With the Senedd (Welsh parliament) election campaign now under way, voters in Wales are beginning to see more political coverage across television, online and social media. Broadcasters have reported on manifesto launches and party messaging.
But how far is this coverage helping voters understand what the parties are actually proposing? And how much of it is being properly scrutinised?
After the first official week of the campaign, our new analysis suggests that while broadcasters are reporting party activity, they are offering limited scrutiny of the pledges and promises being made. That matters because news media play a central role in holding politicians to account and helping voters judge the credibility of competing claims.
We analysed all election news items across major broadcasters’ TV, online and social media output between April 8 and 14. This included Welsh coverage from the BBC and ITV, alongside their UK-wide output, as well as Channel 4 and Sky News.
Broadcasters have also produced special election programming in English and Welsh, from the public asking politicians questions in live TV debates, to exploring issues in depth through podcasts, or party leaders being interrogated at length.
Our focus, however, was on day-to-day news reporting, including UK-wide media, which most people rely on in Wales to understand what is happening in the world.
Covering policies not scrutinising them
Of the 60 news items examined across TV, online and social media posts so far, just over three-quarters covered party policy or claims. Of these policy items, nearly half featured no scrutiny. A quarter featured substantial scrutiny. And a further third featured brief scrutiny.
Broadcasters are committed to holding parties to account. As the BBC stated at the start of the elections across the UK: “It is an important part of our role during elections to check and challenge where the parties are making claims that don’t stand up to scrutiny.”
The BBC’s fact-checking service, Verify, could play a greater role in testing party claims, but it has yet to feature prominently in coverage of the Senedd campaign. Channel 4, by contrast, has stood out for going beyond reporting campaign activity to interrogate the credibility of what parties are saying.
More commonly, news items present parties arguing with one another, without independent assessment of their competing claims. In some cases, broadcasters simply set out multiple positions side by side, leaving viewers to make sense of them without any journalistic scrutiny.
This might be explained by rules on impartiality. These require broadcasters to reflect up to six parties vying for power at the Senedd and perhaps limit space for further questioning. But in covering so many parties within a single news item, the breadth of perspectives can undermine the depth of analysis.
Informing voters or amplifying noise?
Broadcasters have also sought to engage voters through vox pops, which are brief interviews with members of the public. So far, members of the public (25) have appeared two and a half times more often than politicians (10) in election coverage.
Vox pops can provide more colour and human-interest than just listening to party politicians. They can also offer revealing insights into people’s real life concerns and anxieties. But the focus of people’s opinions have largely centred on the campaign, the personalities involved, or about apathy and cynicism towards the Senedd and politics more generally.
At times, vox pops have also reinforced a “horse race” narrative, asking people how they intend to vote rather than what they think about specific issues. While this may appear engaging, it offers limited insight and risks misrepresenting wider public opinion.
As Welsh politics expert, Laura McAllister, argued: “At best, [vox pops are] pointlessly reductionist and a waste of limited political air time; at worst… misleading and potentially distorting”.
Read more:
Voters in Wales face Senedd election amid confusion over who holds power over what
Although such interviews with the public often suggest disengagement, they should not be taken as representative. With the possibility of political change, turnout in this election could in fact be higher than at any point since devolution began 27 years ago.
Rather than emphasising perceived disengagement, news coverage could do more to focus on the issues facing the next Welsh government and to scrutinise party policy positions. This would help improve public understanding of what is at stake.
Our pre-election survey of people in Wales found widespread confusion about the responsibilities of the Welsh and Westminster governments, alongside low awareness of party leaders. Recent focus groups conducted in south Wales by More in Common, a thinktank focused on public opinion and social divisions, found that many voters lacked detailed knowledge of party policies. They often expressed only a general sense that Wales needs political change.
Our own focus groups, conducted in February with people in Wales, showed a clear appetite for more policy-focused reporting over campaign coverage.
The lack of policy scrutiny in the first week of the campaign is perhaps understandable. After all, manifestos have just been published leaving journalists limited time to analyse them. But as clearer campaign narratives emerge and more political promises are made, journalists will have time to question parties and, where necessary, challenge any false, misleading or dubious claims.
With several weeks left of the campaign, broadcasters still have plenty of opportunities to hold parties to account and help people make an informed decision at the ballot box.
Stephen Cushion has received funding from the BBC Trust, Ofcom, AHRC, BA, ESRC and Welsh Government.
Keighley Perkins receives funding from the AHRC for research into broadcasters’ impartiality.
Maxwell Modell receives funding from the AHRC for research into broadcasters’ impartiality.