The UK Government’s updated social cohesion policy, Protecting What Matters, is significant not only for what it says about confidence, resilience and shared civic life, but also for what it now recognises about media. The inclusion of local media, community radio and local reporting within this framework marks an important shift in policy language and, potentially, in policy direction.
Read the Better Media Briefing Summary Here
For many years, discussions about cohesion, integration and community development have too often treated media as a secondary concern. Communications have been assumed to sit in the background, as if trust, understanding and shared belonging emerge on their own without sustained local infrastructure. That assumption has never been convincing. Communities do not become cohesive simply because services are delivered to them. Cohesion is shaped through how people hear about one another, how local issues are discussed, whose voices are recognised, and whether trusted, place-based systems exist to support dialogue, accountability and participation.
The Government’s policy now acknowledges part of this reality. It notes that local media are essential for giving voice to communities that might otherwise struggle to be heard, for holding local institutions to account, and for countering false narratives. That is an important statement. It places local journalism and community broadcasting within the practical architecture of civic life rather than treating them as optional cultural extras.
This matters for professional advocates, policy managers and service providers who work with media for social value purposes. For many in these fields, the case for local and community media has long been clear. Media are not only channels for promotion or awareness raising. They are part of the social fabric that enables people to make sense of common challenges, recognise shared interests and develop a sense of connection to place. Where that fabric is weak, fragmented or absent, mistrust grows more easily, misinformation spreads more quickly, and public life becomes harder to sustain.
The reference to community radio is especially welcome. Community radio has often been discussed in narrow terms, usually as a small-scale broadcasting outlet, a training platform or a marginal cultural service. Those functions matter, but they do not capture its full civic contribution. At its best, community radio provides accessible, low-cost, locally grounded communication that can support social connection, representation, learning, volunteering and practical participation. It can reach people who are overlooked by larger systems. It can reflect everyday concerns in ordinary language. It can also help anchor a sense of common life in places where institutional trust is weak or where communities feel unheard.
The same is true of local reporting. In many towns and cities, the retreat of local journalism has left a gap that has not been filled by national outlets, platform-based information flows or generic regional content. That gap is not only commercial. It is civic. When scrutiny disappears, accountability is weakened. When local issues are no longer reported with care and continuity, public understanding becomes thinner. When communities do not see themselves represented in trusted local reporting, disengagement becomes more likely. The Government’s recognition that local news presence has retreated in some places is therefore important, as is its stated intention to respond.
There is now a strong sense of expectation around the forthcoming Local Media Strategy. The Government has indicated that this strategy will seek to guarantee the long-term sustainability of local journalism, provide new funding for local media publishers to adapt to technological and commercial change, and help revive local news provision where it has declined. These commitments raise the prospect of a more serious conversation than has often been possible in the past.
The central question is whether this review will do more than stabilise legacy decline. If it is to matter, it should not be confined to preserving residual market provision or extending support only to existing institutional models. The opportunity is wider than that. By placing community and civic media within a policy agenda concerned with social cohesion and community development, the Government has opened a space to think again about how place-based communications infrastructure is designed, supported and valued.
That creates an opportunity to move on from the laissez-faire approaches of the past. For too long, local media policy has tended to assume that market incentives alone would secure pluralism, responsiveness and civic value. Where markets weakened, retreat was often treated as unfortunate but inevitable. Where local institutions failed to sustain meaningful public connection, the answer was rarely to rebuild communications capacity as part of local development policy. Instead, media were allowed to hollow out while policymakers focused elsewhere.
That approach is no longer adequate. If social cohesion is now understood as a practical policy concern, then local communication systems must be treated as part of the answer. This means recognising community and civic media as infrastructure. It means linking media policy to place-based development, democratic participation, education, public service access and social trust. It means valuing media not only for audience reach or commercial performance, but for their contribution to reciprocity, accountability and shared public understanding.
There is also a need for precision in how this next phase is approached. Community media should not be invited into the policy conversation merely as a symbolic gesture. Nor should local media support be framed only as a defensive response to misinformation. The stronger case is positive and developmental. Community and civic media can help build confidence, strengthen belonging, improve institutional responsiveness and widen participation in local life. They can support social cohesion because they are rooted in relationships, not simply transactions.
Better Media welcomes the commitment of Ian Murray, the Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts, to adopt a more inclusive practice for policy development in this area.
For service providers and social value practitioners, this should encourage a broader view of media partnerships. The question is not only how media can carry messages about public services. It is how local media can become part of the civic ecology through which communities deliberate, learn, connect and act. That requires support for independent voice, sustainable local production, trusted reporting, participatory formats and long-term institutional development.
The Government’s updated policy does not resolve these issues on its own. But it does signal a more promising direction. It recognises that local media have a public role in strengthening communities and that community radio has a place within that role. The task now is to ensure that the forthcoming review turns that recognition into a durable framework for action.
There is a real opportunity here. If approached seriously, this moment could help shift local media policy away from managed decline and towards civic renewal. That would be good for journalism, good for broadcasting, and good for the places and communities that need stronger, more trusted and more accountable communication systems.
Endnotes
1. UK Government. (2026, March). Protecting What Matters: Towards a More Confident, Cohesive, and Resilient United Kingdom. Policy document provided by user.