There were certainly times when the relationship between the government and the media looked very cosy. The media enthusiastically covered stories which supported the government position, but ignored stories which might harm it.
For example, two studies were released in a short space of time about the immune response to Covid, one negative about long-term immunity and one positive. Guess which one received the most coverage? The BBC reported on the ‘negative’ study, which showed antibodies fall after a Covid infection, on 27 October 2020,17 and said ‘immunity appears to be fading and there is a risk of catching the virus multiple times’. However, in November it did not report on a study18 showing that a quarter of us might have T-cell immunity to Covid, which is long-lasting.
Low-quality evidence in favour of masks was all over the media, but the one decent randomised controlled trial (RCT) into mask-wearing was barely reported. It found a statistically insignificant difference in infection between mask-wearers and non-mask wearers.19 I interviewed one of the study’s authors for Chapter 13, ‘The climate of fear’. Hospital admissions made headlines, but not discharges. Deaths were reported with grim daily dedication, but not recoveries. Is it any wonder that the UK was one of the most frightened countries in the world?20 Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter, the head of the University of Cambridge’s Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, which carried out a study into British attitudes, said he was concerned that the UK had become ‘overanxious’.
Most news outlets rely on advertising revenue for income, which means there is a degree of unspoken catering to the preferences of the advertiser. There was a 48% decline in traditional advertising spend in the UK in the lockdown period 23 March to 30 June. Public Health England became the UK’s largest advertiser, and the government the sixth biggest advertiser, during this time. The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, announced in April 2020 that the UK would spend £35 million on the ‘All in, All together’ advertising campaign in national and regional newspapers. Did that set the tone for editorial coverage at the outset of the epidemic? Campaign reported that Cabinet Office figures reveal that the government invested in excess of £184m on communications relating to Covid-19 in 2020.21 What will the final bill be? And do the newspapers dare to bite the hand that feeds them?
As well as editor and proprietor bias, the influence of advertising revenue, the lure of the clickbait headline and the journalist’s own tendency to feel the fear and allow that to influence reporting, another worrying factor affected media coverage of the epidemic. On 23 April 2020, Ofcom, the UK’s communication regulator, issued strict guidance about Covid coverage. It asked broadcasters to be alert to ‘health claims related to the virus which may be harmful; medical advice which may be harmful; accuracy or material misleadingness in programmes in relation to the virus or public policy regarding it’.22
That guidance could be interpreted as not permitting anyone to challenge the government’s public health policy. Scientific advice evolves, so does government advice, and inhibiting broadcasters from these discussions is dangerous.
Free speech is not just for the good times, it’s for epidemics too. In fact, it is in times of crisis that we need to hold these values even closer. As the Free Speech Union pointed out, broadcasters should be able to air different views without Ofcom making value judgements: ‘The approach adopted by Ofcom in these cases is deeply concerning. It is true, as Ofcom notes, that this is a time of significantly heightened public sensitivity. It is also a time of substantially increased state powers and restrictions on long-established liberties. However, no such restrictions have been placed by the Government on the right to free speech. In fact, it is vital that this right should be upheld so that the Government’s decision to impose wide-ranging restrictions can be challenged by broadcasters and others. This means that any regulator charged with upholding freedom of expression – as is the case with Ofcom – should proceed to restrict that freedom only on a closely-reasoned basis. That is something Ofcom has manifestly failed to do.’23
Ofcom’s decision may have chilled the inclination of the media to explore theories which were counter to government advice. The state broadcaster, the BBC, refused to challenge state orthodoxy, which is the sort of thing we criticise other countries for. Open debate should have been allowed, in sensible and contextual ways, to inform the public, stimulate scientific debate and acknowledge that consensus moves. There is a word for only sharing information which is biased and is used to promote a political cause: propaganda.
3. FRIGHTFUL HEADLINES
GLOBAL GLOOM
Coronavirus leaves Wuhan a ‘zombieland’ with people collapsing in streets and medics patrolling in hazmat suits The Sun, 24 January 2020
Killer Bug Chaos: Man arrested after filming covert video showing true scale of body bags piling up at Wuhan hospital The Sun, 2 February 2020
Iran’s coronavirus mass graves so big they can be seen from SPACE as 429 die from disease The Sun, 13 March 2020
Elderly ‘dead and abandoned’ in Spanish care homes BBC, 24 March 2020
Thousands more people may have died in Wuhan than authorities are saying Metro, 30 March 2020
US passes 10m Covid cases as virus rages across nation The Guardian, 10 November 2020
Swedish surge in Covid cases dashes immunity hopes The Guardian, 12 November 2020
Brutal Covid second wave exposes Italy’s shortage of intensive care staff The Guardian, 18 November 2020
THE UK’S FRIGHTFUL HEADLINES
UK on ‘war footing’ as elderly face isolation BBC, 15 March 2020
Three numbers that tell a terrifying story BBC, 23 March 2020
Coronavirus horror: London mortuaries expand to prepare for massive surge in deaths Daily Express, 18 March 2020
End of freedom The Daily Telegraph, 24 March 2020
Heartbreak as healthy 21-year-old dies from coronavirus – ‘It’s not just a virus’ Daily Express, 25 March 2020
NHS Hero’s Death on the front line
