The study, conducted by Loughborough University’s Centre for Research in Communication and Culture (CRCC), compared 2024 election reporting with six previous campaigns.
It found that UK mainstream news – especially newspapers – focused on Labour and the Conservatives more than in any recent election, even though the public voted for a much wider range of parties.
Lead author Professor David Deacon said the data exposed a stark imbalance in media representation.
He said: “Historical comparison showed that party representation in this election was uniquely out of kilter with vote share.
“The two-party squeeze in media coverage – always more evident in the press than TV – was at odds with the clear multipolarity of voter preferences this time around.”
Although Labour and the Conservatives dominated media coverage, parties such as Reform UK, the Liberal Democrats, the Greens and Plaid Cymru all made historic gains in votes or seats that were not reflected in the media.
The study offered the most detailed examination to date of GB News’s election coverage, finding that while the channel provided some viewpoint diversity across the four largest parties, it gave no airtime to smaller parties and focused more on policy because it largely ignored campaign scandals.
Its output relied heavily on interviews and commentary, making its overall style closer to that of a tabloid debate outlet than a traditional impartial broadcaster.
Prof Deacon said: “GB News didn’t prove to be as dramatic an outlier as some assumed, but there were notable departures.
“It gave negligible airtime to the gaffes and scandals that disrupted the Conservative and Reform UK campaigns, and adopted a distinctive, debate-heavy format.”
The report also showed a resurgence of process-driven reporting – polls, strategy, campaign mishaps and scandals – at the expense of substantive policy discussion.
Prof Deacon said: “The media coverage was conspicuously light on policy content compared with previous elections.
“The agenda was disconnected from the principal concerns of the voting public.
Issues such as the cost of living, housing and the environment were marginalised, while taxation – which ranked far lower in voter concern – dominated coverage.”
Co-author Professor Dominic Wring emphasised that the study challenged the idea that legacy media were fading in relevance.
He said: “Whilst the communication environment was changing, there was a need to be cautious about assuming mainstream news organisations were becoming irrelevant.
Their public reputation and profile remained very significant.”
He highlighted Ofcom’s data showing that traditional outlets continued to be viewed as more accurate, trustworthy and impartial than online-only alternatives.
Prof Wring added: “Social media were platforms, not publishers. To understand their role, we needed to look at which sources people accessed on them – and research consistently showed that legacy news brands had a large footprint across social platforms.
“Even where influencers appeared to dominate, their commentary often rested on information framed by traditional journalism.”
The authors concluded that while the media environment had become more fragmented, mainstream news still played a decisive role in shaping election discourse – but in 2024 it failed to reflect the diversity of voter priorities and political competition.
The report called for renewed attention to the democratic responsibilities of both traditional and emerging news providers in future campaigns.
ENDS