Given the chance, could community media help shape the future of media literacy in the UK? Why the House of Lords Media Literacy Report call for critical thinking and investment, and how might local, participatory approaches rooted in cultural democracy and civic engagement offer a better alternative to centralised strategies.
The newly published media literacy report from the Lords Select Committee for Communications and Digital represents a major intervention in a debate that has been simmering for years: how do we equip people to navigate an increasingly complex, data-driven and globalised media environment? It is a detailed and comprehensive document that deserves careful study, particularly because it positions media literacy as a core element of civic life rather than an optional educational add-on.
One of the report’s most striking conclusions is that low investment in media literacies represents a threat to social cohesion and the security of the UK. This is an important and welcome acknowledgment. Media literacy is not just about individual protection against misinformation; it is a collective safeguard for democracy and social stability. In this respect, the report is right to call for a national strategy, more investment, and greater integration of media literacy across public services.
However, while these recommendations offer significant opportunities, they also raise critical questions. The report leans heavily towards the creation of a national literacy project led by central government. This risks creating a centralised and mono-cultural approach that fails to reflect the diversity of experiences across the UK. Media literacy cannot be designed as a one-size-fits-all solution. Nor should it be shaped entirely by a top-down administrative framework. Instead, it needs to be devolved, pluralistic, and grounded in the lived experiences of communities.
There are several areas where the report feels limited. It does not fully account for the profound social changes that have taken place recently, including mass immigration and the emergence of super-diverse cities. These changes have transformed the cultural fabric of the UK. Media literacy strategies must therefore be sensitive to linguistic diversity, intercultural practices, and the multiple ways in which people create and share meaning in their everyday lives.
Similarly, the report underestimates the positive ways people are already using media as part of family and community life. Every day, individuals engage in creative acts of storytelling—whether through social media posts, WhatsApp groups, podcasts, or community radio. These informal practices are rarely acknowledged in formal policy discussions, yet they are often the most influential forms of media learning. They demonstrate that media literacy is not just about evaluating information but about participating in culture, expressing identity, and building social bonds.
This is where community media offers invaluable lessons. For decades, community media projects have demonstrated how participatory, collaborative and locally rooted approaches can develop media skills while fostering trust, accountability, and social inclusion. These projects show that media literacy thrives when people are supported to create content that reflects their own lives and priorities. They counter misinformation not through punitive measures or abstract warnings, but through dialogue and shared creativity within the communities they serve.
If the UK is serious about media literacy, it must also confront a long-standing imbalance: the downgrading of the social gain remit in community broadcasting policy and the chronic underinvestment in civic media infrastructure. Community radio remains the only part of the UK’s media system with a legal obligation to provide training in media skills through participation—yet this commitment has not been matched with sustainable funding or strategic support. Meanwhile, other countries, such as Ireland, are investing significantly in community media as part of their democratic and cultural policy frameworks. The UK has fallen behind.
The report’s recognition of the role of libraries as potential media literacy hubs is welcome. But we should go further. Decentered Media has long argued for the development of local media hubs, building on existing cultural and civic spaces to provide open, accessible environments where people can learn, experiment and create together. These hubs should not be imposed from above; they should be co-designed with the communities they serve, reflecting local needs and aspirations.
Ultimately, a future media literacy strategy must avoid becoming another technocratic project focused solely on evaluating information. It should prioritise the social value of communication, recognising that media literacy is about building the capacity for storytelling, civic participation and cultural democracy. It should draw on the principles of the foundational economy, treating communication as an essential public good, and supporting infrastructures that allow people to create challenging and creative media without being constrained by top-down policies.
The report is an important milestone, but it must be the start of a broader conversation. How do we create a system that empowers people to engage critically and creatively with media, while respecting their independence and cultural autonomy? How do we build a strategy that strengthens democracy, fosters social trust, and recognises the positive role that media already plays in everyday life? These are the questions that will determine whether media literacy becomes a transformative civic project—or just another policy tick-box exercise.