| Keywords [eng] |
UK General Election 2024, agenda-setting, media ownership, British politics, public perception, journalism, Rishi Sunak, Keir Starmer |
| Abstract [eng] |
Media ownership in the UK is highly concentrated, sparking debates about its impact on impartiality and democracy. Three companies - News UK, Reach Plc, and DMGT Media - control 90% of the national newspaper market. This concentration gives a few powerful owners disproportionate influence over political discourse, especially during critical events like elections. This thesis examines the media coverage of the Daily Mail (its online edition MailOnline), during the lead-up to the 2024 General Election, investigating the influence of ownership on its editorial stance. Historically, the Daily Mail is a known supporter of the Conservative Party, hence this thesis is determined to analyse whether its reporting aligned with Conservative values and ideological framing, potentially shaping public opinion. The study focuses on the portrayal of Conservative Party Leader Rishi Sunak and Labour Party Leader Keir Starmer, exploring patterns in reporting and editorial decisions that may reinforce partisan perspectives. The research begins with a literature review on the implications of concentrated media ownership for journalistic independence. It examines media ownership models, the influence of owners on editorial decisions, public trust in the media, and the Daily Mail’s historical ties to the Conservative Party. These themes provide context for understanding how ownership structures can shape editorial content. Using agenda-setting theory, the study analyses headlines from the month before the election, focusing on volume, frequency, sentiment, and language. The findings reveal how the Daily Mail’s coverage reflected ownership interests, shaping political narratives during a critical democratic period. This thesis highlights the dynamic between media ownership and editorial choices, illustrating how concentrated ownership can amplify partisan agendas. The results underline the broader implications of media concentration for democracy, raising questions about impartiality, the media’s role in democratic accountability, and its potential to disrupt it. |
