I studied journalism for 5 years and I’m not reading the news.

Firstly, most journalists come from a place of good intention.

Fresh faced hopefuls will head to study journalism thinking that they can make sense of the world and maybe make things a little better. But coming out of 5 years of studying journalism, from BA to Masters, I am sorry to say that I fear some of the cogs are broken, which makes it hard for those fresh faced journalists to stay true to their original mission. 

Let’s start first with the issue of headlines - attention grabbing short statements that are used to lure you in. 

Let’s take an example:

“Starmer Scraps NHS England” - Politics Joe, Instagram

More and more of us are getting our news from Instagram and other social media outlets. It’s quick to digest and a lot of us are there anyway watching puppy videos, so why not throw some politics in too. This headline about the NHS is a perfect example of well intentioned journalism getting it wrong or over estimating their audiences! Hoards of comments rushed in mouthing off at Labour, “Wanker”, “We need another Guy Fawkes” or “Probably wanted to rename it NHS Jizzrael”.

These were knee jerk reactions assuming that Labour was just cutting the whole NHS - which wasn’t true! The out cry was justifiable if that was what was happening, but it wasn’t! It was this lazy clickbait headline writing that led to this confusion. Thankfully, people started replying to the comments clarifying that NHS England is the governing body brought in by the Tories. But do we think those comments were read, or do we think that those misinformed individuals then went on with their days telling everyone they saw that Labour were cutting the NHS.

This is how the misinformation spread and it was caused by lazy writing from journalists focusing on site traffic, not clear reporting.

---

Our news is incredibly America centric. 

Let use the example of the Lucy Letby case vs Trump. 

It is becoming more and more clear that the case of Lucy Letby is not over and there is evidence building pointing to a major miscarriage of justice and Letby being used as a scapegoat. This case is sensitive, complicated and is also pointing fingers at many high powered consultants and higher ups for their miss-management and possible neglect. It was much easier to blame a potential serial killer than admit wrong doing on a large scale.

See these podcasts for further information - 

But was this top headline news?

This is a chance for journalists to really stand up for the little guy and hold powers to account. The little guy being a possibly wrongly accused nurse and the powers being the money holders at the top of a huge hospital. This case concerns us all!

Nurses and doctors have been protesting out of fear that they are not protected and are at risk of similar cases. But who takes our headline - Trump.

America is a super power yes, and it is important we know about what they are messing up and destroying so we know which direction the apocalypse comes from. But is it more important to know about a country where our opinions make no difference and we have no say, especially on someone none of us even voted for. America will always take the top of the news page, but those aren’t always the stories we NEED to know about. Who decides to put the US above UK news? It makes me worry about what they are distracting us from, or are they just trying to make us feel lucky that we don’t currently have a Trump like figure running things... anymore.

---

If it bleeds it leads… yup, this was a common phrase we heard in the newsroom. But if we dig deeper, it’s only a specific person bleeding that will lead. 

Let’s compare the Ukraine war, Gaza genocide and Congo. 

Ukraine war, everyone seems very clear on the fact that Russia are the villains. This is a narrative that has been fed to us through cinema and TV screens for a long long time. Simple, cut and dry, we need to save the innocent Ukrainians, welcome them into your home and it’s all very clear.

Not that simple for Gaza though is it? I previously worked as a newsreader and the politics around the words we could use about Israel and Gaza was so sensitive it brought me out in sweats every time! On this date (19th March 2025), Israel has broken the ceasefire agreement and bombed Gaza killing hundreds of civilians. What makes this even more cruel is the fact the that thousands of Palestinians had literally just moved back, many of which were finding ways to celebrate Ramadan amongst the rubble. Netanyahu has been quoted say “Fighting will resume at full force”.

Am I missing something? Doesn’t that seem the height of cruelty to give people hope, lure them home and then bomb them. Oh but we still have to be careful with our language, we still have to quote “the attacks are a reaction to the October 7th attacks by Hamas”, we still have to make it absolutely clear that apparent terrorists in Gaza are the reason that so many civilians are being killed. This is a prime example of journalists hands being tied by higher ups. I’m not saying reporting should go unchecked, but we can see a vast difference in reporting on these two wars, when really what is the difference? Innocent lives are being lost over land. Innocent lives are the ones journalists are meant to be giving the voice to. 

Oh yes and Congo, well apparently no one needs to know about that war… I’ll let you read between the lines with that one. 

---

Let’s look at some solutions - 

Our brains were never built to take in this much information. We weren’t built to be able to process the images of savage cruelty. From the comfort of our homes we are also a lot of the time completely powerless. Petitions and marches are great, but at the end of the day, there is a lot more going on behind the scenes that makes everything more complicated than a march can defeat. 

With this in mind, choose your campaign! Is it climate change, human rights, animal welfare? The only way I have been able to process any of the world’s news is by choosing what I am interested in and dedicating my time as a journalist to finding the real stories. That doesn’t mean that the other stuff doesn’t matter, but those aren’t my battles. I would rather be well informed about one issue that misinformed about loads. 

For example, human rights has always been my fight focus. I feel that people can’t care about the environment or anything else if their rights are being taken away. This then also leads to women’s rights. So, in order to avoid misinformation, I go straight to the horses mouth - I’ll read books directly from those who fight for others, or listen to in-depth podcasts that give context to stories (context, another thing missing from current journalism). By choosing a focus, I can try and get the full story and then pass that on fully informed. 

I call myself a Participatory Journalist. This means I don’t just observe stories, make a snappy headline and then call it a day. I will PARTICIPATE in that story, I will develop trust with the contributors in the hopes of creating a well rounded and honest portrayal. One that others can learn from in an informed way. 

There is a place for hasty journalism - road closures, weather events, unexpected local events - but even murders at times need context (See Gary Younge’s book, Another Day in the Death of America), otherwise we are never going to learn how to improve the systems moving forward. 

And isn’t that what journalism is for, as a voice for the voiceless or purposefully silenced and making the world a better place for those who come after? 

If it isn’t then I would like my money back.