Inaccurate, misleading and intrusive press reporting is causing serious harm

Inaccurate, misleading and intrusive press reporting is causing serious and ongoing harm to individuals and deepening tensions between communities. That’s the verdict of the Press Recognition Panel’s (PRP) 10th Annual Report on the Recognition System.

The report illustrates how irresponsible press coverage is being amplified online and across social media platforms. And this continues to stoke divisions and hatred, and lead to community tensions.

Stories circulate far beyond their original context, with misleading headlines repeated and reframed at scale. This is creating patterns of harm that impact a wide range of people, including women and children, and particularly marginalised groups.

More than 35 stakeholders responded to the PRP’s recent Call for Information. These included regulators, publishers, journalists, academics, campaigners, civil society organisations, and members of the public.

Groups including Amnesty International UK, the Runnymede Trust, Imkaan, the Campaign Against Antisemitism, the End Violence Against Women Coalition, Sport in Mind, and Trans Media Watch, reported widespread impacts and a lack of effective routes to redress.

Public wants better press regulation

Public polling reviewed in the report shows strong and consistent support for regulation independent of government and the press industry. Over half (54%) want a regulator independent of both, 22% favouring a statutory model. But only 3% support an industry-run body, an example of which would be the Independent Press Standards Organisation.

More than a decade has passed since the establishment of the Recognition System following the Leveson Inquiry. Yet Impress remains the only regulator to have demonstrated that it is independent, has proper funding, and is able to protect the public. Most major national publishers continue to operate outside this system, relying instead on membership of a trade complaints body or in-house arrangements.

This means that, across much of the press, accountability is not independently assessed, systemic issues are rarely subject to formal investigation, and access to low-cost arbitration is limited. This creates a system in which only the very wealthy can seek redress through the courts.

Legislative incentives designed by parliament to encourage participation in the Recognition System were never commenced and have since been repealed. This leaves the public with uneven access to redress and justice, and with limited protection against modern press harm. The Labour Party was once a staunch supporter of the Leveson framework. But it has yet to articulate a clear policy direction since taking office.

Kathryn Cearns, chair of the Press Recognition Panel, said:

The substantial harm caused by inaccurate, misleading and intrusive press reporting to individuals and communities across the UK is clearly evident. Lives are being destroyed, intruded upon, and marginalised groups in particular face sustained and enduring attacks.

Digital distribution, algorithmic amplification, and AI-assisted production, coupled with weak and inconsistent oversight, are magnifying this problem, sowing division and stoking community tensions.

The existing fully independent Recognition System remains operational. It protects the public through clear and consistent complaints processes, high standards, structural safeguards, and an independently assessed arbitration scheme that offers low-cost redress.

Yet despite this, most news providers have chosen to remain outside the system, overseeing their own output, leaving ordinary people at the mercy of political and industry choices.

The PRP is calling for new incentives to encourage publishers to join a recognised, truly independent regulator, reform existing bodies, or form new bodies that could apply for recognition.

Featured image via the Canary