Connect with us

Brexit

#EURefMedia: Press coverage in UK was 'overwhelmingly biased'

SHARE:

Published

on

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. You can unsubscribe at any time.

160926whatthepaperssay2A report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Research has found that the press coverage of the UK’s EU referendum was biased. While readership of newspapers has decreased, papers can still play an important role in agenda setting.

The report was based on research into press coverage in the run-up to the EU referendum. The study examined the press coverage of the EU referendum in the UK and asked two key research questions. First, how did the British press cover the EU referendum story? Second, what were the main stories and issues deployed on each side of the argument?

The study, launched at the European Parliament's office in London, revealed that six papers favoured Leave, with the debate dominated by a limited number of voices. The research showed that highly polarized press coverage may have been significant in setting the terms of the debate.

The press was overwhelmingly partisan in its coverage, 27% were Pro Remain and 41% Pro Leave. Broken down by newspapers, the Pro Leave papers also had a much wider reach than the Pro Remain papers (FT, The Guardian and The Mirror). When factoring in reach along with the balance of articles the Pro Leave coverage rises to 48% and the Pro Remain coverage goes down to 22%.

The study also looked at spokespeople cited in the articles. Politicians accounted for 34% were the largest group cited, Conservative MPs who were the most divided dominated the politicians quoted.

Academics received only 2% of coverage. It should also be noted that of the 2%, a fifth of the quotes came from Patrick Minford, a Pro Leave economist. This is remarkable in particular, given that vast majority of economists were Pro Remain.

The research found that the majority of articles were negative. Pro Leave and Pro Remain were negative about the present. Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the Vote Leave campaign said that the eurozone crisis played an important role in the outcome. Until the crisis it could be argued by remain supporters that EU is genuinely good for the economy. However, after the eurozone crisis, these arguments lost some of their credibility.

Advertisement

Elliot also pointed out that Pro Remain multi-national companies and bankers - in particular - had lost credibility with voters given the financial crisis. This view was deftly summed up with Michael Gove’s claim that “people in this country have had enough of experts”.

While the report claims that  sovereignty and the economy were the dominant topics, Richard Corbett MEP said that the remain camp shied away from the migration issue, or pointed out the benefits of migration which were difficult to sell in such a short period.

To watch the debate click here.

Share this article:

EU Reporter publishes articles from a variety of outside sources which express a wide range of viewpoints. The positions taken in these articles are not necessarily those of EU Reporter.

Trending