In between the many battles lines drawn in the run-up to the referendum on Britain staying or leaving the European Union – among them immigration, trade and sovereignty – the coverage of the debate by the mainstream press in London has sparked anger.
This peaked last week when Buckingham Palace made a complaint to the press watchdog over claims in a front page story by the Sun that Queen Elizabeth had expressed Eurosceptic views during a lunch in 2011.
Peter Sutherland, the UN's special representative for international migration, tweeted that "the rabid nationalism and imbalance in the print media coverage of the Brexit debate is astounding" while Tony Blair's former communications director Alastair Campbell claims the right-wing press has reduced the debate to "fresh depths of dishonesty".
Rupert Murdoch
Where precisely the papers stand on the core in/out issue is less clear.
Roy Greenslade
, the
Guardian
’s media commentator, wrote that while some are clearly in favour of Britain remaining (the
Guardian
, the
Financial Times
, the
Mirror
and the
Independent
) and one is in favour of leaving (the
Express
), other sections of what was Fleet Street have yet to state their position to the readers. The
Sun
’s associate editor
Trevor Kavanagh
said the paper had still not made up its mind on the issue and the decision would ultimately rest with proprietor Rupert Murdoch.
Charlie Beckett, professor of media at the London School of Economics, said the nature of the coverage is both a reflection of how sections of the British press operate and also their history of Euroscepticism but may not result in calls to their readers to vote for a Brexit.
“In some ways it is predictable because most of the London-based newspapers have been Eurosceptic for some time,” he said. “In a sense this is partly them going into not just their standard mode in terms of their particular world view but also their standard mode in terms of their attack mode.
Ambiguous
“What you are witnessing is partly an anti-Cameron thing. That they feel that they have to hold him to account. He is the prime minister. Has he been sufficiently sceptical? I don’t think that is necessarily the same as them saying they will definitely recommend a vote to leave. I think you could still end up with for example, the
Daily Telegraph
, being ambiguous or even saying ‘remain’.
“I think there is a difference between the relentlessly critical coverage if you like, or sceptical coverage, and how they might end up advising the readers.”
On BBC's Newsnight this week, Mr Kavanagh defended the Sun's positioning, against criticism from Campbell, saying the paper was entitled to have a sceptical view on the European Union. Murdoch himself has a history of Euroscepticism, and has called for borders to be controlled and has said the EU has more to lose than the UK with a Brexit.
What effect negative coverage will have on the vote, at a time when mainstream press influence is being eroded by rival media forms, is unclear. The number of undecideds hovers at just under 20 per cent.
“I’m not saying that [the coverage] will put off swing voters but I don’t think it will necessarily convince them,” said Mr Beckett.