A survey of journalists and production staff across UK public service media concluded climate reporting needs new approaches.

Former Sky News head John Ryley explores what the findings tell us about newsroom priorities, audience needs and the future of climate journalism.

Broadcast journalists in Britain say they rank climate change and environmental issues above many of the traditional pillars of news coverage – including the NHS, international conflict and immigration – yet this is not reflected in what audiences actually see and hear.

What is striking is the disparity between the views expressed in a recent online survey of UK newsrooms conducted by Climate News Tracker/Kantar and the content that appears daily on television and radio.

Climate News Tracker is a data and insights initiative working with the University of Exeter and the five big-league public service broadcasters including BBC News, Sky News, ITV News, Channel 4 News and Channel 5 News to better understand how climate and environmental stories are covered across television, radio, audio and digital journalism.

Its survey of 80 journalists and production staff points to a persistent gap between editorial priorities inside newsrooms and the stories that ultimately reach audiences.

Day-to-day news pressures cited as reason for limited climate coverage

The pell-mell of major news events is cited as a key reason for the limited prominence of climate coverage.

Over the past ten years, news organisations have been deluged by Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the hurly-burly of six Prime Ministers, wars in the Middle East, and turmoil within the British monarchy. A perma-crisis. And now the longest World Cup tournament yet has begun.

On terrestrial television news bulletins, where main evening news programmes are typically restricted to around 26 minutes, finite airtime means these stories frequently dominate running orders.

The survey’s strongest finding highlighted the impact of day-to-day news pressures.

More than 80% of respondents said crowded news agendas and packed running orders hinder climate coverage. Programme editors and channel schedulers may be willing to extend a bulletin for a dramatic, unexpected and consequential story, but the climate crisis rarely meets the threshold for such immediate editorial prioritisation. The planet heating up is a slow-burning story whose significance has developed over years rather than hours, making it harder to compete with the urgency of daily news.

Journalists also highlighted the difficulty of finding strong editorial “pegs” for climate stories outside major weather events or political announcements. Some 65% said climate stories do not always have a clear or timely news peg. That is disappointing.

It says as much about the ambitions of modern newsrooms as it does about the nature of climate journalism itself. It hints at a lack of imagination, curiosity and enterprise. An inquisitive, ambitious journalist will find a peg. Climate change touches every aspect of society, from housing and health to business, transport and sport. The challenge is rarely the absence of a peg for the story but recognising it.

Newsrooms are, on the whole, straightforward places.

To borrow Anton Chekhov’s famous principle of playwriting, the gun is already hanging on the newsroom wall. Something happens and the newsdesk responds. Or not.

It was therefore no surprise to find that extreme weather events remain by far the dominant trigger for climate reporting. Heatwaves, floods and wildfires ranked well ahead of other reasons including government announcements and policy interventions.

Newsrooms should explain and analyse, not just report

The survey points to a broader malaise in contemporary newsrooms: a reluctance to examine issues in depth. Too often there is little appetite to explain as well as report. John Birt’s memorable ‘mission to explain’ is moribund. News is treated as a series of isolated events rather than as part of a larger story that requires context and analysis.

Interestingly, debate around the impact of net zero ranked only fifth among the triggers most likely to generate climate coverage. Yet, as one respondent observed: “We need to discuss the move to net zero.” They are right.

The transition will affect how people travel, heat their homes, consume energy and earn a living.

These are not peripheral issues but central political, economic and social questions. Net zero is also a politically contentious issue because it raises questions over who pays for the transition, how quickly it should happen, and how costs and benefits are distributed between households, industries and regions. The stuff of democracy.

As one respondent observed: “Trump and Farage’s views need to be calculated in.” I believe strongly the function of a serious news organisation should not be simply to report the news; it should analyse it too. Audiences want to know what the news means in these complex, uncertain times.

Survey is ‘wake-up call’ for climate story

The truth is the Climate News Tracker survey is a wake-up call: a reminder that the planet heating up is not rated as a story. After all, 89% of those surveyed said climate reporting needs a new approach and 64% think climate reporting is not meeting audience needs.

At the same time the way people get their news has changed forever. Now it arrives by a ping on the phone.

As AI drives at speed the growth of visual storytelling, editors and journalists working together have a golden opportunity to offer dazzling original eyewitness reporting. For newsrooms there is no point being grumpy about the reluctance to run climate coverage.

Rather than groan, grab the opportunity.

Now is the time for all good journalists to rethink how climate stories are told, the moment to innovate.

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog