Media Literacy (Communications and Digital Committee Report)

Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay Excerpts

Monday 16th March 2026 Grand Committee

[Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Con)]

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Keeley, for introducing this debate. I thank her and her fellow members of your Lordships’ Communications and Digital Committee for their hard work in producing this report on media literacy.

The opening sentence of the report puts it starkly:

“Social cohesion is at risk and democracy itself is threatened by inadequate media literacy”.


In looking at the annunciator and keeping a close eye on the time throughout this debate, I noticed that, at the moment, the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor of Stevenage, is making a Statement on social cohesion in the Chamber. In some ways, it is unfortunate that we have such a clash, because I know that the noble Lords who have spoken in this debate would have made useful contributions. Perhaps that makes the point about this being an activity that engages many government departments; I am sure that the Minister will ensure that the comments made in this debate are shared with the noble Baroness and his colleagues across government.

The way in which we all consume and interact with the news is changing rapidly. However, although that has opened up a world of choice, it has also created, as noble Lords have said, personalised echo chambers where complex algorithms, rather than thoughtful and experienced news editors, are increasingly determining what we see. We cannot rely on what we read or trust that what is before our eyes is trustworthy and balanced. Artificial intelligence is playing an increasing and uncertain role.

The media we consume are becoming vastly different between the generations and between people of different political persuasions; in many ways, the public forum is becoming a smaller and more segregated space. Children especially now operate in a world that seems alien to their parents and teachers—or, at least, a world with which these conscientious adults are struggling to keep up—which is why my colleagues on these Benches have sought to shield children under the age of 16 from the harmful effects of social media, protecting children from pornographic, violent and extremist content until they are adults and able to engage on a different basis.

We on these Benches welcome many of the recommendations in this thoughtful and detailed report. For instance, we welcome the recommendations on updating Ofcom’s definition of media literacy, as noble Lords have remarked, to make more explicit reference to critical thinking; and on addressing the need for more joined-up thinking across government departments so that we can look at this issue as needs be.

As noble Lords know, I have long argued that Governments do not need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to media literacy education. Teaching people to have a healthy scepticism and an independence of thought around the sources and material in front of them does not require new subjects or new curricula. The report of your Lordships’ committee concludes that media literacy ought to be

“integrated within a number of subjects”.

I welcome that conclusion. Subjects such as history, English literature and the history of art have long taught students to interrogate sources in front of them; to ask who created them, for which audiences and for what purpose and to be curious about what has been omitted.

Promoting greater media literacy does not have to mean specific lessons on critical thinking but, rather, encouraging critical thinking at every point in the classroom in history, art, science, English literature, English language and more. Sadly, very few of our state schools offer history of art at GCSE or A-level. Can the Minister say what the Government plan to do to work with brilliant organisations such as Art History Link-Up and the Courtauld Institute, which are working to reverse that? Also, what will they do to follow up on the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Freyberg, about initiatives such as the Superpower of Looking, which do so much to promote visual literacy—as important a skill for the digital generation as it was for analogue ones.

The Government also propose to reduce the number of exams by 10%. Exams should not be a memory game, of course, but a test of how well students engage analytically with ideas and sources. Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on the changes the Government are pursuing with regard to exams and assessments, and how these can be used to improve critical thinking skills. An important element of promoting critical thinking is protecting freedom of speech and expression, allowing diversity of thought and encouraging students to challenge accepted nostra.

We should be teaching students to disagree well, just as we try to in your Lordships’ House. To that end, I agree with the comments that my noble friend Lady Bottomley of Nettlestone made about the importance of debating. Organisations such as the English-Speaking Union do tremendous work in promoting debating in and outside schools. I declare an interest as a trustee of the Cambridge Union, which has a long-running schools debating competition that tries to spread debating in schools. I commend the work that the Government are doing on oracy in strengthening this important work. The noble Baroness, Lady Caine of Kentish Town, is right that this is about strengthening access to the arts in and outside schools. It is through arts institutions such as the Roundhouse, which she mentioned, that we engage people of all backgrounds in that sort of critical thinking.

I was glad that libraries were mentioned throughout the debate and in the Government’s response. At a reception held by Libraries Connected and CILIP here in Parliament last week, I was pleased to meet professionals from four library services, in Newcastle, Northumberland, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire—not, I am sure, chosen alphabetically—which have been working to try new ways of tackling digital exclusion and boosting media literacy in their areas. These include pop-up demonstrations, bookable sessions providing an introduction to AI, and one-to-one support.

However, as the report notes, library services

“are already overstretched and under-resourced”,

so it is important that we equip local authorities to invest in a resource that is already there and can play such a valuable part in delivering this agenda. Perhaps the Minister will say whether he agrees with the very sensible suggestion from Libraries Connected that there should be public library representation on any external bodies that are set up to scrutinise the Government’s work on the new media literacy action plan.

I welcome the announcement earlier this month that the Government will publish a new strategy for our public libraries. As noble Lords know, I commissioned an independent review of public libraries in the last Parliament, which was very well conducted by my noble friend Lady Sanderson of Welton. I hope that the new strategy will build on the insightful thoughts she gave in that review and, crucially, the engagement she had with public library professionals from across the country.

The report highlights the importance of local media, which we know is trusted far more than national and international media. To that end, I echo the points noble Lords made about copyright and AI, which is threatening the very existence of trusted news journalism. As my noble friend Lord Holmes of Richmond noted, the Government are moving painfully slowly in the face of rapidly changing technology. I echo the points made about the importance of the BBC and public service broadcasters in this regard, particularly at a moment when we look at the BBC’s royal charter. I echo the comments of the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, about ensuring the prominence of our public service broadcast content in a crowded media field.

I am grateful to all noble Lords for their thoughts, particularly the noble Baroness, Lady Keeley, and I look forward to the Minister’s response.