Should the Scottish Government fund public interest journalism?

Scotland is in the middle of a long, slow media collapse. Newsrooms are shrinking, as is the audience. Social media is awash with influencers boosted by dark money. Public trust is eroding. And still, the Scottish Government hesitates.

This week, Holyrood hosted a cross-party meeting on public interest journalism. It was part of a discussion that has been going on for a couple of years now – including a working group report that laid out, in careful language, what most people already know: the status quo isn’t delivering what Scotland needs.

That report recommended that the government set up and fund a Scottish Public Interest Journalism Institute – Spiji – to ensure that citizens across Scotland have access to reliable, civic-minded reporting from and about their communities, their country and the wider world.

The idea has received polite noises of support but no real movement. As manifestos start to be written for the forthcoming Holyrood election, it would be good to see Spiji getting some attention.

Meanwhile, a generation is tuning out

A friend has started teaching18-year-old college students – the first generation whose parents didn’t watch or read the news while they were growing up. She discovered one day that none knew who Rachel Reeves is (Reeves is the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer – the first woman to hold this post. Well they ken noo.)

I have conducted my own straw poll and would say that very few Scots under 30 know who Reeves is. I am in the hairdressers’ as I write this, waiting for some highlights to bed in – “No, not a natural look, thanks – I want to look as if I have been to the hairdresser”. The charming young woman who put them in, as well as not knowing Reeves, didn’t recognise the names Keir Starmer or John Swinney. She did know Humza Yousuf and guessed that he was the First Minister of Scotland (he used to be). (Everyone in the shop has heard of Nicola Sturgeon.)

This leaves me asking – for whom is the current media set-up working? How can we build a better future through democracy if the young don’t participate? Is the loss of a shared and trusted news source a reason why democracies eventually fail?

The Welsh Government already invests in journalism

A similar public interest journalism working group in Wales has won support already. The Welsh Government now invests £100,000 a year in public interest journalism – a modest sum, most of which funds a Senedd reporter through the Caerphilly Observer. It’s already making a visible – though small – difference.

Visit the Senedd website and you’ll find readable news features – stories that also appear in local papers across Wales. Compare that to Holyrood’s site: a dense thicket of agendas and transcripts that few citizens would willingly enter.

No UK newspaper – apart from the Morning Star – has a journalist based in Wales. The Senedd news team even broke the story that led to First Minister Vaughan Gething’s resignation – proof that public funding does not mean becoming a government mouthpiece.

The UK media looks for lines to fit its Unionist agenda

Scotland is in a slightly different situation from Wales. The Scottish editions of London-based media outlets have been scaled back but there are still several Scotland correspondents. They seem to struggle to get anything printed or aired, though, that doesn’t fit with a Scotland-bashing Unionist agenda.

(UK tabloids ran “McPravda” headlines raising the spectre of state propaganda when SPIJI was first mooted here – perhaps a reason why the Scottish government backed off. )

Morning news conferences at broadcasters like STV or BBC Scotland start with reviewing the daily papers – which means their agenda tends to be shaped by the London press. They are also very prone to running Unionist attack stories without any balancing research. Over time, that has undermined trust.

Swallowed up, then hollowed out

Through most of its three centuries as part of the UK, Scotland had a very strong media sector. It famously had the highest newspaper readership in the world.

The papers and news magazines we consumed were commercial enterprises, not making huge profits but earning their proprietors what was regarded in those days as a reasonable return. They were also prestigious trophies for rich men – although they were not run as personal fiefdoms – they did allow editorial independence. for the most part

But the era of globalisation and centralisation was harsh. In The Hollow Drum, my late father Arnold Kemp recounted in detail how then owner Hugh Fraser lost The Scotsman at the roulette table. Since then, The Scotsmanhas changed hands many times, Now, it employs fewer than 100 journalists, and its entire group of titles has been valued at just £4 million (It changed hands for 40 times that sum 20 years ago).

The Herald is owned by a company that rejoices in the name of “Gannett” – perhaps named after the hungry gulls that fight you for your fish supper on Aberdeen beach. Private equity and hedge funds in search of ever-larger profits can be blamed for asset stripping and depredating the newspaper industry.

This hollowing out affects local papers too. The Perthshire Advertiser has no journalist based in Perthshire. The Shetland Times is for sale and it is likely that it will cease to be printed in Lerwick. Papers will probably no longer be printed there, instead being shipped over from the mainland with all the extra carbon footprint and delay that will entail.

Don’t get me wrong – the journalists employed by these papers still work hard and do a pretty good job. I would still recommend reading a newspaper over not reading one. But we need to find a way to halt this slow collapse of the media landscape.

Scots pay the BBC licence fee

Scots do pay a tax for broadcasting that includes some public interest journalism, in the form of the BBC licence fee. I recently wrote a newsletter titled “The BBC is Stealing from Scotland”, which drew on research challenging the corporation’s claim to spend £300 million in 2023/4 here – the same amount it raised in licence fees from Scottish viewers.

The argument hinges on how much of that spending is truly “Scottish”. Much of it is counted as “indirect” – shows made by production companies that might have a Glasgow office but employ few people locally. Critics argue that too much of this budget goes on travel, accommodation, and per diems for crew from London – rather than building a sustainable creative ecosystem here.

I received a full response from BBC Scotland’s Director, Hayley Valentine (published at the foot of this blog). She didn’t just dispute the figures – she pointed out that the BBC operates within a UK-wide system, so focusing on where a production company wouldn’t make sense. A Scottish company could produce shows made in England for the Beeb.

That’s true – but it doesn’t address the deeper structural issue: for centuries, London has functioned as Scotland’s effective capital, sucking talent and resources south.

The real numbers behind the resentment

The controversy over these resources is so bitter precisely because the sums involved are so stark. Scotland’s entire culture budget next year will rise to £238 million. The BBC’s licence fee revenue from Scotland, however, should rise to closer to £400 million with the new licence fee of £174.50 – even accounting for a higher non-payment rate than in England and Wales.

We are effectively taxing Scots to subsidise UK-wide content while our own media and cultural infrastructure crumbles. Are Scots happy with that? Is that money providing the media Scotland needs? The answer depends on what you compare it to.

Denmark and Ireland – to name but two – have much bigger media sectors than Scotland

Independent countries like Denmark and Ireland have media industries that seem to be about three or four times the size of Scotland’s. Their governments support the media and the creative industries with funding and other measures such as tax incentives.

In Denmark, there are two strong public broadcasters (DR and TV2) and several successful commercial brands which receive an annual public subsidy. Newspapers also receive public subsidies. Denmark’s national broadcaster DR uses many innovative techniques to connect with upcoming generations, such as generating a stream of infographics for social media. They have the resources to meet their young people where they are, with informative content tailored to the highly image-literate.

I know Scottish broadcasters are trying. (The most recent hairdresser to visit my chair, now cutting my brightened locks, says she watches STV on TikTok – and has heard of Keir Starmer, though not Rachel Reeves.) But despite these efforts, it is obvious the structure and resources we need to tackles this just simply aren’t there.

This is about democracy, not just journalism

The Scottish Government should fund public interest journalism, at least to the same level as Wales. It’s a start.

This isn’t just about fairness. It’s about civic health. If Scotland wants a functioning democracy – one where people are informed, engaged, and confident in their institutions – we need to support the journalism that nurtures that.

Wales is making a start. Denmark and Ireland are miles ahead. So what is Scotland waiting for?