Skip to content

Expert Briefing | ‘Rhetoric, Disorder, and the Crisis of Democracy’

Article by Foreign Policy Centre

July 7, 2026

Download PDF
Expert Briefing | ‘Rhetoric, Disorder, and the Crisis of Democracy’

On 15th June 2026, the Foreign Policy Centre (FPC), the Global Disorder Group at City St. George’s, University of London (City), Shout Out UK (SOUK), and the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Political and Media Literacy co-hosted a discussion examining the relationship between political rhetoric, information disorder, and democratic resilience.

 

The event was chaired by Susan Coughtrie, FPC’s Executive Director, and brought together an expert panel including: Dr Sasikumar Sundaram, Senior Lecturer at the Department of International Politics at City; Professor Inderjeet Parmar, Professor of International Politics at City; Effie Webb, reporter on The Bureau of Investigative Journalism’s (TBIJ) Big Tech team; Amelia Fairney, SOUK’s Head of Strategy and Communications; and closing reflections from Matt Bishop MP, Chair of the APPG on Political and Media Literacy.

 

The discussion explored how increasingly polarised political rhetoric, widening inequality, AI-driven misinformation, and fragmented media ecosystems are reshaping democratic discourse. Speakers examined the structural drivers of democratic strain, the role of technology in amplifying division, and practical approaches to strengthening political and media literacy.

 

This briefing outlines key themes and insights from the parliamentary panel discussion:

  • Political rhetoric is a symptom of deeper structural transformations.
  • The concentration of economic and technological power is reshaping democratic discourse.
  • AI is accelerating existing vulnerabilities in the information ecosystem.
  • Political and media literacy must be treated as democratic infrastructure.
  • Strengthening democratic resilience requires systemic responses.

 

To explore the key thematic takeaways from this expert discussion, you can download the full briefing here.

 

“Democracy depends on freedom of speech, just as a democratic international order depends on the free flow of ideas and dialogue. Yet rhetoric has become a mainstay of power politics, displacing democratic dialogue. The rhetoric of civilizational glory, decline of the West, technological inevitability, and ideological discontentments among others reflect deeper inequalities between states, societies, actors, and institutions. Specifically, rising wealth inequalities and oligarchies have displaced state entrepreneurism aimed at public well being, which is driving rhetoric, disorder, and the crisis of democracy. Political and media literacy should therefore cultivate social purpose and critical judgment, asking not only how we communicate, but what kind of good life and accountabilities democratic societies ought to pursue.”

Dr Sasikumar Sundaram

 

“The challenges posed by misinformation, AI, and polarised rhetoric cannot be separated from the wider political economy of contemporary democracy. Extreme concentrations of economic and technological power have contributed to growing public distrust and of political exclusion and alienation. There is a widespread legitimacy crisis which fosters dangerous political movements. Political and media literacy are therefore not optional additions to democracy; they are vital democratic infrastructure. However, lasting democratic resilience will depend not only on helping citizens navigate information environments, but also on addressing the inequalities and imbalances of power that erode trust in the first place.”

Professor Inderjeet Parmar

 

Footnotes
    Related Articles

    Five Priorities for the UK as it Retakes the Chair of the Media Freedom Coalition

    Article by Martin Scott

    March 12, 2026

    Five Priorities for the UK as it Retakes the Chair of the Media Freedom Coalition

    In 2023, Professor Martin Scott examined the early performance of the Media Freedom Coalition in an article for the Foreign Policy Centre, reflecting on whether the initiative had achieved the “re-set” recommended in an independent evaluation. As the UK now retakes the Coalition’s co-chairmanship, this article considers what practical steps the government should take to strengthen international support for media freedom.

     

    The UK has just become the new co-chair of the Media Freedom Coalition (MFC), alongside Finland.[1]

     

    This is a welcome move given the current vacuum in leadership for supporting media freedom on the international stage. However, this new role must be accompanied by demonstrable improvements in both the scale and scope of the UK’s international support for independent journalism.

     

    The MFC is a global partnership of 51 countries working together to promote press freedom both domestically and internationally.

     

    As a G7 country and permanent member of the UN Security Council, the UK’s leadership of the MFC provides an opportunity to bring significant visibility and political weight to its work.

     

    The UK also has a comparatively large diplomatic service making it well placed to strengthen the activities of the MFC’s embassy network – which monitors specific court cases, engages in private diplomacy, and coordinates joint statements.[2]

     

    In addition, as one of the MFC co-founders in 2019 and an inaugural co-chair until 2022, the UK has valuable institutional knowledge and established relationships with civil society organisations linked to the Coalition.

     

    However, the UK’s recent track record in supporting media freedom internationally is not as strong as that of many other MFC member states. In 2025, the UK was ranked joint 12th out of 30 on the International Media Freedom Support (IMFS) Index – qualifying for the lowest, ‘bronze’ category.[3] The IMFS Index evaluates 30 states based on their contributions to diplomatic, financial and safety initiatives that promote media freedom. A fuller discussion of the IMFS Index can be found in a recent FPC article by Martin Scott and Professor Mel Bunce.

     

    Sweden (2nd), the Netherlands (3rd), Germany (=5th), France (=5th), Canada (8th) – and even some countries with significantly lower state capacity such as Lithuania (1st) and Estonia (4th) – all scored significantly higher than the UK on the 2025 IMFS index.

     

    Given this, the UK must make demonstrable improvements to the scale and scope of its international support for independent journalism if it is to offer credible international leadership on media freedom.

     

    Here are 5 ways the UK can achieve this:

     

    1. Introduce a dedicated emergency visa scheme that explicitly includes provision for media workers in exile. The MFC’s independent legal advisory arm – the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom – has consistently designated this a priority area and provided MFC states with clear guidance on how to implement a suitable scheme for journalists at risk.[4] Unfortunately, only five MFC member states – Canada, Czechia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania – have so far implemented such a scheme. Between them, they have issued over 1,000 visas or residence permits to media workers in exile under these schemes since 2020. Implementing a similar scheme in the UK will require stronger internal collaboration between the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) and the Home Office.

     

    2. Support a national initiative that promotes the protection and safety of media workers in exile. Journalists at risk require not only legal protection – but also practical support to rebuild their lives and continue their work. Germany, for example – who the UK is replacing as MFC co-chair – supports the Hannah Arendt Initiative, a network of civil society organisations that protects and supports journalists from Afghanistan, Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and elsewhere.[5] As co-chair of the MFC, the UK should be supporting a similar initiative.

     

    3. Increase the proportion of international aid allocated to supporting independent media. In 2023 – the most recent year we have figures for – the UK allocated just 0.1% of its international aid to media development. This is nowhere near the benchmark of 1.0% recommended by the Forum on Information & Democracy and even lower than the average of 0.16% for all 30 states measured in the IMFS Index.[6] As its aid budget is reduced, support for media development must be retained as a strategic priority if the UK is serious about defending press freedom internationally.

     

    4. Ensure consistent, long-term financial support for the BBC World Service. As one of the most trusted international news providers – reaching 435 million people each week – the BBC World Service is one of the most effective instruments in the world for supporting access to reliable information.[7] Speaking at the UK Media Freedom Forum, Foreign Affairs Select Committee Chair Emily Thornbury highlighted its strategic importance, asking: ‘Why aren’t we tripling funding to the BBC World Service? It should be a major priory for this country… Particularly with the cutbacks we are making on aid… Let’s at least have a really good presence in terms of helping people understand what’s going on in the world’.[8]

     

    5. Contribute to multilateral pooled funds dedicated to supporting international journalism. The UNESCO-administered Global Media Defence Fund (GMDF) and other similar, pooled funds can, in principle, provide an effective way of coordinating resources, providing core support to local entities, reducing the earmarking of contributions, and supporting the principle of multilateralism. [9] However, in 2024, the UK only contributed to one such fund – the GMDF. By comparison, in 2024, France awarded funding to all four qualifying multilateral pooled funds and in 2025 hosted a high‑level conference on information integrity and independent media at the Paris Peace Forum – where further financial support was pledged. [10]

     

    According to the 2025 IMFS Index, no country is currently performing consistently well across all three dimensions of support for media freedom: diplomacy, funding and safety.[11] As MFC co-chair, the UK has the opportunity – and obligation – to fill this gap in international leadership.

     

    Achieving this does not require reinventing the wheel. Just the political will to deliver on existing commitments.

     

    As Chris Elmore, FCDO Minister for Multilateral and Human Rights, recently said, “What I want to see, through us retaking the chair of the Media Freedom Coalition, is a move back to the original pillars of this work to ensure that we have meaningful outcomes”.[12]

     

    I agree.

     

     

    Martin Scott is a Professor of Media and Global Development at the University of East Anglia. His publications include, ‘Capturing News, Capturing Democracy’ (2024), ‘Humanitarian Journalists’ (2022), ‘Media and Development’ (2014) and ‘From Entertainment to Citizenship’ (2014).

     

    Image: Johann Wadephul, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of Germany (left), Elina Valtonen, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Finland (centre), and Yvette Cooper British Foreign Secretary (right); credit: Ben Dance / UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office

     

    Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

     

     

    [1] Media Freedom Coalition, Home Page, https://mediafreedomcoalition.org/

    [2] Media Freedom Coalition, MFC Embassy Networks, https://mediafreedomcoalition.org/activities/embassy-networks/

    [3] Centre for Journalism and Democracy, The Index on international Media Freedom Support (IMFS) 2025, 2025, https://jdem.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/IMFS-full-report.pdf

    [4] Media Freedom Coalition, High-Level Panel of Experts, N.A., https://mediafreedomcoalition.org/who-is-involved/high-level-panel-of-legal-experts/

    [5] Network for the protection of journalists and media worldwide, Hannah Arendt Initiative, https://hannah-arendt-initiative.de/en/hannah-arendt-initiative/

    [6] Forum on Information and Democracy, The Forum on Information and Democracy calls for a New Deal for Journalism, June 2021, https://informationdemocracy.org/2021/06/16/the-forum-on-information-and-democracy-calls-for-a-new-deal-for-journalism/

    [7] BBC, BBC’s response to global news events drives audience growth, July 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2025/bbc-response-to-global-news-events-drives-audience-growth

    [8] UK Media Freedom Forum, Home Page, https://mediafreedomforum.co.uk/

    [9] UNESCO, Global Media Defence Fund, https://www.unesco.org/en/global-media-defence-fund

    [10] French Embassy and Consulates General in the UKParis Peace Forum: 29 States commit to information integrity and independent media, November 2025, https://uk.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/paris-peace-forum-29-states-commit-information-integrity-and-independent-media

    [11] Centre for Journalism and Democracy, The Index on international Media Freedom Support (IMFS) 2025, 2025, https://jdem.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/IMFS-full-report.pdf

    [12] UK Parliament, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

    Volume 781, March 2026, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-03-04/debates/8C008AEB-0F64-4A12-A157-368EA0118C0A/ForeignCommonwealthAndDevelopmentOffice#contribution-490D078B-AA2C-4241-8EE2-3F4DDDF44EF0

    Footnotes
      Related Articles

      Op-ed | A Camel Called the Investor Visa

      29/07/26
      Article by Foreign Policy Centre

       Join our mailing list 

      Keep informed about events, articles & latest publications from Foreign Policy Centre

      JOIN