has gained particular prominence in recent weeks with the high-profile case of child killer Axel Rudakubana. A first-of-its-kind study by Richard Jones, director of journalism, politics and contemporary history at the University of Salford, makes for excellent timing as it focuses on the value of sustaining court reporting today (and not to be confused with crime reporting).
What's the context?
Covering the criminal courts is a classic task of journalism. But cutbacks in both the local press and the justice system have led to widespread concern the courts are no longer covered and important stories are being missed.
What's the top line?
Larger regional newspapers have generally kept a commitment to daily court reporting, especially from crown courts, despite the financial pressures which have affected the sector. For example, the Manchester Evening News published 52 stories and the Liverpool Echo 47, so that's roughly seven a day on average. Both those titles plus The Star in Sheffield, averaged more than 600 words for their court stories, demonstrating how in-depth their court reporting is.
The quality and quantity of this work is a bit of a challenge to narratives of clickbait and decline which are regularly aimed at the 'big three' publishers, Reach, National World and Newsquest.
What does this mean for my newsroom?
Budget cuts mean there is less agency and freelance coverage of courts. Broadcasters and national outlets generally attend only the most important days of major trials. This means many local courts now offer a steady supply of stories effectively exclusive to any journalist able to go. Legacy news companies which have moved away from the courts beat to save money should reconsider having a court specialist to take advantage of those opportunities.
Climate is another topic making headlines since recently inaugurated US President Donald Trump quickly reversed the country's climate policies among his first acts. For the past three years, The Reuters Institute (RISJ) has been tracking how people access and perceive climate change news in eight key markets (Brazil, France, Germany, India, Japan, Pakistan, the UK, and the USA), and it has just published its latest findings. Dr Waqas Ejaz, research fellow, Oxford Climate Journalism Network, explained more.
These eight countries are a diverse mix of nations who qualify either/or as historically/currently key contributors of greenhouse gas emissions, play a key role in climate diplomacy, are vulnerable to climate change, and can represent different geographies. In addition to news and information, each year RISJ asks additional questions such as people's understanding of the health impacts of climate change, their perceptions towards COP, the frequency of extreme weather events, and their support for disruptive protests.
A central theme in this year’s report is "climate perception inertia" — the stagnation of public attitudes towards climate change despite its worsening impacts in intensity and scope. The study highlights that news media remain the primary source of climate information, but public concern, media trust, and engagement levels have remained largely unchanged since 2022, even as climate-related impacts intensify. Some examples of this inertia are:
These findings are significant because they suggest that news coverage alone is not shifting public attitudes or driving greater engagement, even as climate disasters become more frequent. If media narratives are not cutting through, the ability to inform and mobilise action may be limited.
Current climate coverage may not be reaching new audiences or making climate change feel relevant enough to their lives. Given that the report highlights localised stories and extreme weather events as key engagement drivers, newsrooms should consider the following actions:
Luba Kassova, co-founder and director of the media consultancy, AKAS, has long been looking at issues of inequality and under-representation in the news industry and elsewhere. Her latest report, with co-founder Richard Addy, looks at the reporting standards related to the music industry. Full report here.
The day after the Grammys last year Kassova was struck by the slew of positive headlines proclaiming women’s reign over the awards in 2024. She said she had never witnessed women turning the tide so spectacularly in any male-dominated industry (which the music industry is). The AKAS team got curious to understand whether there was another story behind the one being reported. They won a grant from the Gates Foundation to do just that.
What AKAS found is quite jaw-dropping. Not only have women not reigned over the Grammys, but they have been and remain on the periphery of this most prestigious peer-led recognition system globally.
Between 2017 and 2024 men dominated the Grammys by receiving 4 in 5 nominations and wins across the 103 Grammy categories. Women’s dominance or even parity in nominations was limited to only 6 per cent of the Grammy categories, with men dominating the remaining 94 per cent. This discrepancy between reporting and reality shocked AKAS so profoundly that they dedicated a large part of the report to understanding what had made this discrepancy possible and, importantly, how to eliminate it in the future.
The reason uncovering this is important, besides supporting the obvious mission of journalism to pursue the truth, is the potential damage caused on two levels by misreporting women’s marginalisation as domination. Firstly, no progress can be achieved for women in music where no problem is being perceived. Secondly, and most perniciously, with women experiencing significant structural disadvantages in music, overly positive news narratives about women’s dominance risk triggering a backlash, particularly in the rising anti-equality era that is emerging. And that would be devastating for women’s standing in music.
This is a story of over-reliance on press releases and the partial narrative pushed out by a key protagonist in a story - a lesson that applies to any industry. When the news media takes the press releases it is fed at face value, it risks becoming an extended PR arm of the most powerful actor in any given story.
Immediately following the end of last year’s Grammy telecast, the Recording Academy pushed out an article at 12.01 am titled "9 ways women dominated the 2024 Grammys". The language and messages were subsequently amplified by some of the most reputable news brands in the US, the UK and globally, so much so that a quarter of online articles led with a variation of this headline. As it turns out, this statement is grossly inaccurate because it was men who had dominated the Grammy nominations and wins across all categories, with 69 per cent nominations and 62 per cent Grammy wins.
To uncover the full reality, the news media must be prepared to ask difficult questions, circumvent potential biases and look into the details (this requires resources that newsrooms are so short of. For example, journalists must demand that the Recording Academy open their 67-year-old database of nominees and winners for journalists to interrogate. Journalists must also question bold statements that are ambiguous or not evidenced - you can find 21 must-ask investigative questions listed at the end of the report.
IN/LAB, an innovation hub founded by Swedish media group, Shibsted Media, and its major shareholder, the Tinius Trust, has been looking at key divisions between different generations of news consumers. Last year, it conducted a study into the drivers of media trust. People over 50 are the most likely age group to trust news that aligns with their worldview. Younger audiences, however, tend to have a more diverse palette of views on the news.
So the hub wanted to dig deeper. Community researcher Molly Grönlund Müller tells us about the latest study that investigates what those two opposite age groups (18-to-25s and 50-to-65s) truly value about the news. Full report here.
Müller saw a potential tension between generations in how they perceive and interact with diverse perspectives. It became important to explore this further to help news organisations navigate generational dynamics and user needs in the future.
One of the most interesting findings relates to a possible tension between younger generations and the news media. The younger respondents talked about how journalists and media should act as connectors between different perspectives, contributing to reducing polarisation and fragmentation. They expect media to bridge societal divides by actively engaging with different communities and bringing underrepresented voices into mainstream narratives.
This insight touches on some fundamental questions about the media’s role in society. If news organisations were to act on this wish from younger generations, it could influence their processes, product and content, but also how they position themselves as a brand.
The research hub suggests that news organisations start by reflecting on their current role. To what extent are they acting as bridge-builders between perspectives today? Is this a role they want to embrace? And if not, are there other ways of addressing this expectation from younger groups?
There are both risks and opportunities that should be considered. The media could serve as a unifying force in times of uncertainty and polarisation, providing stability and fostering understanding between groups. However, there is also a risk of backlash such as perceived bias in selecting which perspectives to include or bridge. This could in turn undermine trust.
In addition to this, the report provides several other concrete recommendations on how to navigate generational differences. These address, for example, what perspectives are being selected in news stories, how they are identified and how they are being presented.
NewsGuard produces special reports into common areas of mis- and disinformation. Its new report looked at the effectiveness of Meta’s fact-checking programs across Facebook, Instagram, and Threads) prior to its closure earlier last month. AI and foreign influence editor, McKenzie Sadeghi, explores further. Full report here.
Meta recently discontinued its third-party fact-checking program in the US and replaced it with a crowdsourced "Community Notes" system, similar to the approach used by X.
To assess the reach of foreign disinformation on Meta platforms, NewsGuard analysed 457 posts advancing 30 false claims from its Misinformation Fingerprints database. These claims were drawn from a broader set of 508 disinformation narratives spread by Russian, Chinese, and Iranian government-backed media between June 2023 and January 2025. The goal was to determine how many posts were flagged with fact-check labels and how many remained unchecked.
Only 14 per cent of posts spreading Russian, Chinese, and Iranian disinformation narratives were labelled as false or misleading under Meta’s fact-checking program. This means that 86 per cent of posts spreading these false claims carried no indication to users that they contained provably false information.
The findings show how Meta’s algorithm struggled to detect variations in wording, allowing reworded versions of false claims to spread unchecked, demonstrating the limitations of automated fact-checking tools and algorithmic moderation. State-controlled media and anonymous pro-Russian, Chinese, and Iranian accounts were able to spread disinformation even with the fact-check program in place. Now with the program being dismantled in the US, they will likely face even fewer obstacles.
For most of the cases, the lack of fact-checking of foreign disinformation narratives was due to the limitations of Meta’s algorithm and automated labelling approach. Meta’s approach of only labelling "identical or near-identical" posts leaves room for slight variations of the same false claim to circulate freely, demonstrating how automated and algorithmic efforts struggle to keep up with the evolving tactics of disinformation actors.
Some false claims did not contain a label because they were not fact-checked by any of Meta’s independent partners. This shows how foreign disinformation is not limited to social media platforms alone but circulates and originates through a broader network of state-backed media, fringe websites, and messaging apps, and solely monitoring a particular platform could result in blind spots in detecting and countering the full scope of disinformation.
If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).
Sign up to receive job alerts of your choice by email, or manage your subscription
Featured recruiter: click to view its vacancies
New launch for London seeks a talented, driven, and culturally connected editor to lead its editorial vision and establish the publication as the UK's most significant culture media brand
Subscribe to our newsletter for latest news, tips, jobs and more
End that deadline stress today and find help in our freelance directory
Personal trainer James Hilton has launched a podcast 'Jim's Gym - Inspiring Movement'. James, a specialist in biomechanics and injury recovery from the Cotswolds, runs Jim's Gym, a virtual online space supporting people over 55 to be more active
Our 35th Newsrewired conference will be held 13 May 2025, News UK, London.
Our community of experts gives a heads-up on the most important shifts your newsroom needs to prepare for this year
Conferences and study weeks are fantastic opportunities to get the latest updates on the industry and network with your peers
If you find your social feeds a tad too heavy on men's voices, follow and connect with these fantastic women experts on indie media
How do you move print readers to digital? Are there other ways to hold on to subscribers besides a last-ditch deal?
