Faith in the news hangs by a thread. Just 31 per cent of Brits said they trusted the media when asked in a survey in November 2023. Meanwhile, blind belief in conspiracy theories and misinformation is flying.
Turning this around will take a huge effort on the part of journalists and legislators. But there is hope to be found in one small yet consequential case: a Court of Appeal ruling that three judges who had dealt with the case of Sara Sharif in the family court could be named. Sara, who was later murdered, aged ten, at home in Woking in 2023, had been involved in three sets of family court proceedings.
After the convictions of her father and stepmother for her murder, and her uncle for causing or allowing her death, the media was able to report the earlier proceedings. They showed Surrey County Council had concerns about Sara’s care as early as her birth in 2013. But David Williams ruled last year that the judges who presided over the family court cases could not be named.
The journalists Hannah Summers and Louise Tickle, the BBC and PA Media appealed the decision, and on 24 January, the Master of the Rolls, Geoffrey Vos, allowed it. He wrote that Williams had been unfair to the journalists, adding: “The judge lost sight of the importance of press scrutiny to the integrity of the justice system.”
We might have sympathy for the judges, whose decisions will come under scrutiny. Williams did: he said naming them would subject them to “rude and discriminatory slurs, moving on to vilification, abuse and threats”. Such attacks are entirely wrong. But hiding from legitimate scrutiny only leads to greater cynicism about the judicial system and media, and deepens the wedge of distrust between people and the perceived establishment.
On TikTok, users have questioned why “professionals” deserve anonymity, and asked: “Is this yet another example of a two-tier society?” Some may ask if such posts are any different from the eccentric “green-ink” letters we once received at newspapers. But 40 per cent of Britons are now on TikTok, with the average user spending almost 50 hours a month on it. If any hint is given on the platform that there may be some establishment cover-up behind Sara Sharif’s death, millions will take it.
We can hope that tech platforms will clean themselves up. We can also hope for world peace and free unicorns for all. In the meantime, the best we can do to counter those who see shadows in every corner is to blast them with light.
Finding herself sandwiched between angry investors and Daily Telegraph staff is probably not where Lisa Nandy wanted to be. And yet it seems the Culture Secretary must now accept she has little choice but to step into the chaos surrounding the sale of the title. Nandy looks likely to refer the sale to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The decision could result in it being taken away from the majority Abu Dhabi-backed RedBird IMI (which, incidentally, has been “advised” through the agonising process by the former chancellor George Osborne).
The Telegraph debacle stretches back 20 months to when Lloyds Banking Group took control of the title and other assets held by the troubled Barclay family. RedBird acquired an option to buy the paper to help pay off the Barclays’ £1.2bn debt to Lloyds. But concerns about press freedom led the last government to put a block on the sale, meaning RedBird had to find a buyer willing to spend £500m to help reimburse its losses. An auction concluded in October in favour of the New York Sun owner Dovid Efune – but he has not yet managed to come up with backers. Meanwhile, insiders at RedBird are agitating for redundancies and a halt on planned investments.
If Nandy does refer the sale to the CMA, it could mean further delays. It could also mean a return to the table of Lord Saatchi and Lady Rothschild, who in August made a £350m bid – a figure many believe is far closer to what the paper is worth.
The Metropolitan Police has asked to see transcripts of the pre-trial hearings in the case between Prince Harry and Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers (NGN). The former Labour Party deputy leader Tom Watson is also sending Commissioner Mark Rowley a dossier of evidence he claims points to illegal activity at the firm. It comes after Prince Harry and Watson both received payouts and apologies from NGN for serious intrusion into their lives.
Their calls appear to have received a muted response from Rowley, who told LBC that “much of the material” in the case had come from earlier police investigations.
There may be a case here. But with the Met facing another round of budget cuts and Londoners angry about knife crime, phone snatchers and bike thieves, an investigation into the historical complaints of an unpopular prince would be a hard sell.
Elon Musk may believe his sway over social media ushered in a Trump presidency. But it may also be ushering out millions of Tesla customers. A survey of British motorists shows 60 per cent have been put off buying a Tesla because of Musk’s recent behaviour – and would rather opt for a Chinese model.
With the UK now the largest market for electric cars in Europe, Musk might think a little more carefully before again polling his followers on whether America should “liberate the people of Britain from their tyrannical government”.
Note: This article was updated on 31 January 2025 to correct an error. The consortium RedBird IMI is backed by Abu Dhabi and not Saudi Arabia as originally suggested.
[See also: What is Labour in power for?]
Content from our partners
This article appears in the 29 Jan 2025 issue of the New Statesman, Class War