Latest news with #WorldsofJournalismStudy
The Star
07-05-2025
- The Star
Hong Kong ranks 37th overall for journalists' safety in new global index
Hong Kong ranked 37th out of 73 places in safety for journalists according to a new global index, outperforming South Korea and Indonesia but falling below Singapore and other European counterparts. The Global Index on Journalists' Safety, published on Thursday, also saw the city score better than the United States when it came to the physical safety of reporters, but scored lower in areas measuring digital and psychological well-being. More than 30,000 journalists across 73 jurisdictions were surveyed between 2021 and 2024 for the joint initiative between the Worlds of Journalism Study research network and the University of Liverpool, in collaboration with Unesco. Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team. Respondents were asked a set of standardised questions about their financial, psychological, physical and digital safety in their operating environments. Additionally, data from the Unesco Observatory of Killed Journalists was used for the index. In Hong Kong, 289 journalists were surveyed between September and October last year. Overall, Hong Kong placed 37th in safety for journalists with a score of 79.17 out of 100, surpassing other East Asian jurisdictions, including Thailand (41st), South Korea (47th), Indonesia (49th), and the Philippines (70th). Nepal and Singapore were the best performing jurisdictions in Asia, at 13th and 17th place respectively, while Taiwan was 36th. Portugal was the top jurisdiction for journalists' safety overall, while Norway, Germany, Czechia and Spain rounded out the top five. Russia, mainland China, and most of the countries in Africa were not ranked. Among the four categories analysed, Hong Kong achieved its highest score in physical safety, ranking 31st with 88.49. The category assessed the number of journalists killed, as well as arrests, detentions, and reporters' concerns for their physical health. The city outperformed the US, which ranked 48th, where assaults against journalists have significantly increased in recent years. However, the city scored comparatively worse in areas related to psychological and digital safety. Regarding psychological safety, which included questions related to threats affecting reporters' mental well-being and actions aimed at delegitimising the profession, Hong Kong fell to 51st place. In digital safety, which included threats to digital privacy such as surveillance or hacking, the city ranked 53rd. The Post has contacted the Security Bureau for comment. Francis Lee Lap-fung, a media scholar from the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said that the city's low score in psychological safety was likely to have stemmed from the recent use of subversion laws and the prosecution of the now-defunct Stand News and Apple Daily. Lee, who served as the researcher for the city in the index, also noted the timing of the local survey coincided with the release of claims by the Hong Kong Journalists Association last year of an alleged 'systemic' harassment of reporters, their family members and employers. The undersecretary for security at the time said he was unaware of the claims and reiterated that the city was a place that followed the rule of law. Lee further suggested that the emergence of alleged online and offline harassment could explain the low ranking of Hong Kong on the digital safety index He added that Hong Kong journalists were less concerned about their physical safety, and that there had not been any murders of reporters in Hong Kong since the city's return to Chinese sovereignty in 1997. 'Lengthy periods of pre-trial detention had become a 'norm' on cases directly related to national security concerns, but the number of journalists who actually experienced arrest and detention remains very small,' he said. 'Hence Hong Kong fares better on physical safety.' More from South China Morning Post: For the latest news from the South China Morning Post download our mobile app. Copyright 2025.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Young UK journalists learn towards activist roles, away from objectivity
The role of journalists has been changing for some time now. Due to the rise of social media, journalists no longer hold the monopoly on informing the public and holding the powerful to account. Nor do they keep their role as exclusive gatekeepers for news. And many readers find that algorithms do a better job of selecting news than human editors. For a new report on the state of the journalism profession in the UK in the 2020s, my colleagues and I asked journalists what they think their role in society should be today. Facing a world of rising authoritarianism, war in Europe and catastrophic climate change, a younger generation of UK journalists increasingly believe they should occupy a more activist role in society. We asked a representative sample of 1,130 UK journalists how important a selection of 24 roles were to them. These included informer roles such as 'being a detached observer', to advocating roles such as 'promote peace and tolerance' and audience-oriented roles such as 'provide entertainment and relaxation'. We measured their answers on a scale from 'not at all important' to 'extremely important'. These questions were part of a wider survey my colleagues Neil Thurman, Sina Thäsler-Kordonouri and I conducted at the end of 2023. Our survey is the UK leg of the third wave of the Worlds of Journalism Study, a global project researching the state of journalism across 75 countries. The survey follows a similar one conducted eight years earlier. Comparing journalists' answers to both allows us to understand how their professional attitudes have changed. Then and now, the roles journalists hold to be most important are those considered to be the traditional purpose of journalism: being a detached observer (linked to objectivity), providing analysis of current affairs, and – the classic watchdog role – monitoring and scrutinising those in power. More than half of our respondents thought that these roles were 'extremely' or 'very important'. However, we found a notable shift in which roles journalists emphasise over others. While they still consider their traditional roles to be essential, many appear to be leaning more towards activist roles, and away from roles linked to objectivity. In 2015, 77% of respondents thought that 'being a detached observer' was 'extremely' or 'very important'. In 2023, it was 69%. Tellingly, there is also a generational shift. While 74% of respondents over 40 rate their role as detached observers as very or extremely important, just 60% of those under 40 do. UK journalists' interest in the more activist watchdog role has risen between 2015 and 2023. It should be noted that the question was asked slightly differently in 2015. Then, 48% found it very or extremely important to monitor and scrutinise political leaders, and 59% thought the same about business. In 2023, 65% considered monitoring and scrutinising those in power very or extremely important. In general, we found that as younger journalists are turning away from roles that can be considered more neutral, such as 'providing analysis of current affairs', they are becoming more interested in more activist roles. Roles such as 'speaking on behalf of the marginalised' and 'shining a light on society's problems' are both more important for journalists under 40 than for older journalists. We also found that the role of 'educating the audience' was significant – 88% of respondents said it was important. This role can sometimes be considered more activist, as it may involve conveying cultural or moral values in addition to information. Along with younger journalists, we found those who produce for podcasts and for radio are significantly more interested in this role than other journalists. We also observed that roles which support active participation in democracy, such as 'provide information people need to form political opinions', are more favoured by journalists working for local and regional media than by their colleagues at national outlets. Those working for internet native media reported being less interested in these roles than those in legacy media (newspaper, TV or radio). Additionally, journalists' interest in commercially driven roles like 'providing the kind of news that attracts the largest audience', has decreased. Recent political and social upheavals have raised confronting questions about journalists' role in society. In the aftermath of Brexit, journalists were accused of failing their democratic role. So-called mainstream media have been criticised by alternative media for supposedly reinforcing the establishment's agenda. And journalists' traditionally most treasured value – objectivity – has been questioned in the face of the war in Ukraine, social movements such as Black Lives Matter and existential threats like climate change. It's no wonder that many journalists themselves are perturbed by what is happening to their profession. Our survey points to a notable shift in journalists' professional attitudes. UK journalists, especially the younger generation, seem to respond more to the pressures that challenge their traditional roles. Meanwhile, local news outlets and legacy media emerge as the most determined advocates for journalism's democratic role. The dispute about the contested value of journalistic objectivity has become a bellwether for journalists' changing professional culture. Our survey shows that, while still important for UK journalists, it is indeed eroding. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Imke Henkel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New survey shows the extent of class privilege in UK journalism
UK journalism has a class problem. This statement will not surprise most people familiar with UK newsrooms. What is astonishing, though, is the scarcity of empirical data that could help us better understand the extent to which class inequality affects journalists and their work. For the first time, research by myy colleagues and me an for the report UK Journalists in the 2020s uses a representative sample of UK journalists to measure their socioeconomic background. The vast majority of our respondents came from a privileged background, measured by their schooling and by the job held by their main household earner when they were a child. Previous research on this issue was based on considerably more limited data. In July 2009, a report commissioned by the then Labour government found that journalism was one of two professions that had experienced the biggest decline in social mobility (the other being accountancy). Research by the Sutton Trust established repeatedly (most recently in 2019), that leading news editors, broadcasters and newspaper columnists are about six to seven times more likely to be privately educated than the general population, a typical marker for privilege in Britain. Some of the best data we have regarding UK journalists' social class was collected by the National Council for the Training of Journalists, who since 2017 has regularly published reports on the diversity among UK journalists. However, as the report's author Mark Spilsbury concedes, the findings have a considerable margin of error. The report uses data from the UK Government Labour Force Survey, and only extrapolates its figures for the small fraction of journalists within that workforce. Our report, for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, draws on a survey that media researchers Neil Thurman, Sina Thäsler-Kordonouri and I conducted between September 27 and November 30 2023. We used data from the 2021 Census for England, Wales, and Northern Ireland and from the Roxhill Media database to estimate the total number of UK journalists to be 68,279. Given how notoriously reluctant journalists are to respond to surveys, already swamped as they are with similar requests, we sent our questionnaire to 16,497 randomly selected participants. We considered journalists to be those who worked for a media outlet with an identifiable focus on news, and who earned at least 50% of their income from journalism or worked at least 50% of their working week as a journalist. To be included in our survey, respondents also needed to work for a news outlet with a UK base and that was aimed, at least in part, at a UK audience. After data cleaning, we retained a final sample of 1,130 respondents, a sufficient size to achieve a confidence level of at least 95% and a maximum error margin of 3%. Our survey is part of the international Worlds of Journalism Study, which uses the same core questionnaire across 75 countries. The survey covers a wide range of topics, including journalists' demographics, working conditions and their experience of safety and wellbeing. For the UK study, we added two questions regarding journalists' socioeconomic background. First, we asked what job the main earner in their households held when the respondents were 14 years old. Second, we asked about the school journalists attended: fee-paying private or state primary and secondary school, non-fee-paying selective secondary school (such as grammar school) or a school not in the UK. Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being up for our weekly , delivered every Friday. The question on parents' occupation allowed respondents to write in the title of the relevant job. We coded the replies manually using the nine categories of the Office for National Statistics' 2020 Standard Occupational Classification. Seventy-one percent of journalists in our sample came from a privileged background, with the main earner in their childhood household holding a job within the three top categories of the classification. Only 12% of our respondents came from a working-class background (sales and customer service occupations; process, plant and machine operatives and elementary occupations). Read more: We lack the data for an outright comparison with the general population. But the 2021 census gives an indication. It shows that 23.3% of the main earner in all households in England and Wales held a job in the highest AB social grade, about equivalent to the top three categories in our classification. Nearly double (43.9%) fell into the social grade C2 and DE, roughly equivalent with our bottom three categories. Journalists' privilege also shows in their schooling. Twenty-two percent of journalists in our sample attended a fee-paying secondary, and 13% attended a fee-paying primary school. Around 6% of the general pupil population in England attends private schools, and fewer in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Our data does not suggest that a privileged upbringing makes it more likely for journalists to hold a top management position. Where it does make a difference, though, is whether they work for national media or outlets with international presence (like the Guardian or the Financial Times). Of those who do only 9% come from a working-class background, while 72% come from a privileged one (the rest come from the middle groups in our classification). In contrast, 20% of journalists working for local and regional outlets (including regional arms of national outlets, such as BBC Wales) have a working-class background, and 57% grew up in a more privileged household. Our survey also shows other areas of inequality. An interesting one is age. Both women and journalists from an ethnic minority background seem to drop out of the profession after the age of 50. Journalists with an Asian or Black background in particular remain underrepresented compared to the overall population, as they were in 2015. Female journalists are also still less well paid, less likely to have a permanent contract or to hold a top management role than their male colleagues. They also more often report feeling stressed out. Their disadvantage against their male colleagues may well be a reason. One reason for the privileged background of so many journalists will be that journalism has become a thoroughly academic profession. Nine out of ten journalists in our sample were university educated. In an increasingly complex world, there may be good reasons for those who report on it to undergo an academic training. However, as some scholars have argued, trust in journalism not only depends on accurate and reliable reporting, but also on emotional and social factors that are essential for the relationship between journalists and audiences. Given the lack of trust in news and rising news avoidance among UK audiences, the inequalities our report found should be of concern. If journalists are found to belong to a privileged elite they are less likely to be trusted by the general public. Reliable data on the inequalities that shape the journalism profession is a necessary start to tackle this problem. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Imke Henkel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
