The launch of the UK Government’s Civil Society Covenant is a welcome and necessary development, particularly for those of us who believe that a healthy, participative democracy depends on open dialogue, trust-based relationships, and meaningful civic infrastructure. By placing renewed emphasis on recognition, partnership, participation, and transparency, the covenant offers a framework that aligns closely with the values that have long underpinned community media practice—yet too often remain under-recognised in mainstream civil society discourse.
The covenant rightly affirms the need for government to work with civil society, not simply to commission it as a service provider. This distinction is vital. It invites us to consider how we foster long-term relationships based on shared purpose, rather than short-term transactions based on cost-efficiency. The covenant also foregrounds the principle that civil society is not monolithic—it encompasses everything from large charities and faith groups to grassroots networks and voluntary associations. Within this plural ecosystem, there should also be a clear and visible place for independent, locally grounded, community media.
However, this is not something to take for granted. If community media wants to be part of the covenant conversation, it must take active steps to align its language, practice, and outcomes with the covenant’s guiding principles. There is important work ahead to articulate how community media contributes to public value—not just by broadcasting information, but by facilitating democratic expression, building local social capital, and supporting participatory governance.
Community media shares deep affinities with the covenant’s stated ethos. Its traditions are grounded in mutual respect, voluntary contribution, collaboration, and locally defined purpose. Community radio stations, local podcasts, neighbourhood newsletters, and digital storytelling projects offer more than just alternative content—they provide relational infrastructures through which communities make sense of themselves. These are spaces in which difference can be heard, identity can be negotiated, and solidarity can be cultivated—not imposed from above, but generated through everyday dialogue.
By committing to the Civil Society Covenant, government signals a willingness to invest in civil society not as an adjunct, but as a co-equal contributor to our social and democratic life. If this commitment is to be meaningful, then local and community media must be part of the picture. Media that is produced with, not simply for, local communities must be seen as an essential part of our social fabric—just as important as food banks, youth groups, or voluntary environmental action.
To realise this potential, the covenant’s implementation must prioritise pluralism in how media is supported at the local level. A one-size-fits-all model will not suffice. Community media thrives in different forms across different places, responding to different histories, demographics, and needs. Funding streams, commissioning frameworks, and partnership models need to be flexible enough to support this diversity—rather than reinforcing narrow or tokenistic definitions of media engagement.
At its best, community media helps to surface the stories that too often go unheard—those of people grouped by protected characteristics, those living in overlooked neighbourhoods, those whose lived experience defies political cliché. By amplifying these voices, community media can strengthen the social bonds that connect us across divides of geography, class, and identity. It can help to repair trust in institutions by demonstrating that communication is not just about messaging, but about listening and responding. It can remind us that democracy is not an occasional act, but a daily practice rooted in relationships and mutual recognition.
If the Civil Society Covenant is to be a success, it must engage with the cultural and informational dimensions of community life. Civil society doesn’t function without stories—shared, contested, and told in our own words. Local media can, and should, be at the heart of that process. It is time for community media practitioners, advocates, and supporters to step forward, make the case, and demonstrate that they too are essential partners in building a more responsive, inclusive, and relational civic life.
The covenant is a signal—a starting point for a new way of working. Community media must now respond with equal ambition and clarity of purpose. This is a moment of opportunity. Let’s not miss it.
If you’d like to explore how community media projects can align with the Civil Society Covenant and contribute to local implementation partnerships, contact us to get involved in the dialogue.