#
My Lords, there is much to be commended in the Green Paper, not least adding on-demand rights to the listed events regime which we have been discussing in the Sporting Events Bill. As the Government recognise, some of the questions in there are thorny ones which will need careful consideration, not least how we ensure greater prominence for trusted news sources in our increasingly crowded media environment.
When this Urgent Question was taken in another place last week, one of the Labour members of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee urged the Secretary of State to consider “reining in GB News”—a question that the Secretary of State rather sidestepped. Can the Minister provide a bit more reassurance that that is not the Government’s direction of travel? Do the Government consider GB News a trusted news source?
#
The noble Lord makes an interesting point. The whole idea of prominence is to ensure that people know the difference between trusted sources of news and opinion, and that is where the prominence issue comes in by looking at ways we can make sure that such sites come further up in the searches that people make. On the specific question, I would say it would depend whether the item on a particular news programme was opinion purporting to be fact or more factual.
#
My Lords, we welcome the Green Paper, which rightly recognises the severe financial challenges facing our PSBs, vividly exposed by the recent devastating cuts at the BBC. We have long proposed on these Benches that the BBC World Service should be fully funded directly from an FCDO budget, freeing up millions of pounds per year. The World Service is so important both for underpinning soft power and for the security implications of guaranteeing a source of trusted news in a polarised world. Will the Minister take this on board and tell us what conversations her department is having with the Foreign Office on this really important matter?
#
One of the real strengths of the BBC is that it is such a trusted source of news, and that is behind a lot of the issues within this. On the ongoing discussions with the FCDO, I am happy to meet the noble Baroness to discuss that. As she is aware, another Minister in the department deals with this. The Secretary of State has referred to the BBC’s overseas coverage as
“a light on the hill”, —[Official Report, Commons, 16/4/26; col. 992.]
and somewhere that people go to, so we do recognise the real importance of the World Service.
#
My Lords, I too welcome the Green Paper because, frankly, Rome is burning. Two of the UK’s greatest, most respected and historic achievements are threatened by the globalisation of media—a lively, challenging and diverse press, which we have had for centuries, and an unmatched tradition of public service broadcasting, encompassed by Channel 4 and ITV, as well as the BBC, which we have had for almost a century. For over a century, through those means, we have created a very effective national debating chamber and brilliantly captured our national culture, talent and capability. Does the Minister accept that radical measures will be needed to arrest these trends?
#
The Government are fully behind the BBC, both at the present time and as a future source of trusted news and content. Through the charter review process, a lot of these conversations are happening and we are looking in particular at how we can ensure that the funding model is sustainable while being fair and affordable for households. We are clear that,, if we can get sustainable funding and make sure that we get the prominence regime on the internet as well as on television screens, then we should go a long way to ensuring a strong future for our press and media. I would probably draw back a little from saying Rome is burning. There is so much good practice out there that we should celebrate, but I appreciate that we need to see the warning signs of what might come down the road, which is where the paper comes from.
#
My Lords, the Green Paper is really welcome. If this is got right, then digital switchover will mean many more people in this country will get sufficient media and digital understanding to be able to use what they need to improve their lives, so this is much bigger than many people have been thinking. I welcome that and hope that the department will fully involve those who are really concerned about digital inclusion in the consultation so that we get it right for everyone.
#
The intention is to make sure we get it right for everyone. If people have not read the Green Paper, it is worth the read; I thought it was a really interesting document. A striking point made in the paper is about information being part of public infrastructure, and recognising that is critical. In terms of the switchover from digital terrestrial television to the internet provision, there is a question about whether that should be in 2034 or in the decade afterwords. It is not just critical for people and their news; it is also about how people get jobs and apply for pretty much anything. The world is now online, and we need to do what we can to make sure we listen to those people as part of this process.
#
My Lords, none of us underestimates how hard it will be to preserve and protect the place of what we must now call public service media in this new world, but I would contend that it is impossible to understand our world at the moment if we do not understand the place of faith in the affairs of the world. It is impossible to understand our own nation’s culture, literature and law without understanding the place of faith; I do not think we can understand ourselves without it. But I notice that, in the Green Paper, there is little or perhaps no mention of the place of faith, which has always been such an important part of the public service broadcasting economy. I wonder whether the Minister would like to mention—I know how difficult it is—what steps are being taken to make sure this is preserved.
#
I will feed the right reverend Prelate’s point back. I think it is a really interesting point. I know that having knowledge of the Bible and Bible stories meant that I was much better equipped to understand literature. I think there is that cultural aspect, as well as the faith aspect, to it. The main thrust of the paper was around making sure nobody was left behind in the move towards digital, but I will feed those points back.
#
My Lords, a trusted source of news that everyone can rely on is good for society, but we should not kid ourselves that that is what currently exists. Levels of trust in the BBC and other mainstream broadcasters are not universal across all demographic groups. The cause of that is the failings of the broadcasters and that is what pushes these people in search of other sources of information—not all of which is bad, I understand. Before any decision is made on giving greater prominence to broadcasters, will the Minister require them, especially the BBC, to publish a breakdown of their audience trust scores by demographic group, using a modern model, such as that deployed by More in Common or Yonder, that goes deeper than just age and socioeconomic groups? Will she demand from the BBC especially that, for any prominence to be awarded, it must first improve its performance among those groups?
#
The noble Baroness makes a really interesting point. I hope the noble Baroness will take part in the consultation, but I will feed that back. We are clear that a free and fair media is essential to our democracy; part of that is people actually accessing information, and that trust piece has to go beyond just the surface level. I will feed the points back.
#
My Lords, the Green Paper does not simply propose that the prominence regime be confined to public service media, including public broadcasters; it suggests that it should also be extended to news publishers. Therefore, if some news publishers are going to be included in the prominence regime and given various privileges, and social media companies will have to promote the content of those news publishers, how are those news publishers going to be selected? Can the Minister assure the House that this is not a Trojan horse for forcing some news publishers to bend the knee to a state-approved press regulator, such as Impress?
#
This is entirely why we have a consultation period that runs to 31 August. As part of the consultation, we will work and engage with relevant parties to determine the criteria that we use. We will decide the criteria for a trustworthy news provider in an open and transparent manner. On protecting media freedom, this is not about censorship or people having to take a different view; this is about making sure that the general public—and we as the part of the general public with a particular interest in news—can understand what is more likely to be high-quality content, and ensuring that that comes further up the search mechanisms.