Party political coverage of third parties and their leaders: A comparative assessment of TV news coverage of Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats
Context
Over recent weeks and months, questions have been raised about the extent to which Reform UK – and, notably, its leader, Nigel Farage – have appeared in broadcast media coverage. On 3 September 2025, for example, the BBC issued a statement defending its impartiality and rejected complaints that Farage had received too much airtime. The UK’s main public service broadcaster justified its reporting by pointing out that Reform attracted a large share of votes at the last general election, had won the most seats at the 2025 English regional and local elections, and had been riding high in the opinion polls over a sustained period. The BBC also noted that “Many political analysts across the media, with different political perspectives, report that Reform UK are ‘making the political weather’ – in other words, the reactions and policies of the other political parties can only be properly understood in the context of knowing what is happening with Reform UK and its increased level of support.”
Since broadcasters have highlighted the importance of the latest trends in opinion polls, rather than the number of elected MPs in Parliament, it has prompted debates on how they should make impartial judgements about allocating airtime to different parties. The Liberal Democrats’ leader, Ed Davey, for example, has claimed the BBC is breaching its rules on due impartiality because of the prominent airtime allocated to Reform UK. Given the party only had five MPs elected at the 2024 General Election – compared to the Liberal Democrats’ 72 MPs – he believes Reform UK has received a disproportionate amount of coverage. Davey told PoliticsHome that “the goal posts have moved, with the BBC always telling the Liberal Democrats they would get more coverage when they won more MPs, and now they have more MPs, Reform are getting more coverage based on poll ratings”. In response, a BBC spokesperson said:
“Determining coverage of political parties involves editorial judgements, including appropriate levels of scrutiny and taking account of past and current electoral support. We look at both representation and vote-share, as well as giving some weight to consistent trends in legitimate opinion polls. In line with Ofcom guidance, the BBC puts greater weight on actual votes.”
Davey also criticised the public service broadcaster’s news agenda by claiming – during a live interview on BBC Breakfast – that coverage focused too much on the “tittle tattle” of Reform UK as opposed to properly scrutinising the party’s policies. Likewise, former Labour spin doctor Alastair Campbell has argued that Nigel Farage receives both a disproportionate amount of coverage in broadcast media and that the coverage it garners fails to properly question and scrutinise Reform UK’s policies to the same extent as other parties. He has been especially critical of the BBC’s coverage of Reform UK’s September party conference, pointing to one article that “reads like a press handout from an event organiser”.
To understand how due impartiality is interpreted when reporting Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats, we systematically tracked every reference to each party and their leaders on two of the UK’s most-watched nightly TV news bulletins – BBC and ITV News at Ten – between January and July 2025. We assessed how they were covered, including the degree of scrutiny paid to their perspectives and policy positions. We focused on Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats to explore the weight of coverage between a third party with a large number of MPs and a third party with a sustained lead in opinion polling – as such the Green Party was not included in this study. Beyond Labour and the Conservatives, our analysis represents one of the first studies to examine party political coverage of third parties and their leaders outside of election campaigns.
Executive Summary
Between 1 January and 23 July on BBC News and ITV News at Ten, we found:
22.7% of TV bulletins referenced Reform UK, whereas 12.6% featured the Liberal Democrats. Or, put differently, for every 50 TV news bulletins, Reform UK appeared in 11 programmes and the Liberal Democrats featured in six programmes.
Reform UK was referenced in just under a fifth of ITV bulletins – 19.8% - compared to 6.2% for the Liberal Democrats. This meant that Reform was covered more than the Liberal Democrats by a ratio of more than 3:1 on ITV News (32 vs. 10 references).
On BBC News at Ten, Reform was featured in 25.1% of its bulletins (49 references), whereas the Liberal Democrats were featured in 17.9% (35 references).
Reform UK was the protagonist in almost four in ten stories they featured in (primarily in post-election coverage or in reports about internal issues with the party’s leadership). In contrast, fewer than one in ten were led by the Liberal Democrats.
Over two-thirds of references to Reform featured some footage of its politicians, such as Nigel Farage in a pub, whereas the Liberal Democrats appeared in just over half of references to the party and in more conventional backdrops.
In just over six in ten references, the Liberal Democrats were mostly mentioned briefly in stories about other parties’ policies, whereas this only happened in a third of references to Reform UK. This meant the Liberal Democrats featured more passively than Reform UK, reacting to issues or events rather than leading debates.
However, prior to the local elections on 1 May, references to Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats on both TV news bulletins were roughly balanced. But due to Reform’s electoral performance, media attention increased substantially. Reform coverage also increased post-elections due to stories about its former Chairman, Zia Yusuf, resigning and then re-joining the party.
The increase in Reform’s coverage needs to be interpreted in the context of its recent electoral performance, high-profile stories about its leadership, and its status as the most popular party according to the latest trends in opinion poll surveys. Against this changing context, the editorial judgement of broadcasters may be that Reform warrants more coverage than other parties, including the Liberal Democrats.
When broadcasters substantially featured claims by Reform UK, they scrutinised them rigorously in just under four in ten cases, while in another four in ten instances they supplied some analysis of the party’s positions. This meant under a fifth of items - 19.2% - had no scrutiny of the party’s policies or claims.
On the rare occasions stories about the Liberal Democrats made substantial claims or advanced their policy positions, in around half of the coverage, the party received either high-level or some degree of scrutiny. The other half of coverage did not question or challenge their positions, largely due to the limited airtime the party received.
Method
As part of our AHRC-funded project about the impartiality of political news, this study was designed to provide hard evidence about specific claims that Reform UK has received more broadcast coverage than the Liberal Democrats, with limited scrutiny paid to their policies and perspectives. In doing so, we considered how broadcasters interpreted the concept of due impartiality, taking into account the broad criteria used to determine coverage of political parties. This included factors such as past performance at the last general election in terms of seats won and vote share, as well as taking into account the results of the latest electoral devolved, regional or local electoral contests, and trends in opinion poll data.
The study focused on the BBC and ITV late evening TV bulletins because they represent two of the most-watched broadcast news programmes in the UK. While they are the respective channel’s flagship news programmes, they do not reflect all BBC and ITV political content across their broadcast, online and social media channels. But it was well beyond the resources of our project to monitor all BBC and ITV political news output in detail. We searched for references to the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK, as well as their respective leaders, using Learning on Screen’s Box of Broadcasts. This identified relevant transcript data, which we then subjected to close textual analysis. We relied on this database to access retrospective broadcast output; however, some dates were not available, which we have excluded from our analysis. In total, we examined 195 days of BBC News at Ten and 162 days of ITV News at Ten. The availability of transcripts in 2025 was also limited from January to late July. Should subsequent transcripts become available, we can update our findings to reflect coverage in August 2025 and beyond.
Reform featured more than Liberal Democrats - and more prominently
Reform UK or its party leader featured in over a quarter of BBC TV bulletins – 25.1% (49 references) – whereas the Liberal Democrats appeared in a fifth of bulletins - 17.9% (35 references) – between 1 January and 4 July 2025. On ITV, Reform UK appeared in 19.8% of bulletins (32 references), which is three times more than the Liberal Democrats, who featured in 6.2% of bulletins (10 references). Overall, while 22.7% of BBC and ITV bulletins referenced Reform UK between January and July 2025, they featured the Liberal Democrats in 12.6% of programmes. This meant that for every 50 TV news bulletins, Reform UK appeared in roughly 11 programmes while the Liberal Democrats featured in six programmes, almost half the amount.
In references to party leaders, Nigel Farage was mentioned in almost two-thirds of TV news items featuring Reform UK - 65.4% (see Graph 1). By contrast, Ed Davey made fewer than four in ten appearances - 37.8% - when the Liberal Democrats were covered. Farage cut through far more on ITV, where he appeared in over seven in ten items when Reform featured.
We identified instances where Nigel Farage was namechecked but Ed Davey was not. For example, on 9 January, ITV’s News at Ten covered reports that the regional and local elections might be delayed. The anchor then stated that “plenty of people would not be happy about that, not least Nigel Farage’s party Reform and the Lib Dems”. While this may appear an innocent exclusion, it perhaps signals how far the Reform Party has become synonymous with Nigel Farage in a way that the Liberal Democrats have not with Ed Davey. For party leaders like Ed Davey, who want to extend their name recognition, not being regularly name-checked will limit their brand’s reach and engagement with the public.
To further examine how both Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats were comparatively reported on TV news, we judged whether they were the protagonists in stories they featured in. Or, put another way, we assessed whether either party was the lead element of a story when they appeared in coverage. Graph 2 shows that Reform appeared as the protagonist in nearly four in ten cases – 38.3% - whereas the Liberal Democrats appeared in fewer than one in ten stories – 8.9% - where they led the narrative. This pattern was similar across both broadcasters.
Another way to contrast the prominence paid to Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats was to examine whether they visually featured in footage on TV news, as opposed to just being verbally referenced by a journalist. We found Reform UK appeared in almost seven in ten references (69.1%) – see Graph 3 – whereas for the Liberal Democrats it was 11 in 20 instances (55.6%). On ITV News, the Liberal Democrats appeared visually on five occasions, whereas Reform UK appeared five times more (25 in total). In footage of the party, Farage was often pictured at the pub while the Liberal Democrats appeared in more conventional backdrops, such as participating in community events.
To consider further whether a party was leading or responding to the political news cycle, we examined whether they were used to rebut claims by other parties – most often the UK government - or not (see Graph 4). We found just over six in ten references to the Liberal Democrats featured them – often briefly – responding to other parties’ policies compared to a third of references when Reform UK appeared in this context. This resulted in more passive coverage of the Liberal Democrats than Reform UK, with their spokespeople and positions used to briefly rebut issues or events raised by other parties rather than take a lead role in coverage.
Pre-local election reporting balanced – but then focus on Reform UK and its agenda
Prior to the regional and local elections in May 2025, broadcasters broadly balanced coverage of Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats. But after the elections – where Reform won the most votes and seats – reporting of the party spiked. While the Liberal Democrats were the second-largest party in the regional and local elections in terms of seat share, and the third-largest party in terms of vote share (ahead of Labour), they received no sustained boost in coverage. Graph 5 illustrates the increase in the proportion of references to Reform UK following the election, while coverage of the Liberal Democrats remained relatively unchanged.
Over our seven-month analysis, both Reform and the Liberal Democrats were primarily covered in the context of campaigning before the regional and local elections, as well as during the by-elections in Runcorn and Helsby, and Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse (see Tables 1 and 2). Reform UK featured in stories relating to immigration and asylum seekers, grooming gangs and in welfare coverage, while changes in the party’s leadership brought additional attention. The Liberal Democrats’ agenda did not cut through, by comparison, since the party was primarily used to react to the political news cycle rather than help set it.
Broadcasters did scrutinise Reform UK – but they could have offered more sustained analysis
In order to explore the level of scrutiny paid to both Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats in TV news reporting, we examined any references to their policy positions by journalists or other sources featured in coverage. Needless to say, we would not expect every news story to challenge either party’s claims and forensically analyse their policy positions. Indeed, we excluded all instances where each party was briefly mentioned without any references to anything substantive that could be analysed. This meant we focused on coverage where either Reform UK or the Liberal Democrats had the opportunity to make substantial political claims and/or lay out their policies, which then allowed broadcasters to assess the credibility of their respective positions.
If we had included instances where Reform UK responded to other parties or were only briefly mentioned, we found that over six in ten items had no journalistic scrutiny. Likewise, when the Liberal Democrats were reacting to other parties, over eight in ten instances received no scrutiny, and almost a fifth received some degree of analysis. But we have excluded these figures in Table 7 below because it would be unrealistic to expect every reference to a party to be questioned or even challenged. This lack of journalistic rigour is partly a symptom of the brevity of TV news, and its conventions and practices. Often parties will appear relatively briefly in coverage – to ensure their positions are represented and broadcasters satisfy rules on impartiality – but their claims will go unchecked.
We instead focused on coverage of parties when broadcasters featured substantial claims made by either party, which could be subjected to more in-depth analysis. Since this represented a relatively small number of items, we have presented the data on TV news generally rather than comparing each bulletin.
Graph 6 shows that when broadcasters had the opportunity to question Reform UK’s substantial claims, in over four in ten cases they provided a high degree of scrutiny, while in four in ten instances they conducted some analysis of the party’s positions. This left just under a fifth of items – 19.2% - without any scrutiny. When the Liberal Democrats made substantial claims and/or advanced their policy positions – which only happened eight times over our seven-month analysis – half of the time the party received either a high level or some degree of scrutiny.
Taken together, our study identified several striking examples where broadcasters robustly challenged Reform UK’s policy claims.
ITV News at Ten, for example, featured one item on 27 May, which critically examined Reform UK’s policy related to lifting the two-child benefit cap. It rigorously questioned how the party’s policy could be funded and drew on an expert source from the Institute of Fiscal Studies to evaluate its credibility.
Likewise, when BBC’s News at Ten reported that Reform promised to cut the size of local government and spending on 3 May, it was met with robust analysis, including from a Unison representative who rebutted many of the party’s claims.
However, we also found instances where journalists provided only limited scrutiny, even when there was potentially an opportunity to examine policy positions in greater depth.
For example, on 21 July, the BBC News at Ten featured claims made in a speech by Reform UK’s leader, Nigel Farage. The reporter acknowledged the need to “subject it to some scrutiny”. While a long list of Reform UK’s policies was mentioned, the main critique of the speech was that other parties, because of the costs involved, considered it to be “pie in the sky”. Rather than independently assessing the economic credibility of claims – as Verify, the BBC’s fact-checking service has recently analysed in detail – the item concluded by posing it as an open question that would be addressed again.
In the case of the Liberal Democrats, because the party generally received limited airtime – with few opportunities to set out their policies in detail – they received little scrutiny. On many occasions, the Liberal Democrats’ position was only briefly mentioned, making it both difficult for the party to advance its policy agenda and for journalists to subsequently interrogate it. Since Reform received more coverage, the party had more time to articulate policy positions, which, over half the time, received either some or no journalistic scrutiny.
We found instances where broadcasters allowed Reform UK to challenge other parties, but did not offer a comparable perspective from the Liberal Democrats. For example, on 8 June – a month after the local elections, when Reform performed well – the UK government announced its spending review. The Liberal Democrats did not feature, but Reform UK’s Deputy Leader, Richard Tice, was given the opportunity (along with the Conservatives) to respond to the plans. He made some claims about government waste that were not subject to sustained scrutiny. Unlike the Liberal Democrats, Reform UK and the Conservatives were given a platform to act as a credible alternative to the UK government.
Conclusion
Our study was designed to produce an evidence-based assessment of the extent to which third political parties in the UK – Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats – have featured in broadcast coverage since 2025. We also examined the nature of reporting, including how the respective leaders have been comparatively portrayed.
Before reflecting on the wider significance of the findings, two points need to be acknowledged. First, TV news bulletins do not represent the full range of political output from the broadcasters. Both ITV and the BBC provide audiences with a wide range of high-quality political news and current affairs coverage across their TV, radio, online, and social media channels. Examining a large sample of coverage over time is resource-intensive, making it difficult to extend our sample size across other programmes and platforms, or over a longer period of time. At the same time, the late evening news bulletins have long been known as flagship programmes and represent some of the most widely watched broadcast shows.
Secondly, while we have analysed coverage in the context of debates about due impartiality, the study has not found that broadcasters breached the UK’s due impartiality guidelines. Broadcasters – following Ofcom guidelines - have the editorial freedom to make impartial judgments about selecting party political representatives in news programming based on a range of criteria. They can apply weight in their selection of parties to factors to determine the allocation of airtime, such as representing party political views based on vote share and seats won at the last general election, as well as the performance of recent local and regional electoral contests, or the latest trends in opinion polls.
The study focused from January to July 2025 in order to take into account the most recent opinion polls, the latest performance of the regional and local elections, as well as seats won and vote share at the last general election. Against this backdrop, it assessed which criterion broadcasters have used to construct due impartiality when featuring the UK’s two major third parties, Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats. Overall, our study revealed that TV news bulletins have given more weight to Reform UK due to its strong performance in the latest regional and local elections, as well as the party’s sustained high poll ratings throughout much of the year. This suggests broadcasters may have downgraded criteria such as the number of seats won or vote share at the last general election when allocating airtime to parties.
We found that broadcasters provided almost equal coverage of the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK up until May’s local elections. But after Reform’s electoral performance, the party was allocated far more airtime. We also found Reform led more stories than the Liberal Democrats and featured more prominently in coverage, such as its leader, Nigel Farage, pictured in pubs. Moreover, we found Farage was repeatedly namechecked - further enhancing his name recognition among the public – whereas the Liberal Democrat leader, Ed Davey, was not. This, along with Reform UK, often proactively driving political narratives, meant the party has featured more prominently in TV news bulletins during recent months. While there are no specific due impartiality rules on how broadcasters report party leaders, Farage is benefiting from receiving far more coverage than other leaders. Broadcasters might want to consider the prominence and nature of the coverage of party leaders. For example, is picturing Nigel Farage sinking a pint the most impartial way of political reporting when other party leaders are more often featured in conventional locations, such as wearing hard hats outside factories?
Reform UK was also allowed to make many claims without scrutiny because it was often featured responding to government policies. On the occasions when the party’s policies led news programmes, journalists were more likely to robustly challenge vague or dubious claims. However, there were also instances when Reform UK’s policies could have been scrutinised by journalists, rather than leaving it to other parties to raise questions. In the case of the BBC, there were occasions when its nightly bulletin could have turned to Verify – the fact-checking service – to subject some of the claims to greater scrutiny. The Liberal Democrats’ policies and perspectives were not subject to intense journalistic scrutiny simply because the party received more limited coverage overall.
Taken together, our study cannot determine whether there has been a ‘disproportionate’ level of Reform UK coverage, as there is no precise measure to define what is proportionate. It remains a subjective judgement based on broadcasters’ internal considerations about how far they want to weigh coverage according to a range of criteria, including the newsworthiness of political stories. At present, the political context appears somewhat unprecedented, given that a party with just four MPs is enjoying a sustained lead in opinion polls. This represents new territory for broadcasters interpreting rules on impartiality, which may explain why it has sparked so much debate in the media and the wider public. To help audiences maintain their confidence in impartial news broadcasters might want to consider telling them more specifically how they intend to balance coverage of the parties over the coming months and years, especially ahead of the devolved elections and the run-up to the next general election.
Over the coming months and years, opinion polls and political contexts will change. The devolved elections scheduled for May 2026 are just a matter of months away and feature a wide range of political parties that could gain seats in Scotland and Wales, given the proportional voting system. Broadcasters will need to recalibrate their coverage to reflect different electoral voting systems and variations in public opinion across the nations. Stay tuned and sign up for our research updates because we will be continuing to monitor broadcast and online output over the coming years to better understand how broadcasters make impartial judgments.