The Decline in News

There was a time when the news was about, well, the news. Proper journalism. Investigations, in-depth analysis, a commitment to facts. Now? Now it’s a race to the bottom, and even the so-called reputable outlets have abandoned editorial judgment in favour of the almighty click.

Take the BBC. Once the gold standard, now a slave to engagement metrics. The shift began in earnest over the past decade, as the rise of digital consumption forced even publicly funded outlets to chase audience engagement. In an effort to stay relevant in a rapidly changing media landscape, the BBC began prioritising online traffic and social media shares over traditional editorial discretion. Headlines that used to be clear and factual are increasingly crafted for maximum drama. “How this one weird trick saved an economy” is just around the corner. And the content? A mix of serious reporting buried under a pile of soft news, celebrity guff, and whatever’s currently causing a meltdown on Twitter. Sorry, “X.”

Live reporting used to mean something. Think back to the BBC’s coverage of the Iraq War or the 7/7 London bombings – comprehensive, well-researched, and led by seasoned journalists on the ground. Now it’s just a rolling feed of breathless non-updates, padded out with speculation and tweets from random punters. Now it’s just a rolling feed of breathless non-updates, padded out with speculation and tweets from random punters. The BBC, funded by the public, shouldn’t need to chase clicks like a desperate tabloid. But here we are.

And speaking of tabloid trash, let’s talk about the biggest offenders. The Mail Online is a cesspit of clickbait, gossip, and outright misinformation, all packaged in headlines designed to enrage and deceive. The Express has given up entirely, vomiting out pro-Brexit fever dreams that bear little resemblance to reality. The Sun? Well, expecting integrity from The Sun is like expecting culture from a Wetherspoons menu.

Even the broadsheets are at it, and their credibility has taken a hit. Readers who once trusted them for in-depth analysis and balanced reporting now find a landscape filled with sensationalism, partisan spin, and a desperate chase for online engagement. Subscriptions wane, serious journalism gets sidelined, and the once-reliable institutions are increasingly indistinguishable from the tabloid frenzy. The Telegraph, once a serious paper, now spends half its time drumming up culture war nonsense to keep its readers permanently outraged. The Independent, now just an SEO-driven content farm, prioritises viral garbage over proper journalism. HuffPost has become a parody of itself, serving up outrage and ideology over fact. Metro is basically BuzzFeed with a bus timetable. And then there’s GB News and TalkTV, which exist solely to stoke anger and grievance among those who enjoy shouting at the television.

This isn’t just a case of bad journalism. It’s a fundamental shift in how news is delivered. Clicks determine everything. Investigative reporting, the kind that takes months to uncover corruption and hold power to account, simply doesn’t generate the instant dopamine hit of “You won’t believe what Meghan did next.” And so, it gets sidelined. Buried. Because facts don’t sell. Outrage does.

The problem is that it’s self-perpetuating. The more the media prioritises sensationalism, the more the public loses its appetite for real news. And when people are only fed a diet of clickbait and trivia, they stop caring about the things that actually matter. Who needs to understand economic policy when you can read about some Z-list influencer’s new face tattoo?

The result? A dumbed-down, hyper-partisan, misinformation-riddled mess where the most important stories struggle to break through the noise. Take, for example, the recent surge in global economic instability. While major developments in inflation and trade policies unfold, much of the news cycle remains fixated on celebrity scandals and outrage-driven fluff. Critical issues barely register against the noise of clickbait-driven headlines. The decline of news quality isn’t just a shame. It’s dangerous. Because when truth takes a backseat to clicks, we all lose.

There are, however, some exceptions. Reuters and AP seem to have largely avoided falling into the click-driven abyss. Reuters, for instance, maintained its commitment to investigative reporting with its extensive coverage of the Myanmar military's atrocities against the Rohingya, despite political pushback. AP, meanwhile, has continued to set the standard for on-the-ground war reporting, with its recent Pulitzer Prize-winning work covering the war in Ukraine (for which Trump refuses them access to Oval Office jamborees of misinformation). While no organisation is entirely immune to occasional lapses, these outlets still prioritise fact-based journalism over viral engagement. As wire services, their priority remains factual reporting over sensationalism. That said, they are not immune to the pressures of the modern news cycle. Instances of ethical missteps and editorial lapses do occur, but they remain among the few organisations still striving to uphold rigorous journalistic standards. If only more outlets followed their lead.